When the “implications” become more than just an afterthought: Takeaways from the Estonian Doctoral School’s Idea Development Workshop at EBS

“Start with the problem, not the publication.”

That simple mantra echoed through the lecture hall of the Estonian Business School (EBS) on 8–9 December 2025 as doctoral students and early‑career researchers grappled with a paradox that plagues much of academia: how do you make scholarly work matter in the real world?

The Idea Development Workshop, co‑hosted by the Estonian Doctoral School and the Academy of Management Perspectives (AMP) Journal, challenged participants to flip their usual approach. Instead of writing papers and tacking on practical implications at the end, the AMP editors urged them to craft research around real‑world managerial problems from the very beginning.

Why this workshop felt different

Traditional academic writing often leaves the implication section as an afterthought, an obligatory couple of paragraphs that connect dense theory to reality. Yet AMP’s editors made it clear that, for their journal, practice is not a footnote but the foundation. Irina Burns, Senior Managing Editor for AMP and Academy of Management Review, explained that the journal’s mission is to provide evidence‑based solutions designed to solve real‑world challenges, and that papers must be rigorous, relevant and readable. This means starting with a problem that keeps managers awake at night and ensuring the entire manuscript speaks to their needs rather than to tenure committees.

Burns, who joined the Academy of Management (AOM) in 2015 and currently manages licensing for the Academy, also highlighted how the Academy’s Community Accelerator Programme is deliberately expanding beyond North America to engage scholars from regions underrepresented in management research. In fact, it was one of the reasons why the editorial team was in Tallinn.

AMP Associate Editors Bonnie Hayden Cheng and Stacey Fitzsimmons doubled down on the message. Cheng, Professor and Head of the Department of Management at City University of Hong Kong, whose research on corporate wellness has been featured in The Wall Street Journal, Forbes and The New York Times, warned that simply resubmitting a rejected empirical paper with a new cover letter will not suffice. Instead, she argued, the implication section should come first. According to her, it is crucial to first identify a managerial pain point, ground it in theory and data, and then offer concrete, actionable recommendations. 

Fitzsimmons, an Associate Professor of International Management at the University of Victoria, Canada, and a Research Associate at the Gordon Institute of Business Science (GIBS), South Africa, noted that AMP even encourages authors to partner with managers or executive‑MBA students when shaping their questions. “Talk to managers before you collect data,” she advised. “If they don’t see the problem you’re solving, it may not be worth anyone’s time.”

Over the course of the two days…

The workshop’s structure reinforced these messages.

On Day 1, Burns introduced the Academy of Management and described its efforts to build a global scholarly community. Attendees then engaged in a candid Q&A with Cheng and Fitzsimmons about why papers get rejected and what makes a successful AMP submission. A hands‑on session on structuring an AMP paper had participants re‑working their research ideas around managerial problems, while a networking dinner allowed for conversations that spilt late into the evening.

On Day 2, the workshop shifted to implementation. Participants had submitted 350‑word abstracts ahead of time and were paired with editors for one‑on‑one feedback. Small breakout sessions provided space to discuss research designs, methodological hurdles and, crucially, how to articulate the ‘so what?’ for non‑academic audiences. Because slots were limited, each participant received personalised attention, making the feedback more like a mentoring session than a formal review.

Lessons on bridging academia and industry

Several themes emerged that could inspire researchers beyond this workshop:

1. Translate theory into stories: Participants were challenged to explain their work without jargon and to illustrate how their findings could play out in a manager’s day. Fitzsimmons recommended the “mom test.” If a family member without a PhD doesn’t understand your abstract, you need to rewrite it.
2. Co‑create knowledge: The editors encouraged scholars to involve practitioners early, either as co‑authors or as sounding boards. Doing so not only improves relevance but also opens access to data and real‑world insights.
3. See implications as the starting point: As one PhD student quipped during a coffee break, “I used to bolt on my recommendations in the last week before submission. Now I realise that’s where I should begin.” Basically, AMP’s ethos flips the script. Practical implications are the thesis, not the appendix.
4. Value diversity of perspectives: Bringing together researchers from Estonia, Finland, Latvia and beyond with editors from the United States, Canada, and Hong Kong created a cross‑cultural dialogue about management challenges. Discussions ranged from AI ethics to refugee integration, reminding everyone that a “real‑world problem” looks different depending on where you stand.

What participants took away

For attendees, the workshop was as much about mindset as mechanics.

Veiko Valkiainen, a Junior Research Fellow at the University of Tartu and leadership coach, said the direct feedback from AMP editors “sharpened my thinking about how to position my work” and made him more confident about targeting practitioner‑oriented journals.

Heidi Vähänikkilä, an EBS PhD candidate and Senior Lecturer at Laurea University of Applied Sciences, appreciated the in‑person format. She described the two‑day immersion as “encouraging,” noting that speaking with peers and editors gave her a sense of belonging and helped her clarify the “why” behind her research. Many students echoed that the workshop demystified publishing and made high‑impact journals seem attainable.

EBS’s role in advancing science communication

Hosting the Idea Development Workshop is part of a broader push by EBS and the Estonian Doctoral School to elevate science communication and nurture research that matters.

The event was meticulously organised by Hira Wajahat Malik, a PhD candidate and Junior Research Fellow at EBS, who leveraged her own network and experience in science communication, with support from Sigrid Lainevee, EBS’s Research and Doctoral Studies Coordinator, and Karmo Kroos, Vice‑Rector of Research at EBS.

Their efforts reflect a recognition that bridging academia and industry requires not just good research but also the skills to tell compelling stories about it.

Looking ahead

By the end of the second day, participants had not only refined their abstracts but also reframed their approach to scholarship. The editors’ parting message was clear – there is a global appetite for management research that speaks to practice, and journals like AMP are creating spaces where such work can thrive.

With AOM planning to launch more open‑access journals and expand its community to 15 journals by 2030, the opportunities for practice‑oriented scholarship will only grow. 

For Estonian researchers, the opportunity is obvious! The infrastructure exists. The editorial gatekeepers are actively seeking diverse perspectives. The question isn’t whether practice-oriented research has value but whether researchers will do the harder work of making their scholarship accessible and actionable.

Project “Cooperation between universities to promote doctoral studies” (2021-2027.4.04.24-0003) is co-funded by the European Union.