Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to the International Journal of Management, Finance and Accounting (IJOMFA) are subject to a double-blind peer review process and are expected to meet the journal's standards of academic quality, originality, and research integrity. Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening will be sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Throughout the review process, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous.

Editorial decisions are based on the reviewers' recommendations, the manuscript's scholarly merit, and its relevance to the journal's aims and scope. Where necessary, the Editorial Office may consult experts and the academic editor before deciding on appropriate actions, including, but not limited to, recruiting reviewers with specific expertise, having additional editors assess the submission, and declining to further consider a submission.

 

Workflow and Stages

1. Initial Editorial Screening 

The Editorial Office conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript falls within the journal's scope, complies with the Author Guidelines, satisfies formatting and demonstrates sufficient academic quality for peer review. Manuscripts failing to meet these criteria may be declined without external review.

2. Editor Assignment
Eligible manuscripts are assigned to an editor with appropriate subject expertise, who oversees the review process and selects suitable independent reviewers.

3. Reviewer Selection and Invitation
The assigned editor invites at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise while ensuring that potential conflicts of interest are avoided.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript's originality, significance, methodological quality, validity of the findings, literature support, presentation, and overall contribution to the field. They submit detailed comments for the authors together with confidential recommendations for the editor.

5. Author Revision
Where revisions are required, authors submit a revised manuscript accompanied by a detailed response letter addressing each reviewer comment. Revised manuscripts may undergo additional rounds of peer review where necessary.

6. Final Editorial Decision
The assigned editor evaluates the revised manuscript together with the reviewers' recommendations and advises the Editor-in-Chief. The final decision to accept, request further revision, or reject the manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on the overall academic quality and reviewers' recommendations.

 

Quality Criteria

Reviewers are instructed to assess the quality of submissions solely based on the academic merit of their content along the following dimensions:

  1. Pertinence of the article’s content to the scope and themes of the journal;
  2. Clear demonstration of originality, novelty, and timeliness of the research;
  3. Soundness of the methods, analyses, and results;
  4. Adherence to the ethical standards and codes of conduct relevant to the research field;
  5. Clarity, cohesion, and accuracy in language and other modes of expression, including figures and tables.

In addition, all of the articles will be checked for textual overlap in an effort to detect possible signs of plagiarism by the publisher.

 

Editorial Decisions

Following the peer review process, manuscripts submitted to the International Journal of Management, Finance and Accounting (IJOMFA) may receive one of the following editorial decisions:

  • Accept – The manuscript is accepted for publication.
  • Minor Revision – The manuscript requires minor revisions before it can be considered for publication.
  • Major Revision – The manuscript requires substantial revisions and may undergo an additional round of peer review upon resubmission.
  • Reject – The manuscript is not suitable for publication in IJOMFA.

 

Competing Interests

The Editors declare no competing interests with the submissions which they have handled through the peer-review process. The peer-review of any submissions for which the Editors have competing interests is handled by another Editor who has no competing interests.

 

Editorial Review Policy

  1. This journal uses a double-blind peer review process, which means that both the reviewer(s) and author(s) identities are concealed from the reviewer(s), and vice versa, throughout the review process. Peer review helps validate research and establish a method for its evaluation.
  2. All submitted papers will be reviewed by a double-blind peer review process, which may take between two and eight weeks from the date of submission.
  3. IJOMFA is committed to prompt evaluation and publication of fully accepted papers. To maintain a high-quality publication, all submissions undergo the following rigorous review process.
    • No simultaneous submissions of the same manuscript to different journals.
    • Manuscripts with contents outside the scope will not be considered for review.
    • Papers will be refereed by at least two experts (reviewers) as suggested by the editorial board.
    • All publication decisions are made by the journal’s Editorial team based on the reviewers’ reports.
    • Authors of papers that are not accepted are notified promptly.
    • All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents.
    • All manuscripts submitted for publication in this journal are cross-checked for plagiarism. Manuscripts found to have similarity index of more than 20% during initial stages of review are out-rightly rejected and not considered for publication in the journal.