Peer Review Policy
Peer Review Policy
The International Journal of Commerce, Management, Leadership, and Law (IJCMLL) employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and relevance of published research. This policy outlines the review stages, reviewer responsibilities, and ethical standards that guide the review process.
1. Double-Blind Review Process
Anonymity: IJCMLL follows a double-blind review process, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. This approach minimizes potential biases, ensuring impartial evaluations.
Initial Screening: Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial screening by the editorial team to assess its alignment with the journal’s scope, relevance, and adherence to submission guidelines. Manuscripts passing this stage are then forwarded to reviewers.
Assignment to Reviewers: Manuscripts that pass initial screening are assigned to at least two expert reviewers in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and absence of any potential conflicts of interest with the authors.
- Reviewer Responsibilities
Objective Assessment: Reviewers are required to provide an objective, unbiased assessment of the manuscript’s quality, originality, methodology, and significance to the fields of commerce, management, leadership, and law.
Constructive Feedback: Reviewers are encouraged to offer constructive feedback, highlighting strengths, suggesting improvements, and identifying any concerns in the manuscript. Comments should be respectful, clear, and aimed at helping authors enhance their work.
Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their review within the agreed timeframe. This ensures a timely decision-making process for authors and maintains the journal’s publication schedule.
Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all materials received for review as confidential. Manuscript details should not be shared or discussed with others outside the editorial process.
Ethical Vigilance: Reviewers are responsible for reporting any ethical concerns, such as plagiarism, data falsification, or conflicts of interest, that may arise during the review process.
- Decision-Making and Editorial Responsibility
Editorial Decision: After receiving feedback from reviewers, the editorial team evaluates the reviews and makes a final publication decision. The decision may be one of the following: accept, accept with minor revisions, major revisions required, or reject.
Revisions and Resubmission: If revisions are required, authors are provided with reviewer comments and are expected to submit a revised manuscript addressing each point. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the same reviewers for further evaluation.
Appeal Process: Authors who disagree with the editorial decision may appeal by providing a detailed response. Appeals are considered by the editorial board, but final decisions remain at the editor’s discretion.
- Reviewer Selection and Recognition
Selection Criteria: Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, publication history, and reputation in the field. The editorial team ensures that reviewers have the necessary knowledge to evaluate the manuscript fairly.
Recognition: IJCMLL values the contributions of its reviewers. Reviewers receive acknowledgment and may be recognized through annual reviewer awards or certificates.
- Conflict of Interest and Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest: Reviewers, editors, and authors are required to disclose any conflicts of interest that might affect the review process. Potential conflicts of interest are managed to ensure impartiality.
Ethical Standards: The peer review process follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. Reviewers, editors, and authors are expected to uphold ethical standards throughout the review process.
