Every year, EURAM has three Conference Awards which are given out during the Award Ceremony onsite. Scientific Council members volunteer their time and expertise and take part in the various selection committees. You may find additional information about the Scientific Council here.

Below you will find a description of the selection process for each conference award:

1. EURAM Best Paper Award – Prize Money 1000 Euro

• Reviewers can nominate a paper for the Best Paper Award.
• Each Strategic Interest Groups (SIGs) select one paper per SIG. Papers selected cannot have the SIG chair as a co-author.
• The 13 anonymised papers are reviewed by three committee members who each give a score from 1 to 10 and rank the papers.
• Results of the evaluations are consolidated, and in the case of a tie, the committee may decide to give the award to one of the papers or to more than one paper. The prize money is shared among all authors.
• Nominees must be registered to the conference.

Criteria of evaluation:

Main criteria: advancing the field (theoretical contribution, empirical contribution, methodological contribution, results, relevance); social impact. Additional criterion: clarity (writing and objectives)

2. EURAM Most Inspirational Award – Prize Money 1000 Euro

• Reviewers can nominate a paper for the Most Inspirational Paper.
• Each Strategic Interest Groups (SIGs) select one paper per SIG. Papers selected cannot have the SIG chair as a co-author.
• The 13 anonymised papers are reviewed by three committee members who each give a score from 1 to 10 and rank the papers.
• Results of the evaluations are consolidated, and in the case of a tie, the committee may decide to give the award to one of the papers or to more than one paper. The prize money is shared among all authors.
• Nominees must be registered to the conference.

Criteria of evaluation:

Main criteria: originality, relevance for the debate around main questions of the discipline; relevance for the debate around main contemporary issues; theoretical and methodological accuracy. Additional criterion: clarity

3. EURAM Best Reviewer Award – Prize Money 500 Euro

• Nominations may be made by SIGs. SIG Chairs cannot self-nominate a bets reviewer.
• In parallel, authors whether their paper was accepted for presentation or not, are asked to rate their reviewers by answering a short questionnaire.
• All anonymised reviews are read by two committee members who are asked to give a score of 1 to 10.
• Results of the evaluations are consolidated and in case of a tie, the committee may decide to give the award to one or more reviewers. The prize money is shared among all awardees.
• Nominees must be registered to the conference

Criteria of evaluation:

Comprehensive feedback taking into consideration both relevance and rigour dimensions of the research (emphasizing responsible research); Constructive feedback which is based on up-to-date knowledge, and which addresses all the parts of the paper; Feasible feedback; Clearly written and well-organized feedback. Feedback that provides not only additional references but also comments on how they can be helpful for the development of the paper.

Other Awards given during the EURAM Conference:

1. EURAM Impactful Researcher 

The EURAM Impactful Researcher Award recognises excellence in the application of theory and research in practice. The award is assigned to a scholar whose publications had a strong impact on contemporary managerial practice in private or public companies, for-profit or non-profit organisations.

Criteria to be found in call here

2. EURAM Best Book 2025 – Prize Money 2500 Euro

The Best Book award is also given during the Award Ceremony of EURAM Conference.

Criteria to be found in call here

3. EURAM Research Grants Scheme – Grants between 3000 – 5000 Euro

EURAM promotes research through the EURAM Research Grants Scheme.

Criteria to be found in call here

4. EURAM Edith Penrose Award for Trailblazing Researchers sponsored by INSEAD

To be trailblazing a scholar will demonstrate how they have challenged established wisdom and have been the first to propose a new, alternative or complementary view of it: i.e., they have blazed a new trail (as did Penrose in 1959).

Criteria to be found in call here