Peer Review Policy

The Bulletin of Management Review (BMR) is committed to publishing high-quality, original, and impactful research in all areas of management. To achieve this goal, we employ a rigorous double-blind peer review process. This policy outlines the expectations for reviewers and authors involved in the BMR peer review process.

Reviewer Responsibilities:

  • Expertise: Reviewers should be qualified in the area of the submitted manuscript and possess sufficient expertise to provide a fair and accurate evaluation.
  • Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively and free from bias based on the author's identity, affiliation, or nationality. Reviewers should focus on the quality of the research and the manuscript's contribution to the field.
  • Confidentiality: Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and reviewer reports. Information obtained during the review process should not be shared with anyone except the editor and designated BMR staff.
  • Timeliness: Reviews should be submitted promptly within the assigned timeframe.
  • Thoroughness: Reviews should be thorough and provide detailed feedback on the manuscript's strengths, weaknesses, and potential for improvement. Reviewers should address the following key aspects:
    • Originality and significance of the research
    • Soundness of the research methodology
    • Clarity and organization of the writing
    • Quality of the data and analysis
    • Contribution to the field of management
  • Constructive Criticism: Reviews should be constructive and provide specific suggestions for improvement. The tone should be respectful and professional, even when suggesting revisions or raising critical points.
  • Ethical Conduct: Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest, such as personal or professional relationships with the authors or their institutions. If a conflict of interest exists, the reviewer should recuse themselves from the review process.

Author Responsibilities:

  • Manuscript Quality: Authors are responsible for ensuring the quality of their manuscripts before submission. Manuscripts should be well-written, clear, and concise.
  • Originality: Authors must ensure that their work is original and does not infringe on the intellectual property of others.
  • Response to Reviews: Authors should carefully consider all reviewer feedback and provide a detailed response to each review point. The response should address the concerns raised and explain how the authors will improve the manuscript.
  • Ethical Conduct: Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, such as funding sources or collaborations.

Review Process:

  • All submitted manuscripts are initially screened by the editor for suitability for the journal. Manuscripts that meet the journal's scope and format requirements are then sent to two or more independent reviewers.
  • Reviewers are provided with clear guidelines and evaluation criteria to ensure consistency and fairness in the review process.
  • Authors are notified of the editor's decision based on the reviewer feedback. If the manuscript requires revisions, authors are provided with the reviewers' comments and encouraged to respond thoughtfully.
  • The final decision on publication rests with the editor, who considers the reviewers' recommendations and the authors' response to those recommendations.