eISSN: 3087-4084 editor@aimjournals.com
All Journals
Submit your article

Peer Review Policy

International Journal of Management and Business Development (IJMBD)
eISSN: 3087-4084

The International Journal of Management and Business Development (IJMBD) is committed to maintaining high standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review process. Peer review is an essential component of the journal's publication process and is intended to evaluate the originality, academic quality, relevance, methodological soundness, and contribution of submitted research in management and business-related fields.

1. Type of Peer Review

  • IJMBD employs a double-blind peer review process, where:

    • The identities of authors are concealed from reviewers.

    • The identities of reviewers are concealed from authors.

  • This process is intended to support an impartial and objective evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

2. Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening to assess:

  • Relevance to the scope of IJMBD

  • Originality and scholarly contribution

  • Compliance with the journal's submission and formatting guidelines

  • Basic academic and methodological quality

  • Ethical considerations

  • Plagiarism and similarity concerns

  • Potential conflicts of interest

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic editorial, ethical, or scope requirements may be declined before being sent for external peer review.

3. Reviewer Selection

  • Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, subject knowledge, research experience, and familiarity with the manuscript's topic.

  • Reviewers may be selected from relevant areas of management, business administration, entrepreneurship, economics, finance, marketing, organizational studies, human resource management, and other related disciplines.

  • Potential conflicts of interest are considered during reviewer selection.

  • Reviewers are expected to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest and decline the assignment where impartiality may be compromised.

  • The journal aims to maintain a qualified and diverse reviewer pool from relevant academic and professional backgrounds.

4. Review Process

  • Each manuscript is generally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers, subject to the editorial requirements of the journal.

  • Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on relevant scholarly criteria, including:

    • Originality and significance of the research

    • Contribution to management and business literature

    • Clarity of research objectives and questions

    • Appropriateness of the theoretical or conceptual framework

    • Suitability and rigor of the research methodology

    • Quality of data collection and analysis, where applicable

    • Clarity and consistency of results or findings

    • Quality of discussion and interpretation

    • Relevance to management, business development, or related fields

    • Quality of presentation, organization, and academic writing

    • Adequacy and relevance of references

  • Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive, specific, and academically relevant comments that may assist authors in improving their manuscripts.

5. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' reports and the overall editorial assessment, the Editor-in-Chief or handling editor may decide to:

  • Accept the manuscript

  • Accept subject to minor revisions

  • Request major revisions and resubmission

  • Reject the manuscript

The final editorial decision is based on the scholarly assessment of the manuscript and the peer review process. Editorial decisions are independent of an author's ability or willingness to pay any applicable Article Processing Fee.

6. Revision and Re-Review

  • Authors are expected to address reviewer and editorial comments carefully and provide appropriate responses to the issues raised.

  • Revised manuscripts should clearly indicate the changes made in response to reviewer comments where requested.

  • A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editor, depending on the extent and nature of the revisions.

  • Where significant reviewer concerns remain inadequately addressed, the manuscript may require further revision or may be declined.

7. Confidentiality

  • Manuscripts submitted to IJMBD and all associated peer review materials are treated as confidential.

  • Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, copy, or use unpublished manuscript content for personal, academic, or professional purposes.

  • Reviewers should not discuss the manuscript with third parties without prior authorization from the editorial office.

  • Editors and reviewers are expected to protect the confidentiality of the peer review process.

8. Conflicts of Interest

  • Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest that could affect the impartiality of their evaluation.

  • Reviewers should decline assignments where a conflict may compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their independent judgment.

  • Editors should also disclose and appropriately manage conflicts of interest.

  • Where necessary, an editor may be recused from handling a manuscript because of a conflict of interest.

9. Ethical Oversight

  • IJMBD is committed to responsible and ethical scholarly publishing practices.

  • The journal follows recognized principles of publication ethics, including relevant COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines, where applicable.

  • Allegations or concerns involving plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, authorship disputes, conflicts of interest, or other forms of research or publication misconduct may be investigated in accordance with the journal's applicable policies.

  • Appropriate corrective action may be taken where misconduct or ethical violations are established.

10. Appeals and Complaints

  • Authors may appeal an editorial decision by submitting a clear and justified request to the editorial office.

  • Appeals should provide specific reasons and, where applicable, address factual or procedural concerns relating to the decision.

  • Appeals are reviewed by the editorial team or an appropriate independent editorial authority where necessary.

  • Complaints concerning the peer review process, editorial conduct, or publication procedures are considered fairly and handled in accordance with the journal's applicable policies.

  • The journal aims to address legitimate appeals and complaints in a timely, transparent, and professional manner.