Management Science 'Under Review': What Each Status Means

Before the paper reaches external reviewers, a Management Science Department Editor evaluates whether the business or operations research significance warrants Management Science's editorial slots and whether the paper fits the department's field. About 50 to 60 percent of submissions are desk-rejected at this stage. A desk rejection most often means the Department Editor concluded that the work would fit better at a sister INFORMS journal (Operations Research for operations research theory, M&SOM for manufacturing and service operations, Marketing Science for marketing, INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics for applied work) or that the Management Science cross-department business research bar is not met.

The Department Editor in the appropriate field (Accounting, Data Science, Finance, Information Systems, Operations Management, etc.) reads the paper and evaluates business or operations research significance, methodological rigor, contribution to the relevant department's field, and Management Science cross-department fit.

In parallel with the Department Editor's primary read, ambiguous-fit papers spanning multiple departments are discussed across the INFORMS editorial team where peer Department Editors weigh in on whether the paper would fit better at a specific Management Science department or at a sister INFORMS journal. This cross-department consultation runs alongside the desk-screen and adds 3 to 7 days to the timeline that is invisible to the author in the portal.

Management Science Department Editors typically invite 2 to 3 reviewers, with reviewer recruitment typically taking 7 to 14 days. The double-anonymous review model means both authors and reviewers are anonymous to the identity of the other; this can extend recruitment as reviewers are matched without author-identity bias.

Once 2 to 3 reviewers agree to review, the typical Management Science peer-review cycle lasts 4 to 8 weeks per reviewer, contributing to the 65-day Department Editor decision average. Reviewers are asked to evaluate business or operations research significance, methodological rigor, contribution clarity, and reproducibility. Reviewer reports for Management Science tend to be thorough; 2000 to 4000 word reports are typical.

After reports return, the Department Editor synthesizes them and forwards the recommendation to the EIC for final decision. Management Science strives to provide high-quality feedback to 90 percent of authors within 90 days.

• Rejection within 1 to 7 days: Administrative issue or immediate scope mismatch.
• Rejection within 7 to 21 days: Department Editor desk rejection per the 50 to 60 percent figure.
• Still Under Review after 3 weeks: Strong signal. Paper passed the Department Editor desk screen.
• Still Under Review after 12 weeks: You would be past the slowest 10 percent (per INFORMS 90-day target). A polite inquiry via the INFORMS Author Portal is appropriate.
• Status changes to "Decision Pending": Reports are in; expect a decision within 1 to 2 weeks.

This is the most common anxiety we hear from Management Science authors during the active editorial window. The honest answer: no, 8 weeks at Under Review puts you right at Management Science's 65-day Department Editor decision average. Reports may already be in editorial synthesis with the Department Editor preparing the recommendation. Most reviewer-driven delays come from the double-anonymous review reviewer-recruitment difficulty (reviewers are matched without author-identity bias) rather than slow reviews. If the portal still says Under Review at the 12-week mark, the most likely explanation is that one of the assigned reviewers asked for an extension and the Department Editor granted it. This is normal practice at Management Science.

What you should NOT do during the 8-to-12-week window is email the editorial office. Management Science Department Editors are working academic business and operations researchers managing 60+ active papers per year around their own research; an inquiry at 8 weeks adds friction without accelerating the timeline.

If your Management Science paper is rejected after review, the natural cascade depends on what the reviewers and Department Editor cited:

Operations Research is the natural INFORMS cascade for operations research theory papers.

M&SOM (Manufacturing & Service Operations Management) is the INFORMS cascade for manufacturing and service operations papers.

Marketing Science is the INFORMS cascade for marketing papers.

INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics is the INFORMS cascade for applied analytics papers.

INFORMS Journal on Computing is the INFORMS cascade for computing methodology papers.

INFORMS Journal on Optimization is the INFORMS cascade for optimization theory papers.

Production and Operations Management (POMS) is the external POMS Society cascade.

Strategic Management Journal (SMJ) is the external Strategic Management Society cascade.

INFORMS asks reviewers at Management Science to evaluate four things specifically. The table below maps each to actionable preparation.

In our pre-submission work with Management Science-targeted manuscripts, three named patterns generate the most consistent reviewer concerns and the most common reasons papers miss the editorial bar or fail the desk screen.

Department mismatch framing flagged at Department Editor desk screen. When the introduction frames the work for the wrong Management Science department (e.g., framing accounting work as Finance), Department Editor desk rejection or cross-department transfer is common. The strongest manuscripts identify the appropriate department clearly in the cover letter.

Author-identity leakage flagged under double-anonymous review. When the manuscript contains self-citation patterns or acknowledgments that reveal author identity, double-anonymous integrity is compromised. The strongest manuscripts prepare the manuscript with author-identity fully removed.

INFORMS family cascade offers from Department Editor. When the Department Editor concludes the work is rigorous but the Management Science cross-department bar is not met, transfer offers to Operations Research (OR theory), M&SOM (manufacturing/service operations), Marketing Science (marketing), or INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics (applied) are common. INFORMS editors take these transfers seriously.

This page was created from INFORMS's public Management Science submission guidelines at pubsonline.informs.org/page/mnsc/submission-guidelines, INFORMS editorial documentation (90-day high-quality-feedback target for 90 percent of authors, 65-day Department Editor decision average for papers sent to reviewers, double-anonymous review, department-based editorial structure with Department Editors for Accounting/Data Science/Entrepreneurship & Innovation/Finance/Information Systems/Operations Management/Revenue Management & Market Analytics/etc.), and Manusights pre-submission review experience with Management Science-targeted manuscripts.

For the INFORMS business and operations landscape beyond Management Science, see Operations Research (OR theory), M&SOM (manufacturing/service operations), Marketing Science (marketing), INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics (applied), INFORMS Journal on Computing (computing methodology), INFORMS Journal on Optimization (optimization theory), and external top-tier business alternatives (Production and Operations Management, Strategic Management Journal). The choice across these titles depends on whether the central contribution is top cross-department business research (Management Science), OR theory (Operations Research), manufacturing/service operations (M&SOM), marketing (Marketing Science), applied analytics (INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics), computing methodology (INFORMS Journal on Computing), optimization theory (INFORMS Journal on Optimization), production/operations management (POMS), or strategic management (SMJ).

Reviewers at Management Science typically draw from 2 to 3 department-specific subspecialty experts under the INFORMS double-anonymous model. Editors screen and triage manuscripts before any reviewer sees them via the Department Editor model, and preparing a response template that addresses both department-specific significance and methodology accelerates revision rounds substantially.

For a pre-upload check of your manuscript against the Management Science cross-department-business-research bar before submission, our Management Science pre-submission diagnostic flags the department fit and double-anonymous preparation weaknesses most likely to surface in reviewer reports.