We expect that theoretical or theoretical-empirical articles submitted to the RAE are correct in the following three dimensions and offer a contribution in at least one of them:

  • Theory: The work’s theoretical argument should be well made and developed, with clearly defined concepts, a complete review of the literature and, when appropriate, well constructed hypotheses.
  • Methodology: The data used should be appropriate for testing the proposed hypothesis(es); data collection should be consistent with the research techniques employed; the study should be internally and externally valid; the analysis techniques adopted should be appropriate to the proposed questions and applied correctly. This dimension applies only to theoretical-empirical articles.
  • Concrete Knowledge of the Area: the article should incorporate the results of already existing research in the area, stimulate debate, and stipulate relevant implications to the practice and research of Administration.

An article should explicitly state its objective in the first few lines of its introduction and demonstrate coherence throughout the text in meeting its objective.

If the objective is to contribute to the theory of the field, we recommend consulting “What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution?” (Whetten, 1989). Suggestions listed in this text have been adapted and summarized below and mainly concern how to deal appropriately with the following questions:

  1. Which factors (variables, constructs and concepts) should be considered to understand the phenomenon in question? How do these factors relate to each other, even in terms of relationships that cannot be tested? What are the justifications for the factors and proposed relationships that have been selected?
  2. How and to what extent can additions and/or subtractions of factors to already existing theoretical models on this subject substantially alter them?
  3. Which perspectives from other fields of study challenge the fundamental concepts that support the prevalent theories about the phenomenon under analysis?
  4. Which contextual and temporal elements define the boundaries of generalization and constitute the limits of the presented theory? Are there explanations for certain specific situations in which the proposed theory fails to apply?
  5. Is there something new being proposed? What are the practical and scientific implications of the logic underlying this work and the evidence it presents?
  6. Does the article deal with a subject that is pertinent to the interests of contemporary learned researchers in this area?

Guidelines outlined in the text “Getting a manuscript to publication standard” (Arnould, 2006), summarized and adapted below, may be followed. We suggest, however, that the text be read in its entirety.

  1. Introduce the general area of the research, followed by the article’s specific proposal and its relationship to the most important existing research on this subject.
  2. Specify what is known and what is unknown about the phenomenon being studied, identifying important details of knowledge.
  3. Clarify why these details are so important and how your investigation can help advance the knowledge of this field.
  4. Derive the tested hypothesis from the general subject and the immediate objective (with details to be filled in) of your research whenever possible.
  5. Explain how your research makes a solution possible for the understanding of a research problem.
  6. Detail the study’s objectives in such a way that they answer your article’s research demands.
  7. Where appropriate, describe the empirical analyses conducted, as well as their specific results and theoretical and practical impacts.
  8. Categorize your results by subject and explain their relevance in terms of the specific objectives of your article.
  9. Explain in your conclusion why your study’s result is relevant and how it can further the theory and practice of the field being studied, focusing on the demands established in your paper’s objectives.
  10. Compare what has been announced with what the article concludes, explaining any diverging results and ensuring coherence between the various components of your text.