Focus and Scope

Communication and Language at Work is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal focusing on (communicative and discursive) practices relating to organizations. With a view to disciplines, the journal invites contributions navigating sociological and philosophical considerations of communication, knowledge, agency, and organization. Empirically, our authors investigate subjects in diverse research areas, from communication to critical management studies and education, psychology, political science, and intercultural studies. We publish research investigating the phenomenon of work with various foci: theoretical considerations on organizational behavior are as welcome as empirical case studies on agent groups at the workplace, and studies on the embeddedness of work organizations in communicative webs of culture, politics, economics, and other aspects. Work, here, is meant as an umbrella term for work(places) in and related to private and public organizations, NGOs, and bordering phenomena such as networks of volunteers. Explicitly included is the area of research into higher education organizations. We take a special interest in issues of communicative construction of group belonging, cultural othering, and processes of change, such as internationalization or digitalization, but the themes are by no means limited to these fields of study.

Upon successful peer-review (double blind) we publish original research papers, both conceptual and empirical. We further aim at representing the tradition of scholarly knowledge construction through dialogue and process. Consequently, we also publish essays, interviews, group discussion protocols, outstanding speeches or key notes, as well as research notes on either project results or on ongoing projects.

CLAW is published under a Creative Commons license and is a joint project initiated and managed by Peter Kastberg, PhD, Full Professor at Aalborg University, and Klarissa Lueg, Dr. phil. habil., Associate Professor at University of Southern Denmark.

CLAW publishes at least twice a year. For manuscript submission, please contact CLAW does not charge any submission or publishing fees.

CLAW is the successor of the magazine Language at Work – Bridging Theory and Practice (

Peer Review Process

We use double-blind peer review

CLAW applies double-blind peer review. Both the reviewer and author identities are concealed throughout the entire review process. We will usually involve two reviewers. We aim at turnaround times of 12 weeks. The editors review each initial submission and judge the general suitability for publication. Then the author either receives note of a desk reject without further explanation, or the publication is sent to the reviewers for double-blind review. Based on the written recommendation of the reviewers, the editors decide whether the submission should be accepted, rejected, or revised (minor or major revisions). We ask all authors to ensure that their manuscripts are prepared in a way that does not give away their identity. 

Reviewers are encouraged to mentor authors by providing constructive feedback as an avenue to publication, and to sufficiently motivate their decisions on manuscripts. Further, authors are asked to submit a detailed letter to the reviewers when responding to feedback, and to track changes in the original document.

Guidelines for Reviewers

The following guideline is meant to help you producing an article review Communication and Language at Work (CLaW). The role of a reviewer in the editorial process consists of two aspects. Firstly, as a gatekeeper, you are to decide over the paper being included in one of our issues; secondly, as a consultant, you are asked to help the author(s) in developing their paper into a form that meets the journals´ expectations for publication.

Our expectations

On the most general level, to be included into CLaW, an article must meet four expectations:

1) It shows a connection to the focal points of the Journal.

2) It puts forward a stringent and intelligible argumentation.

3) It shows a systematic reference to the relevant research literature of the respective


4) It meets the formal requirements in terms of length and style.

Your recommendation to the editors can take five different forms

1. Accept

please opt for this recommendation if you think the publication is excellent and should be published in its submitted form.

2. Conditional accept

please opt for this recommendation if you assess the document as publishable upon condition of adding or omitting aspects that are to be clearly outlined by you. This could refer to, e.g., adding one or two references, correcting errors in wording or phrasing, or minor issues with table or figures.

3. Revise and resubmit/Minor revision

please opt for this recommendation if you think the author can make their text publishable by changing minor issues. CPE considers all changes minor that can be implemented in a reasonable time, and don’t require revisiting data or fundamental theoretical work.

4. Revise and resubmit/Major revision

please opt for this recommendation if you think the article has potential to be published, but the author should, e.g., revisit their data or conceptual work. The number of your critical annotations can be decisive whether to recommend a minor or major revision. Please inform the editors whether you will serve as a reviewer for a second review stage.

5. Reject

Please opt for this recommendation if you think this contribution is impossible to make suitable for publishing in CPE with reasonable effort and within a reasonable time frame. Please note that the editors will, as a rule, desk reject all submissions they don’t believe to be of appropriate quality.

Writing the review:

After having read the manuscript, you should develop suggestions on what could be improved (if necessary). Many reviewers begin their explications by a brief summary of the reviewed article to signal their essential understanding. Subsequently, you should try to point out your suggestions. To facilitate communication, you should try to explain your suggestions as well-structured as possible. A sober, down-to-earth style and tone is likely to get your message across.

Please make your review short and clear. Usually, a good review does not comprise more than two pages. Please choose a respectful tone for critique. The manuscripts are to be kept strictly confidential.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.


Communication & Language at Work does not take any charge for submission, review or publishing of articles


We acknowedge the financial support by:

University of Southern Denmark, Department of Design and Communication