Editorial Judgments, Quality Scholarship, and the Academy of Management's Journals
评论了Bedeian等人对管理学会期刊编委会成员学术成就的批判性分析，探讨了方法论、编委遴选标准、编辑角色及期刊绩效等问题，得出更全面的学术出版观点。
Bedeian, Van Fleet, and Hyman's article offers a critical examination of the scholarly achievements of editorial review board members for several scholarly journals in related disciplines, including the Academy of Management's primary scholarly journals, the Academy of Management Review and the Academy of Management Journal (AMJ). The author finds their critique to be interesting and thorough in many ways. However, this commentary examines several issues related to their critique, including the methodology, criteria for and process of selecting editorial review board members, the editor's role in the evaluation of work submitted to journals, and the performance of scholarly journals. Consideration of these issues allows a broader and more complete view of scholarly publishing, leading to some different conclusions.