R&R Rebuttal (mgsci-rebuttal)

When to trigger

• You received a major-revision (R&R) decision from Management Science
• You have reviewer reports and a Department Editor letter and must plan the response
• You are unsure which concerns are decisive versus advisory
• You need to fit a strengthened paper inside the invited-revision page cap

Read the Department Editor's letter as the map

In Management Science the Department Editor synthesizes the reviews and signals which concerns are binding. Plan the revision around that letter first: list every point from the DE and each reviewer, mark each binding / important / advisory, and resolve any conflicts between reviewers by deferring to the DE's framing (note the conflict explicitly in your response).

Address objections in the paper's lane

• Analytical lane. If a reviewer questions an assumption, either defend its necessity or show the result survives relaxing it (add an extension/robustness proposition). If a proof step is challenged, tighten the proof and, where useful, add a numerical illustration. Reframe comparative statics to make the managerial intuition unmistakable.
• Empirical lane. If identification is challenged, add the design test the reviewer expects (parallel-trends/event-study, alternative instruments, RDD continuity, placebo/falsification) rather than asserting validity. Add robustness across specs, samples, and measures.
• Fit / contribution. If the concern is cross-department fit or "so what," strengthen the contribution framing (see mgsci-contribution-framing) — make the decision relevance and cross-department travel explicit.