Author Guidelines
AUTHOR
EDITOR
SECTION EDITOR
REVIEWER
(Author Guidelines)
Submission to this journal proceeds totally online and must be submitte : http://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/thejobsreview. Please read and follow these instructions carefully. Doing so will ensure that the publication of your manuscript is as speedy and efficient as possible. The Publisher reserves the right to return manuscripts that are not prepared according to these instructions.
The originality of the Article
- The manuscript is written in the format required by the Author Guidelines of the The International Journal of Business Review (The Jobs Review)
- The manuscript does not contain plagiarism, falsification and/ or fabrication of data.
- The manuscript is not submitted to another publication and is not be under review for publication elsewhere during The International Journal of Business Review (The Jobs Review) review process.
- The manuscript is not accepted for publication elsewhere.
- The submission file is in Microsoft Word, RTF, or WordPerfect document file format.
Format
Manuscripts should be written as concisely, consistently, and straightforward as possible. The number of pages consists of 16 - 20 (twenty) pages (including figures and tables), and appendices should not be included in the text. Scripts are written in single-space on one side of A4 size paper (210 x 297 mm). The paper should have an upper limit and a lower limit of 2.5 cm and 3 cm left and right border of 2.5 cm. Font used is Times New Roman 12 pt. Scripts can be written using the English language. The writing style refers to the APA Style (The American Psychological Association).
The manuscript is presented in several sections: Introduction (Include research objective and hypothesis development if available), Method, Results and Discussion, Conclusion, and References
Title
The title should simply and clearly summarize the main idea, typed in uppercase and lowercase letters, centered between the left and right margin; the recommended length of the title is no more than 15 words with font size 14.
Author
The Journal operates a peer review process and promotes blind reviewing. To facilitate this process, author’s names (without academic titles), institutional affiliations, and the email address of the corresponding author should appear only on a detachable cover sheet. Contributor(s) should include a short CV describing his/her/their current position and activities in not more than 80 words.
Author 1*
Author 2*
*Departement/Study Program Name, Faculty Name, University Name, City, and States
*Corresponding Author. E-mail: author@author.com
Abstract
The abstract consists of not more than 200 words, describing the phenomenon being studied (one or two sentences, maximum 10 [ten] words) with the font size 11, explicitly write in bold: Introduction, the purpose of a study, objective of the papers, research method, results, conclusion. The abstract should be written in two languages, Indonesian and English, and include five keywords. Written alphabetically.
Introduction (include research objective, theoretical framework, and hypothesis development if available)
This section describes three main components. First, it describes the phenomenon being studied, the introduction should consist of the background of the study, research contexts. Secondly, the author explains the relationship between phenomenon and existing theories (at least one of the journals cited should be less than five years old); and finally describes the purpose of the study. Furthermore, this section also contains previous theories, both from primary reference (grand theory) and journal articles (including at least one journal published in the last ten years). This section also discusses arguments on the relationship between the variables being studied and ends with the hypothesis depicting the relationships of the variables (there should be some argument for each hypothesis). All introduction should be presented in the forms of paragraphs, not pointers, with the proportion of 15-20% of the whole article length.
*For an exploratory study, this section should consist of previous theories underlying the Research Question. (Please provide a strong argument(s) that reference variable(s) or explanation(s) as to why research will fill the gap from the literature.
Method
This section consists of description concerning the research design, data sources, data collection, and data analysis with the proportion of 10-15% of the total article length, all presented in the form of paragraphs and approaches taken by the author, whether qualitative or quantitative approach. This section also includes a sample description (respondent/case profile), sampling method, sampling size, error level, data collection method, variable operationalization, and analysis method.
Results and Discussion
The Results and discussion section consist of a description of the results of the data analysis to answer the research question(s) and their meanings are seen from current theories and references of the area addressed. The proportion of this section is 40-60% of the total article length. This section consists of the results of validity and reliability tests and analysis of the results. Furthermore, this section discusses the results of the current study and how they relate to the hypothesis presented. The discussion section also explains possible reasons for why a certain hypothesis is rejected or accepted and how they relate to previous research. The results of the study are discussed to address the problem formulated, objectives and research hypotheses. It is higly suggested that discussion be focused on the why and how of the research findings can happen and to extend to which the research findings can be applied to other relevant problems. Furthermore, the author should show how the current result supports or contradicts previous studies, limitation of the study, and implication of the study (both managerial and scientific implications). This section also discusses the recommendation(s) for future research based on the limitation of the study.The findings and discussion section consist of description of the results of the data analysis to answer the research question(s) and their meanings seen from current theories and references of the area addressed.
Conclusion
The conclusion section consists of the summary, restatement of the main findings. This section provides a brief explanation of the study and the impact of the study. Conclusion should be withdrawn on the basis of research findings, formulated concerns and research purposes. Conclusion is presented in one paragraph without numerical form of expression. Explain your research contributions to science
References
This section consists of all references used in the article. The number of references should be no less than 15 references, where the number of journal articles (includes at least one journal article published within the last ten years) should exceed the number of textbooks. Follow the author instructions in the APA style.
The sources cited should at least 80% come from those published in the last 10 years. The sources cited are primary sources in the forms of journal articles, books, and research reports, including theses and dissertations. Citations from journal should be at least 80% of the total references cited.
Example:
Antonacopoulou, E. P. (2007). Actionable knowledge. In S. Clegg, & J. Bailey (Eds.), International encyclopedia of organization studies (pp. 14–17). London: SAGE.
Argote, L. (2011). Organizational learning research: Past, present, and future. ManagementLearning, 42(4), 439–446.
Argote, L. (2012). Organizational learning: Creating, retaining and transferring knowledge.Springer Science & Business Media.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective, Vol. 173. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Argyris, C. (2009). On organizational learning (2nd ed.). USA: Blackwell Publishing.
Baron, R. A. (2006). Opportunity recognition as pattern recognition: How entrepreneurs connect the dots to identify new business opportunities. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(1), 104–119.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2009). Teaching for quality learning at university society for research into higher education (5th ed.). England: McGraw Hill.
Brady, T., & Davies, A. (2004). Building project capabilities: From exploratory to exploitative learning. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1601–1621.
Brix, J., & Peters, L. S. (2015). Exploring an innovation project as a source of change in organization design. Journal of Organization Design, 4(1), 29–43.
Brix, J. (2014). Improving individual knowledge construction and reconstruction in the context of radical innovation. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 15(2), 192–209.
Brix, J. (2015). Fail forward: Mitigating failure in energy research and innovation. Energy Research & Social Science, 7, 66–77.
Brusoni, S., & Rosenkranz, N. A. (2014). Reading between the lines: Learning as a process between organizational context and individuals’ proclivities. European Management Journal, 32(1), 147–154.
Burawoy, M. (1998). The extended case method. Sociological Theory, 16(1), 4–33.
Burton, R. M., Obel, B., & Håkonsson, D. D. (2015). Organizational design: A step-by-step approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Choo, C. W. (1998). The knowing organization: How organizations use the information to construct meaning, create knowledge, and make decisions. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 128–152.
Colquitt, J. A., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2007). Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1281–1303.
Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2011). Building theory about theory building: What constitutes theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 12–32.
Crossan, M. M., & Apaydin, M. (2010). A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies,
47(6), 1154–1191.
Crossan, M. M., & Berdrow, I. (2003). Organizational learning and strategic renewal. Strategic Management Journal, 24(11), 1087–1105.
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An organizational learning framework: From intuition to the institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522–537.
.
