Peer Review Policy

International Journal of Marketing and Business Management (IJMBM) has a rigorous and transparent peer review system to constantly ensure the maintenance of quality standards, while rendering academic integrity and relevancy of the information published. However, it is important as well to preserve the High Standards to which the journal subscribes. The primary purpose is not to favor any one candidate over the other or prevent any publication that does not abide by the standards of publication for the journal.

Upon submission all articles are first screened by the editorial team to verify that the article is within the journal’s scope and meets the basic submission guidelines. At this stage, an article may be rejected if it does not fit the journal’s focus, or if it does not proceed according to the initial submission standards, and the author will be notified promptly.

If the article passes the preliminary evaluation, it is assigned to one or more expert reviewers in marketing and business management. The reviewers are chosen carefully by virtue of their knowledge and expertise, experience, and background research and are usually academics or professionals who have extensive knowledge of the underlying subject. The journal employs a single blind review wherein reviewers know identities of the authors but not of the authors knowing the identities of reviewers. This approach ensures candid and constructive feedback, reducing potential bias.

The review process typically involves two key stages: After initial review, the revision and resubmission. In the initial review stage, reviewers evaluate the article based on its originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and contribution to the field. The research design, data analysis, literature review, conclusions reached by authors are evaluated. All articles are reviewed by the reviewers for clarity, structure and for compliance to journal submission guidelines, including standards of citation and referencing.

Detailed and constructive reviews, including indications of what is and what is not strong are received from reviewers and they are asked to suggest how the article can be improved. They are also asked to make one of the following recommendations:

• Accept: The article is deemed suitable for publication without the need for major revisions.
• Minor Revisions: The article requires some changes, but it is generally suitable for publication once these revisions are made.
• Major Revisions: The article requires substantial changes in its content, methodology, or presentation before it can be considered for publication.
• Reject: The article is not suitable for publication, either due to significant flaws in the research or failure to meet the journal's standards.

As the reviewers give us their feedback, the editorial team very carefully considers what they say and what recommendations they make. From this feedback, the editor relays the decision to the author and any required revisions or changes. If the article is accepted with minor or major revisions, the author will be given a set period to carry out this pertinent act and resubmit the article. Authors are expected to respond in a point by point manner and must provide a detailed response to all reviewer comments, explaining how each concern has been addressed.

In case a lot of revisions were requested, Authors may resubmit the article to the same reviewers who initially rejected it, but usually with the permission of the new chief editor. If the revisions have indeed been correctly made, the reviewers will then judge if the article now meets the journal’s publication standards. The article is also sent to additional reviewers, when there is a need for new areas of monitoring or if the first reviewers are not available.

Once an article has been submitted and passed the final review, if accepted it will then be notified to the authors, who will move it into the production stage. It includes copyediting, typesetting and final checking to facilitate that the article meets quality standards.

Throughout the review process the editorial team communicates closely with reviewers and authors for timely and transparent communication. One of the aims of the journal is to finish the review process quickly while maintaining the quality of high academic standards. We hope that authors are given constructive feedback on their work and that ultimately readers are given rigorous and high quality research on marketing and business management which advances the knowledge in these areas.

The purpose of this peer review process is to be fair, objective and unbiased to make sure the best research is in IJMBM. All members of the editorial team keep the highest standards of academic integrity explicit and strive to ensure that the articles published in the journal reflect the best of the scholarly research, regardless of the author(s), the affiliation, the relevance to the traditional scholarly cultures, the funding sources, as well as the settings where the research is conducted.