The Journal of Business Models is an open source, peer reviewed, international journal devoted to establishing the discipline of business models as a separately recognized core discipline in academia - as is already the case in practice.

The objective of the journal is to disseminate the newest research-based insights into business models. The Journal of Business Models constitutes an interdisciplinary platform conveying multiple-type papers, i.e. both conceptual and empirical papers , as well as a fast track short paper section. The journal encourages methodological pluralism. It is the aim to cover a wide array of perspectives on business models, like e.g. innovation, management, commercialization, entrepreneurship, internationalization, design thinking, strategy, organization, accounting, performance measurement and finance. As this journal aims at pushing the knowledge of the field to a higher level, and becoming a core discipline in due course, the rigor of the review process and the quality of the published papers naturally lend themselves to an expert audience. Thus, in addition to the academic audience, policy-makers, entrepreneurs and students with high academic aspirations will also benefit substantially from the mix of articles in this journal. 

Short papers

Why JoBM short papers?

  • We wish to speed up the development of business model research!
  • We wish to fast-track business model publishing process!
  • We wish to maximise the visibility and impact of your business model research!

Short Paper Outline:

Structured papers should be submitted with these outlines:

  • Follow the guidelines, meaning max:
    • - max 3.000 words
    • - 2 figures or tables
    • - 25 references
  • Identification (Article Title Page)
    • - Title (max 10 words)
    • - Abstract (max 150 words)
    • - Key words (3)
    • - Authors’ names and affiliation
    • - Acknowledgements (max 30 words)
  • Contents
    • - Introduction
    • - Methodological approach
    • - Key insights
    • - Discussion and conclusions
    • - References

What do we expect from you?

We ask for language-proofed papers with a clear focus and a singular clear message

Short papers can be within three different focus areas as outlined below:

  • Focus area A
    • - Conceptual
    • - Theoretical
    • - Methodological
  • Focus area B
    • - Empirical
    • - Managerial
    • - Educational
  • Focus area C
    • - Tools
    • - Processes
    • - Facilitation

What do we promise you?

  • - A double-blind review process
    • - Two reviewers involved in the review process
    • - Review rating according to
      1. Accept as is
      2. Minor revision
      3. Major revison
      4. Reject
    • - Across the three acceptance criteria
      1. Theoretical, Empirical or Practical Novelty
      2. Theoretical, Empirical or Practical Relevance
      3. Clarity of argumentation
  • - A faster editorial journey and review process than those of standard papers
  • - In-print versions online instantly

Journal of Business Models Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement


The Journal of Business Models is committed to publishing and widely disseminating high-quality content. The editorial operations of the journal are governed by transparent, fair and rigorous ethical standards. The journal recognizes that the scholarly publishing includes many stakeholders such as editors, authors, reviewers, and publishers. All involved stakeholders have a shared understanding and acceptance of policies on publication ethics and malpractice.


Responsibility of the Editor

The editor’s chief responsibility at the Journal of Business Models is to determine which submissions to the journal will be published. He/she, together with the editorial team, must ensure that decisions are made on the basis of the manuscript’s merit and that the author’s race, gender, religious or political beliefs, ethnicity, or citizenship are not considered.



Information concerning a submitted manuscript to Journal of Business Models should only be revealed to the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial board members, or the publisher as is required or otherwise appropriate.


Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Reviewers at the Journal of Business Models will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Reviewers at Journal of Business Models should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.


Responsibility of Reviewers

Purpose of peer review

The peer review process st the Journal of Business Models is a crucial component in helping the editor and/or editorial board reach editorial or publishing decisions and may also serve the author in improving the quality of the submission.



A potential reviewer should withdraw from the review process at the Journal of Business Models if he/she feels unqualified to assess the contribution or cannot provide an assessment in a timely manner as defined by the editor.



Manuscripts for review at the Journal of Business Models must be considered confidential documents. Information concerning the manuscripts should not be discussed with others without the approval of the editor.


Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and editorial advisory board members at Journal of Business Models will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.



Reviewers at Journal of Business Models should strive to be objective in their assessments. Reviewers’ comments should be clearly expressed and supported by data or arguments. Personal criticism of the author(s) is not appropriate.


Acknowledgment of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors to ensure that the work contributes to discussions ongoing in the journal. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.


Responsibility of the Author

Reporting standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.


Data access and retention

Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals, provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.


Originality, plagiarism, and acknowledgment of sources

Authors will submit only entirely original works and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited.


Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication

In general, papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by one journal should not be submitted to other publications while the manuscript is under review. Journals that publish creative works may make exceptions to the previously published rule; please consult the editor.


Acknowledgment of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.


Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.


Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed to the editor at the earliest stage possible. Readers should be informed about who has funded research and on the role of the funders in the research.


Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or to provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.


Please send questions, concerns or comments to