Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement
Our publication ethics a publication malpractice statement is mainly based on the Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011).
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published. The editor will evaluate manuscripts without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the journal's scope. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.
Contribution to editorial decisions
The peer-reviewing process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers will notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.
Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data access and retention
Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.
Originality, plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources
Authors will submit only entirely original works, and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
In general, papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by the journal should not be resubmitted to copyrighted publications. However, by submitting a manuscript, the author(s) retain the rights to the published material. In case of publication they permit the use of their work under a CC-BY license [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/], which allows others to copy, distribute and transmit the work as well as to adapt the work and to make commercial use of it.
Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors and no uninvolved persons are included in the author list. The corresponding author will also verify that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should include a statement disclosing any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper in form of an erratum.
Allegations of misconduct policy
Journal of Business Management’s policy for managing allegations of research misconduct is based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), available at https://publicationethics.org/misconduct.
Authors are required to read the journal’s author instruction and ethical policies carefully and to adhere to the terms before submission.
Report of research misconduct may be related to a published article or a manuscript under peer-review process. The procedure for the application and management of complaints of author misconduct should proceed with sensitivity, tact, in confidence, and in the following manner:
- The editorial office of the journal receives a complaint that an article submitted to or published in the journal is suspected of containing research misconduct.
- The complainant needs to clearly indicate the specific manner and detail of misconduct; for example, in a case of plagiarism, the plagiarized paragraph should be clearly highlighted, and the original and suspected articles should be referred to clearly.
- The editorial office will investigate, during which time the editor of the journal and the corresponding author(s) of the suspected article will be in contact.
- The corresponding author(s) will be asked to provide an explanation with factual statements and any available evidence.
- If the author(s) of the suspected article accepts the misconduct complaint, the editorial office will take the following actions depending on the situation:
- If the article has been published, an erratum or retraction may be necessary to remedy the situation. However, there may still be disagreement concerning the appropriate wording of the description.
- If the misconduct is reported during the review process, the review process may continue, with the author(s) making the relevant changes.
- In the case of nonresponse in the stipulated time or an unsatisfactory explanation, the article may be permanently retracted or rejected. Before making a decision, confirmation will be sought from the experts of the relevant institution or other authorities as required.
- The complainant will be informed of the outcome once the issue is resolved.
- The complaint case will thereupon be considered concluded.
Conflicts of interest/Competing interests
Editors’ disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members
of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.
Reviewers’disclosure and conflict of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used
for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of
interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of
the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.
Authors’disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should include a statement disclosing any financial or other substantive conflicts of
interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All
sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Data and reproducibility
The Journal of Business Management strongly encourages authors to make all data associated with their submission openly available, according to the FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable).
Data obtained from other sources must be appropriately credited. When depositing data for a submission, the below should be considered:
- The repository the data is deposited in must be suitable for this subject and have a sustainability model.
- The data must be deposited under an open license that permits unrestricted access (e.g. CC-BY). More restrictive licenses should only be used if a valid reason (e.g. legal) is present.
- The deposited data must include a version that is in an open, non-proprietary format.
- The deposited data must have been labelled in such a way that a 3rd party can make sense of it (e.g. sensible column headers, descriptions in a readme text file).
Journal's policy on Ethical Oversight
Journal of Business Management focuses on the СОРE definition of Ethical oversight, namely “Ethical oversight should include, but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and of business/marketing practices”.
Based on this definition, the editorial board of the JBM works under the issue of observing the ethical principles. The journal bounds to consider the appeals from the Ethics and Oversight Committee for professional and scientific activity concerning the non-observance of the ethical principles by authors.
The JBM understands the authors’ effort required to create or invest in intellectual property, as well as its value. Allowing that authors’ intellectual property is stolen, misused or mishandled would clearly contradict our core values of honesty, caring and academic integrity. We follow for ensuring the proper use of all intellectual property by respecting it.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, adaptation, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited.
Complaints and appeals
Policy and Process
The below procedure applies to appeals to editorial decisions, complaints about failure of processes such as long delays in handling papers and complaints about publication ethics. The complaint should in first instance be handled by the Editor-in-Chief responsible for the journal and/or the Editor who handled the paper.
Complaint about scientific content, e.g. an appeal against rejection
The Editor-in-Chief and Production Editor consider the authors’ argument, the reviewer reports and decides whether:
- The decision to reject should stand;
- Another independent opinion is required
- The appeal should be considered.
The complainant is informed of the decision with an explanation if appropriate. Decisions on appeals are final and new submissions take priority over appeals.
Complaint about processes, e.g. time taken to review
The Editor-in-Chief and Production Editor will investigate the matter. The complainant will be given appropriate feedback. Feedback is provided to relevant stakeholders to improve processes and procedures.
Complaint about publication ethics, e.g., researcher's author's, or reviewer's conduct
The Editor-in-Chief or Production Editor follow guidelines published by the Committee on Publication Ethics. The Editor-in-Chief or Production Editor decides on a course of action and provides feedback to the complainant. If the complainant remains dissatisfied with the handling of their complaint, he or she can submit the complaint to the Committee on Publication Ethics.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.