Guide for Editors

This guide outlines the roles, responsibilities, and procedures for editors of Journal of Business Governance (JBG). It is designed to ensure transparency, consistency, and academic integrity throughout the editorial and peer-review process.

1. Editorial Structure and Roles

1.1 Editor-in-Chief (EiC)

The EiC is responsible for:

  • Setting the journal’s academic direction, priorities, and standards in corporate governance, business ethics, and organizational management research

  • Overseeing editorial policy, ethical compliance, and peer-review integrity

  • Making final decisions on manuscripts

  • Appointing Associate Editors, Editorial Board members, and Guest Editors for special issues

  • Representing the journal to indexing bodies, publishers, and scholarly communities

1.2 Associate Editors

Associate Editors support the EiC by:

  • Managing submissions within their areas of expertise

  • Selecting and communicating with reviewers

  • Evaluating peer-review reports and making recommendations

  • Ensuring timely, fair, and high-quality review processes

1.3 Editorial Board Members

Editorial Board members are expected to:

  • Advise on journal scope, policy, and development

  • Review manuscripts upon request

  • Promote the journal in academic, corporate, and governance networks

  • Contribute to special issues and thematic initiatives

2. Editorial Independence and Integrity

Editors must:

  • Act impartially and independently in all manuscript evaluations

  • Avoid conflicts of interest

  • Base decisions solely on scholarly merit, originality, and relevance

  • Maintain strict confidentiality during and after the review process

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by commercial, institutional, or personal interests.

3. Manuscript Handling Workflow

Step 1: Initial Screening
Editors assess submissions for:

  • Alignment with JBG scope

  • Originality, significance, and methodological soundness

  • Ethical compliance and research integrity

Submissions that do not meet these criteria may be desk-rejected with clear justification.

Step 2: Reviewer Selection
Editors should:

  • Assign at least two independent reviewers with appropriate subject expertise

  • Avoid conflicts of interest with authors or institutions

  • Ensure diverse perspectives in reviewer selection

Step 3: Peer Review Management
Editors must:

  • Monitor review timelines and send reminders when necessary

  • Ensure reviewer comments are constructive, professional, and objective

  • Address any ethical concerns raised during review

Step 4: Editorial Decision
Based on peer-review reports, editors may recommend:

  • Accept

  • Minor revision

  • Major revision

  • Reject

The EiC makes the final decision in complex or contested cases.

4. Decision Communication

Editors should:

  • Provide clear, reasoned decision letters summarizing key reviewer feedback

  • Avoid personal, dismissive, or unprofessional language

  • Offer constructive guidance, even in cases of rejection

5. Ethical Oversight

Editors are responsible for identifying and addressing:

  • Plagiarism or self-plagiarism

  • Data fabrication, falsification, or manipulation

  • Authorship disputes or misattribution

  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest

All ethical cases must follow COPE guidelines and documented procedures.

6. Handling Conflicts of Interest

Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts if:

  • They have collaborated with the authors

  • Personal, institutional, or financial relationships exist

  • There is any potential for bias

Such manuscripts must be reassigned to another editor.

7. Use of AI in Editorial Processes

Editors may use AI tools for:

  • Language and grammar checks

  • Reviewer suggestions (with human verification)

Editors must ensure AI does not make editorial decisions, compromise confidentiality, or introduce AI-generated content into manuscripts.

8. Special Issues Management

  • Guest Editors must be approved by the EiC

  • Clear aims, scope, and timelines must be defined

  • All submissions undergo the same rigorous double-blind peer review

  • The EiC retains final decision authority

9. Timeliness and Performance Standards

Editors are expected to:

  • Complete initial screening within 7–10 days

  • Ensure first review decisions within 4 weeks

  • Maintain transparent communication with authors and reviewers

  • Communicate any delays promptly

10. Post-Acceptance Responsibilities

Editors must:

  • Ensure manuscripts meet formatting and ethical standards

  • Coordinate with copyeditors and production staff

  • Approve final proofs before publication

  • Confirm metadata, author details, and DOI registration

11. Retractions, Corrections, and Appeals

Editors must:

  • Recommend corrections, errata, or retractions when necessary

  • Handle appeals transparently and fairly

  • Document all decisions and communications

12. Editorial Meetings and Review

The editorial team should:

  • Review journal performance annually

  • Evaluate reviewer quality, turnaround times, and decision consistency

  • Plan future issues, special topics, and thematic calls

  • Update editorial policies as required

13. Confidentiality and Data Protection

Editors must:

  • Treat all submissions as confidential

  • Avoid using unpublished material for personal research

  • Comply with data protection and privacy policies

14. Commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Editors should:

  • Encourage geographic, institutional, and gender diversity

  • Support inclusion of early-career researchers

  • Ensure fair and unbiased treatment of all submissions

15. Compliance and Accountability

Editors are expected to:

  • Uphold JBG’s mission and ethical standards

  • Follow this guide and journal policies consistently

  • Support indexing, quality assurance, and journal visibility

Non-compliance may result in reassignment or removal from editorial roles.