Reviews for "Leadership"

Average duration Review reports
(1st review rnd.)
1st rev. rnd Tot. handling Im. rejection Number Quality Overall rating Outcome Year
n/a n/a 7.0
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2019
Motivation: The editor provided timely, highly engaged, and very constructive comments to help develop our paper before welcoming a second attempt at submission.
n/a 3 5
(very good)
Rejected 2019
Motivation: The comments from reviewers were detailed, constructive, and very thoughtful. The reviewers all showed great interest in the topic and seemed invested in improving the paper. They provided tips for various theoretical perspectives on the paper's topic and also gave recommendations of helpful references that all served to guide us on how the paper can be improved for future submission attempts.