Tibetan pastoralists have long been using dogs as guards. Since the late 1980s, the same dogs, called “Tibetan Mastiffs,” have become valuable pets for Han Chinese consumers. This paper discusses how commodification transforms the value of these dogs, and the care relationship between humans and dogs. Tibetan pastoralists and dogs participate in a reciprocal yet distanced care relationship through raising and guarding, which is not confined to a pursuit of dogs’ ferocity. In contrast, a taste for ferocity prevails in the Tibetan Mastiff market, and breeders care for dogs in a more dedicated, and yet more unilateral and dangerous, way. The unintended consequence of breeders’ care is that they raise dogs that sometimes bite; this is explained based on a process of value transformation in dogs’ guarding abilities, from ethical virtue to commercial price.

Integrity provides the foundation for most scholarly endeavours, including research and publishing. Authors, reviewers, and editors share responsibility for creating and maintaining the system in which we conduct and publish our work. However, research and publishing are complicated processes. A single research effort may involve multiple authors, hundreds of participants, and a variety of skills and tools that play out over the course of months or even years. Ethical challenges may arise at any point along the way, so it is not surprising that both new and experienced scholars often struggle to understand and maintain the ethical standards expected of them. This article highlights some of the main challenges scholars face and provides initial guidance for seeking solutions. But most importantly, it sets the stage for this Special Editors' Forum on research and publishing ethics.

This essay discusses the sundry ethical considerations confronting editors and reviewers. To begin, journal hierarchy and manuscript lifecycles are reviewed. From there, ethical issues faced by individuals in various editorial roles, who interact with various parties, are discussed. Issues include making fair desk rejections, assigning reviewers ethically, refraining from the promotion of HARKing (hypothesizing after results are known), promoting a holistic view of validity, balancing scientific progress with journal success, providing developmental and actionable feedback, disclosing expertise parameters, and upholding the spirit of double-blind review.

Managing a successful research team involves a variety of activities and potential issues. In this article, we discuss these issues based on our experience of having worked together for 20 years with regular team meetings that include Ph.D. and undergraduate students and occasionally other faculty colleagues. We attempt to describe the challenges that occur, including some ethical issues, and distil the knowledge we have gained over the years. We pose and answer nine questions about our team processes and procedures and end with a brief summary of key learning.

This commentary reflects on the Academy of Management's experience since developing a formal code of ethics to guide the professional behaviour of its members over twenty years ago. Despite widespread efforts to publicize the Code within the Academy, a sizeable proportion of Academy members are unaware it exists and only a very small proportion have read it carefully. Current efforts underway to increase ethics awareness are described. In addition, it is suggested that the discussion of ethical principles needs to move beyond a printed document and annual workshops to become more influential in the day-to-day lives of management professors. Suggestions for how this might be accomplished by the Academy of Management and other similar associations with codes of ethics (e.g., IACMR) are discussed.

Researchers who are fortunate enough to collect large datasets sometimes wish to publish multiple papers using the same dataset. Unfortunately, there are few guidelines that authors can follow in managing these multiple papers. In this article, we address three main questions including: (i) how do authors know if they have a dataset truly worthy of multiple papers; (ii) what procedures do authors follow when they are ready to submit multiple papers from a single dataset to top tier journals; and (iii) what are the main issues when attempting to publish multiple papers from a single dataset? We provide a set of concrete recommendations for authors who wish to maximize their data collection efforts with multiple papers.