Journal of Improvement Management

Peer Review Process

Peer Review Policy

Journal of Improvement Management uses double-blind peer review to review manuscripts so that the reviewers do not know the author's identity and vice versa.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

(https://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf)

Confidentiality of article information must be observed in all areas.
Reviewers should judge articles at the appropriate time and assist the editorial team in deciding whether or not to accept the article.
Reviewers should refrain from judging articles with conflict of interest and report any conflict of interest as soon as possible.
Reviewers should rely on expert and impartial viewpoints to judge the articles' quality and content.
Peer reviewers should keep all manuscript and review details confidential.

Peer Review Process

The journal is committed to the highest standards of peer review (Double-blind peer review). After submitting the manuscript by the author (s) in the journal management system, the manuscript will be primarily studied based on publishing experts. (Please study the guide for authors carefully to expedite setting up the manuscript as precisely as the guidelines in the system and then submit it).
If it is accepted in the first stage, the manuscript will be assessed by the editor-in-chief. The article is reviewed at this stage regarding content quality and relevance to the journal's policies. Upon receipt of the manuscript, the corresponding author is notified and will receive the number under which the manuscript has been registered. From this point onwards, authors should only communicate with the editor-in-chief about the progress of the reviewing process.
If it is accepted in the second stage, the paper will be sent to two reviewers, then the review process of the paper is as follows:

- If two reviewers reject a paper, it will be disapproved
- If the opinion of two reviews is a total revision of the paper, the paper will be submitted to the author for revision
- If a reviewer`s opinion is a general revision and the second one rejects the paper, the essay will be submitted to the third reviewer, and according to his idea relevant to the first and second item, the decision will be made.
- When the author modified the paper and submitted it, the paper would be given to another reviewer for comparative assessment.

A weekly email will be submitted to the reviewers, and the paper will be given back due to lack of paper review after one month, then it will be sent to another reviewer.