The paper reflects on the experience of preparing a ‘From the Editors’ (FTE) editorial for The Academy of Management Review that went through a process of editorial evaluation prior to its rejection. It provides a detailed example of an encounter between orthodox and heterodox forms of scholarship, illuminating their distinctive value-orientations and forms of engagement. Its specific focus is upon evaluative criteria applied, accountability of decision-making and the mobilization of scholarly aspirations and ethical principles in the preparation and assessment of the FTE. Its intent is to stimulate debate on what it means to ‘challenge conventional wisdom’ – an aim that is broadly shared by ‘top’ journals in the field of management and organization.

该论文反映了为管理评论学院编写“来自编辑”（FTE）社论的经验，该经历在遭到拒绝之前经历了编辑评估过程。它提供了正统和异相学术形式之间相遇的详细示例，阐明了它们独特的价值取向和参与形式。它的重点是评估标准的应用，决策的问责制以及在准备和评估FTE时动员学术理想和道德原则。它的目的是激发人们对“挑战传统智慧”意味着什么的辩论-这一目标在管理和组织领域的“顶级”期刊中普遍存在。