Peer Review Policy

The International Journal of Modern Research in Management (IJMRM) follows a rigorous and transparent double-blind peer review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, original, and ethical scholarly work. The journal is committed to maintaining academic integrity, fairness, and impartiality throughout the review process.

1. Double-Blind Review Process

  • Both the identities of the authors and reviewers remain anonymous.

  • Submitted manuscripts are stripped of identifying information before review.

  • Reviewers evaluate manuscripts solely based on academic merit, originality, methodology, and relevance.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

  • All submissions undergo an initial check by the editorial team for:
    ✓ Scope relevance
    ✓ Formatting compliance
    ✓ Plagiarism screening (using reliable plagiarism-detection tools)
    ✓ Ethical considerations

  • Manuscripts that do not meet basic requirements may be returned to authors for correction or rejected at this stage.

3. Reviewer Selection

  • Each manuscript is assigned to two independent expert reviewers based on their specialization.

  • In case of conflicting recommendations, a third reviewer may be invited.

4. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers assess the manuscript based on:

  • Originality and scholarly contribution

  • Research design and methodology

  • Quality of analysis and interpretation

  • Relevance to the field of management

  • Clarity, coherence, and structure

  • Ethical compliance

  • Accuracy of citations and references

5. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers may recommend one of the following:

  • Accept without revision

  • Minor revisions required

  • Major revisions required

  • Resubmit for review

  • Reject

6. Revision and Resubmission

  • Authors are required to submit a detailed response to reviewer comments.

  • Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by the same reviewers for compliance.

  • Failure to adequately address reviewer feedback may result in rejection.

7. Final Decision

  • The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision based on reviewer reports and editorial assessment.

  • Decisions are communicated to authors in a timely manner.

8. Confidentiality

  • All manuscripts and reviewer reports are treated as strictly confidential.

  • Reviewers must not use any information gained through peer review for personal advantage.

9. Ethical Compliance

  • Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

  • Manuscripts involving unethical practices (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication) are rejected immediately and may lead to sanctions.

10. Recognition of Reviewers

  • Reviewers may receive acknowledgement certificates upon request.

  • Reviewer contributions are recognized annually while maintaining anonymity.