1 WHY THIS NEW SECTION?

Academic journals in the fields of business and ethics often publish similar pieces of research, not only in terms of research paradigms and theories, but also with regard to methodology, structure and writing style. This generally translates into a routine of publishing incremental contributions, and drifts away from revelatory research that is likely to be bold and daring, and thus able to shift mainstream narratives, paradigms or mindsets (Corley & Gioia, 2011). We know that what lies outside of academic conventions faces a high risk of being rejected, which limits creativity and the broadening of the horizons of knowledge. Why would an author with an unorthodox idea or viewpoint invest time in crafting a manuscript for a well-established journal if they know beforehand that it is likely to be rejected?

Hence, it is evident that, despite their benefits related to the provision of a steady basis for knowledge generation and dissemination, academic conventions limit major leaps of knowledge creation by being over conservative and risk averse, and thus discourage authors from sharing dissenting ideas and insights. That is why we have decided to launch a new journal section, entitled BEER Heterodoxies, to complement our regular submission channel. Our new BEER Heterodoxies section is intended to highlight dissenting perspectives by welcoming unorthodox types of contributions in terms of paradigms, theories, methodology, structure and writing style, provided that they have a strong theoretical basis and that they present a compelling argumentation. Below, we provide more detail about this new section:

1.1 Aims and scope

Contributions published in BEER Heterodoxies revisit or theoretically discuss a problem or thought, with the aim of outlining accounts that depart from and challenge the axioms of established paradigms in the literatures related to business ethics, corporate responsibility and sustainability. Contributions may challenge a particular view, breaking with the agreed use or standard practice that prevails in a given community of thought. BEER Heterodoxies is a reflection space in which necessary debates are started, discussed, contested or restarted.

1.2 Types of submission

Submissions are made online via ScholarOne, and selecting “Perspective” as manuscript type. Manuscripts should typically be between 3,000 and 6,000 words in length (excluding references, tables and figures). Extensive footnotes/endnotes and appendices should be avoided. BEER Heterodoxies welcomes, but is not limited to, the following types of contributions:

• Viewpoints: this kind of article is based on the author's expert opinion anchored in extant theory and/or practice. Thus, the analysis takes readers through the points of contention that the author wishes to problematize. Empirical evidence may, or may not, be brought to bear on the issue at stake, although BEER Heterodoxies agrees with Popper (2014) that observations ‘are interpretations in the light of theories.’
• Philosophical arguments: more speculative in nature than a Viewpoint, this kind of article challenges current philosophical thinking, carefully elaborating points and counterpoints that outline the author's contention vis-à-vis a specific contender understood either as a thinker, thesis, or philosophical tradition.
• Interview-based contributions: this kind of article aims to disentangle the intricacies of contemporary scholarly or practitioners' work based on interview(s) with the respective authors. Interviewees should be known for having made a significant contribution to theory or practice.

1.3 Review process

Submissions to BEER Heterodoxies are subject to a double-blind review process. Authors should be informed that the Associate Editors and the reviewers dealing with BEER Heterodoxies are well aware of the Aims and Scope of this new section, and thus the risk of rejecting a paper on the grounds of not following academic conventions or being too unorthodox will be virtually non-existent. Thus, we encourage authors to be brave, to challenge existing knowledge grounds, and to break away from academic silos and traditional conventions. In short, we encourage them to pursue revelatory research that allows examining imaginatively and unconventionally a theory, a phenomenon, a research question or a research model (Corley & Gioia, 2011) and that opens doors for new ways of thinking and future avenues and unchartered grounds.

中文翻译：

---

BEER Heterodoxies：触发非正统声音和观点的新部分

1 为什么是这个新部分？

商业和伦理领域的学术期刊经常发表类似的研究，不仅在研究范式和理论方面，而且在方法、结构和写作风格方面。这通常转化为发布增量贡献的常规，远离可能大胆大胆的启示性研究，从而能够改变主流叙事、范式或心态（Corley & Gioia，  2011）。我们知道，学术惯例之外的东西面临被拒绝的高风险，这限制了创造力和知识视野的拓宽。如果一个具有非正统想法或观点的作者事先知道可能会被拒绝，为什么他们会花时间为一家知名期刊撰写手稿？

因此，很明显，尽管学术惯例有利于为知识生成和传播提供稳定的基础，但由于过于保守和规避风险，学术惯例限制了知识创造的重大飞跃，从而阻止作者分享不同的想法和见解. 这就是为什么我们决定推出一个名为 BEER Heterodoxies 的新期刊部分，以补充我们的常规投稿渠道。我们新的 BEER Heterodoxies 部分旨在通过欢迎在范式、理论、方法、结构和写作风格方面的非正统类型的贡献来突出不同的观点，前提是它们具有强大的理论基础并提出令人信服的论点。下面，我们将提供有关此新部分的更多详细信息：

1.1 目标和范围

发表在 BEER Heterodoxies 上的投稿重新审视或从理论上讨论了一个问题或思想，目的是概述背离和挑战与商业道德、企业责任和可持续性相关的文献中既定范式公理的账户。贡献可能会挑战特定的观点，打破在特定思想社区中普遍存在的商定用途或标准做法。BEER Heterodoxies 是一个反思空间，在其中开始、讨论、争论或重新启动必要的辩论。

1.2 提交类型

通过 ScholarOne 在线提交，并选择“Perspective”作为稿件类型。手稿的长度通常应在 3,000 到 6,000 字之间（不包括参考文献、表格和图表）。应避免使用过多的脚注/尾注和附录。BEER Heterodoxies 欢迎但不限于以下类型的贡献：

• 观点：此类文章基于作者基于现有理论和/或实践的专家意见。因此，分析使读者了解作者希望解决的争论点。尽管 BEER Heterodoxies 同意 Popper（2014 年）的观点，即观察“是根据理论进行的解释”，但经验证据可能会或可能不会被用于相关问题。
• 哲学论证：本质上比观点更具投机性，这类文章挑战了当前的哲学思想，仔细阐述了要点和对立点，概述了作者与被理解为思想家、论文或哲学传统的特定竞争者的争论。
• 基于访谈的贡献：此类文章旨在通过对各自作者的访谈来解开当代学术或实践者工作的复杂性。受访者应该以对理论或实践做出重大贡献而闻名。

1.3 审核流程

向 BEER Heterodoxies 提交的申请需经过双盲审查。应告知作者，处理 BEER Heterodoxies 的副主编和审稿人非常清楚这一新部分的目的和范围，因此以不遵循学术惯例或过于不正统为由拒绝论文的风险将是几乎不存在。因此，我们鼓励作者勇敢，挑战现有的知识基础，打破学术孤岛和传统惯例。简而言之，我们鼓励他们进行启发性研究，以富有想象力和非常规的方式检验理论、现象、研究问题或研究模型（Corley & Gioia,  2011)，这为新的思维方式、未来的途径和未知的领域打开了大门。