The as-is journal review process: Let authors own their ideas

Recently, the problems associated with the existing journal review process aroused discussions from seasoned management researchers, who have also made useful suggestions for improving the process. To complement these suggestions, we propose a more radical change: A manuscript should be reviewed on an "as is" basis and its fate be determined in one round of review. The as-is review process shortens the time period from submission to final acceptance, reduces the workload of editors, referees, and authors, provides frank author feedback to referees, and, most important, lets authors own the ideas in their publications.