|
Peer-review represents an important step in a journal's publication process.
Acting as a filter for all manuscripts received, it manages to ensure the
journal's scholarly quality. Therefore we are very grateful for all Reviewers
help in evaluating the manuscripts and providing expert opinions.
The best possible review should be developed taking into consideration the
following:
- the article submitted for review matches the reviewer's expertise;
- sufficient time allocation for the review process in order to meet the
deadline stated in the invitation to review;
- existing conflicts of interests of any kind and scale may influence the
reviewing process, so the Reviewer should announce the Editor if such situation
arises;
- not only the suggestions and comments should be confidential, but the
manuscript itself should be kept as a privileged communication;
- the Reviewer is not allowed to send the comments made upon an article directly
to the author(s) of that article.
The Reviewer's comments should address the following:
The topic of the manuscript is relevant for the Economia. Seria Management's
theme and topics.
Embracing a multidisciplinary approach Economia. Seria Management publishes
papers on a wide range of topics related to management science and practice:
o operational management
o strategic management
o investment management
o project management
o knowledge management
o corporate social responsibility
o quality management
o production management
o human resources management
o risk management
Each article must tell a cohesive story appropriate to the specific of the
journal.
The paper has a potential to contribute to the knowledge of Economy and
Management Field.
The contribution in terms of novelty and originality should be addressed and
highlighted. In the same time, the significance of the paper's main claims
should be emphasized; in this way the Reviewer can decide if the paper is
outstanding for the field and for the journal's readers;
Seminal works in the related literature are mentioned by this manuscript.
Reviewers should carefully follow the authors' trial to include in their works
relevant previous research. It is important that each work explain the context
of the research and provide evidence of other related works with different
findings.
The manuscript is of scholarly quality.
In determining the suitability for publication, this criterion is one of the
most important as it reveals the scientific soundness of each work.
Written expression of the manuscript is fluent and appropriate.
The writing style of each article must be easy to follow and understandable not
only for specialists but also for non-specialists; in the same time it should be
concise, without grammatical or spelling errors.
Regarding the Reviewer's final decision, the following categories should be
considered for making the recommendation:
1 Accept As Submitted (with routine editing)
2 Accept With Suggested Revisions
3 Possibly Accept After Extensive Revisions
4 Reject
In case if revision is needed, each Reviewer should announce the Editor whether
or not is willing to review the revised article.
|