View Thread

Call for Papers - PAR Symposium on Reviews to Reimagine and Rejuvenate Theorizing

  • 1.  Call for Papers - PAR Symposium on Reviews to Reimagine and Rejuvenate Theorizing

    Posted 10-25-2022 17:16
      |   view attached
    Call for Papers
    Public Administration Review (PAR)

    Symposium on Reviews to Reimagine and Rejuvenate Theorizing

    Although reviews of scholarly literature can play an important role in reimagining and
    rejuvenating scholarship and pedagogy, reviews can also serve to simply reinforce existing
    understanding, thereby blocking avenues of progress. From a metascience perspective, reviews
    should indeed provide a synthesis on a subject but should also be critical of how we as
    researchers "do" research to encourage continuous development of our scientific repertoire –
    both in terms of theory development and methodological rigor (Schooler 2014). Breslin and
    Gatrell (2020) use the miner-prospector metaphor to distinguish creative and original review
    approaches from the standard systematic review. Increasingly, there have been calls over the last
    few years to reorient reviews to question taken-for-granted scholarly understanding, and use
    reviews to reimagine and rejuvenate extant understanding and break disciplinary boundaries (see
    Alvesson and Sandberg 2020; Breslin and Gatrell 2020; Pandey, Bearfield, and Hall 2022).

    PAR's pages have featured many creative and original review articles (e.g., Andersen et al. 2016;
    Bryson et al. 2006; Campbell et al. 2022; George et al. 2021, Pandey et al. 2022; Walker 2013)
    and the goal of this symposium is to add to this corpus of high-impact reviews. As a discipline,
    we need reviews to systematize existing knowledge in order to understand this knowledge better
    and create new ideas. To stand on the shoulders of giants does not necessarily prevent progress,
    but it takes some courage to go beyond summarizing what others have found and even more
    courage to suggest a fundamentally different organizing principle.

    Public Administration Review invites manuscripts that survey scholarly literatures and promote
    new insights. Manuscripts will be subject to an editorial evaluation followed by PAR's peer review
    process. Manuscripts will be assessed according to the following criteria:

    1. Review scope, goals, and execution – Of broad interest to public administration scholars
    and practitioners; clear articulation and execution of review goals
    2. Review methodology – replicable and transparent review methodology
    3. Review contribution - contribution to reimagining and rejuvenating extant understanding

    Manuscripts should be submitted online at, choosing
    "Symposium Article" as the article type at the time of submission. In the comments to the
    editor, please note that the article is intended for the "PAR Review Symposium 2023." Relevant
    dates for the symposium are as follows***:

    1. January 15, 2023 to February 15, 2023 – Submission of manuscript to PAR online
    2. April 2023 to May 2023 – First Decision made; authors invited to revise provided with
    reviews (contingent on review process)
    3. June 2023 to July 2023 – Revised Manuscripts due
    4. August 2023 – Final version of accepted manuscripts due
    5. November/December 2023 – Publication of accepted manuscripts in a PAR print issue

    ***Please note that this is an ambitious timeline. Prospective authors should plan to
    adhere to this timeline in order to ensure timely publication.

    Please direct any inquiries or questions to


    Andersen, Lotte Bøgh, Andreas Boesen, and Lene Holm Pedersen. 2016. Performance in public
    organizations: Clarifying the conceptual space. Public Administration Review 76 (6):

    Alvesson, Mats, and Jörgen Sandberg. 2020. The Problematizing Review: A Counterpoint to
    Elsbach and Van Knippenberg's Argument for Integrative Reviews. Journal of
    Management Studies 57 (6): 1290–1304.

    Breslin, Dermot, and Caroline Gatrell. 2020. Theorizing through literature reviews: The minerprospector
    continuum. Organizational Research Methods DOI: 1094428120943288.

    Bryson, John M., Barbara C. Crosby, and Melissa Middleton Stone. 2006. The Design and
    Implementation of Cross-Sector Collaborations: Propositions from the Literature. Public
    Administration Review 66 (s1): 44-55.

    Campbell, Jesse W., Sanjay K. Pandey, and Lars Arnesen. The Ontology, Origin, and Impact of
    Divisive Public Sector Rules: A Meta‐Narrative Review of the Red Tape and
    Administrative Burden Literatures. Public Administration Review.

    George, Bert, Sanjay K. Pandey, Bram Steijn, Adelien Decramer, and Mieke Audenaert. 2021
    Red Tape, organizational performance, and employee outcomes: Meta‐analysis, metaregression,
    and research agenda. Public Administration Review 81(4): 638-651.

    Pandey, Sanjay K., Domonic Bearfield, and Jeremy L. Hall. 2022 A New Era and New Concepts
    in the Study of Race in Public Administration. Public Administration Review 82(2): 205-

    Pandey, Sanjay K., Smith Amy, Pandey, Sheela, and Ojelabi Olanike. 2022. Reimagining Race
    and Gender in Public Administration and Public Policy: Insights from an
    Interdisciplinary Systematic Review. Public Administration Review.

    Schooler, Jonathan W. 2014. Metascience could rescue the 'replication crisis'. Nature,
    515(7525): 9.

    Walker, Richard M. 2013. Strategic management and performance in public organizations:
    findings from the Miles and Snow framework. Public Administration Review, 73(5): 675-

    Amy E. Smith
    Division Chair Elect
    Academy of Management Public & Nonprofit Division

    Associate Professor
    University of Massachusetts Boston


    1CFPRejuvenatingReviews.pdf   148 KB 1 version