Guide for Editors

This guide outlines the roles, responsibilities, and editorial procedures for editors of the Review of Management Studies (RMS). It is designed to ensure transparency, consistency, and the highest standards of academic integrity throughout the editorial and peer-review process.

1. Editorial Structure and Roles

1.1 Editor-in-Chief (EiC)

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for:

  • Defining the journal’s academic vision, scope, and strategic direction in management studies
  • Ensuring adherence to editorial policies, ethical standards, and publication quality
  • Making final decisions on manuscript acceptance, revision, or rejection
  • Appointing Associate Editors, Editorial Board members, and Guest Editors
  • Representing the journal in academic, indexing, and publishing platforms

1.2 Associate Editors

Associate Editors support the EiC by:

  • Managing manuscripts within their subject expertise (e.g., HRM, strategy, marketing, finance, operations)
  • Selecting appropriate peer reviewers
  • Evaluating reviewer reports and making recommendations
  • Ensuring timely and high-quality peer-review processes

1.3 Editorial Board Members

Editorial Board members are expected to:

  • Advise on journal development, policy, and strategic direction
  • Support manuscript review when requested
  • Promote the journal within academic and professional networks
  • Contribute to special issues and thematic calls for papers

2. Editorial Independence and Integrity

Editors must:

  • Maintain full independence and impartiality in editorial decisions
  • Base decisions solely on scholarly merit, originality, and relevance
  • Avoid all conflicts of interest
  • Maintain strict confidentiality throughout and after the review process

Editorial decisions must never be influenced by personal, institutional, or commercial interests.

3. Manuscript Handling Workflow

Step 1: Initial Screening

Editors must assess each submission for:

  • Alignment with RMS scope (management and related disciplines)
  • Originality, academic contribution, and methodological quality
  • Ethical compliance and research integrity

Manuscripts that do not meet basic standards may be desk-rejected with clear justification.

Step 2: Reviewer Selection

Editors should:

  • Assign at least two independent and qualified reviewers
  • Ensure subject-matter expertise and methodological suitability
  • Avoid conflicts of interest between reviewers and authors
  • Maintain diversity and balance in reviewer selection

Step 3: Peer Review Management

Editors are responsible for:

  • Monitoring review progress and ensuring timely completion
  • Ensuring reviewer feedback is constructive and professional
  • Addressing ethical concerns raised during review
  • Requesting additional reviews when necessary

Step 4: Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer feedback, editors may recommend:

  • Accept
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Reject

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision in complex or disputed cases.

4. Decision Communication

Editors must ensure that decision letters:

  • Clearly summarise reviewer comments and editorial reasoning
  • Provide constructive feedback for authors
  • Maintain professional and respectful tone
  • Offer guidance even in rejection cases

5. Ethical Oversight

Editors are responsible for identifying and addressing:

  • Plagiarism and self-plagiarism
  • Data fabrication, falsification, or manipulation
  • Authorship disputes or misrepresentation
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest

All cases must be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines.

6. Handling Conflicts of Interest

Editors must recuse themselves when:

  • There is prior collaboration with authors
  • Institutional or personal relationships exist
  • Financial or professional bias may be present

Such manuscripts must be reassigned to another editor.

7. Use of AI in Editorial Processes

Editors may use AI tools only for:

  • Language and grammar assistance
  • Administrative support (e.g., reviewer suggestions with verification)

Editors must ensure that:

  • AI does not make editorial decisions
  • Confidentiality is fully maintained
  • No unpublished manuscript content is exposed or misused

8. Special Issues Management

  • Guest Editors must be approved by the Editor-in-Chief
  • Clear scope, timeline, and objectives must be defined
  • All submissions undergo full double-blind peer review
  • Final decision authority remains with the Editor-in-Chief

9. Timeliness and Performance Standards

Editors are expected to:

  • Complete initial screening within 7–10 days
  • Ensure first review decisions within 4 weeks
  • Maintain timely communication with authors and reviewers
  • Inform the EiC of delays when necessary

10. Post-Acceptance Responsibilities

Editors must:

  • Ensure compliance with formatting and ethical standards
  • Coordinate with production and copyediting teams
  • Approve final proofs prior to publication
  • Verify metadata accuracy and DOI assignment

11. Retractions, Corrections, and Appeals

Editors must:

  • Recommend corrections, errata, or retractions when necessary
  • Handle appeals in a fair and transparent manner
  • Maintain full documentation of editorial decisions

12. Editorial Meetings and Review

The editorial team should:

  • Review journal performance annually
  • Assess reviewer quality and turnaround times
  • Improve editorial policies and processes
  • Plan thematic issues and future journal development

13. Confidentiality and Data Protection

Editors must:

  • Treat all manuscripts as strictly confidential
  • Not use unpublished material for personal gain
  • Comply with data protection and privacy standards

14. Commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Editors are expected to:

  • Promote diversity in authorship, reviewers, and editorial board
  • Support early-career researchers
  • Ensure fair and unbiased editorial treatment

15. Compliance and Accountability

Editors must:

  • Uphold the mission and standards of RMS
  • Follow all editorial policies consistently
  • Support indexing, quality assurance, and journal reputation

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