mgsci-writing-style

Writing Style (mgsci-writing-style)

When to trigger

• The prose is notation-dense, passive, or buries the main result
• An analytical paper reads as a symbol dump with no verbal intuition
• The writing assumes a reader already inside your sub-niche
• You are over length and the text is padded

Management Science explicitly prefers short, focused papers and warns that excessive length and notation density slow review. The style bar is rigor expressed economically and read by editors across many departments.

Front-load the result

State what you find and why it matters in the abstract and the first pages. A Department Editor desk-screening dozens of papers should see the result, the mechanism, and the decision relevance early — not after twenty pages of setup. The abstract is 250 words or less with 3–5 keywords; make every word carry the contribution.

Pair every symbol with intuition (analytical lane)

Formal rigor is required, but a Management Science paper is not a proof transcript. For each key model object and result, give the plain-language reading: what the assumption means behaviorally, what the proposition says in words, what the comparative static implies for a decision-maker. Introduce notation only when used, keep it minimal and consistent, and never make the reader hold five symbols in their head to follow a sentence.

Write for a cross-department reader

Because the contribution must travel across departments, avoid sub-field jargon that only your immediate stream parses, or define it on first use. A finance reader should follow your operations result's significance, and vice versa. This breadth of audience is a defining feature of the flagship, not an optional courtesy.

Citation and format house style

• Author-year (name–date) in-text citations, e.g., (Norman 1977) or Norman (1977); alphabetical reference list in INFORMS/journal style.
• Manuscripts double- or 1.5-spaced, 11-pt font, 1-inch margins; PDF preferred for submission.
• Keep prose active and direct; cut throat-clearing and redundant restatement.

Length discipline

There is no formal limit at initial submission, but brevity is rewarded and invited revisions are capped (47 pages double-spaced / 32 pages 1.5-spaced, online appendix excluded). Tighten now so a revision is not a triage emergency later.

Worked micro-example (illustrative): tightening a platform-competition draft

Because Management Science is the broad multidisciplinary INFORMS flagship, the Department Editor first reading your prose may be from another field entirely. An Information Systems / Business Strategy submission models two-sided platform competition with an empirical test. The draft abstract opens: "We study the interaction between cross-side network effects and seller multi-homing under heterogeneous buyer search costs." A reader cannot tell what was found.

Front-loaded rewrite (numbers illustrative): "When buyer search costs fall by half, the equilibrium flips from single- to multi-homing and platform commissions drop from 15% to about 9%; a marketplace lowering friction should expect thinner take rates, not fatter." Now result, mechanism, and decision lever land in one sentence a finance or operations reader also grasps. The discipline: claim the qualitative flip robustly, but treat the 9% as illustrative of direction, not a forecast.

Referee-pushback patterns and the prose-level fix

• "The contribution only appears in the conclusion." Front-load a one-sentence result with a decision lever on page 1.
• "The notation is impenetrable for a non-specialist." A flagship-specific risk: a single-field journal's reviewers share your symbols; the cross-department pool here may not. Add a notation table; verbalize every proposition.
• "This reads like an Operations Research / Marketing Science paper." Prose is method- or single-application-forward; re-angle toward the cross-department reading.

Calibration anchors

• The default reader is informed but not from your subfield — calibrate to a reader from one of the journal's other departments (optimization, finance, operations, marketing, information systems, behavioral economics, strategy).
• The house bar is rigor expressed economically and a visible management contribution; prose nailing one and dropping the other reads as off-mission. Exact length and abstract specs can change — confirm against the current author guidelines.

Anti-patterns

• A first page that is all background and no result.
• Symbols introduced pages before they are used, or never verbally interpreted.
• Jargon that only your sub-niche understands, in a cross-department venue.
• Numbered-citation style instead of author-year.

Output format

【Front-loaded?】result + decision relevance in abstract/first pages: yes/no
【Notation ↔ intuition】every key result interpreted in words: yes/no
【Cross-department readability】jargon defined / minimized: yes/no
【House style】author-year; 11-pt, 1-inch; abstract ≤250 words, 3–5 keywords: yes/no
【Length】tight; revision cap reachable: yes/no
【Next step】mgsci-submission