Publishing Process

Editorial Operations

Editorial and Publishing Workflow

Journal of Accounting and Management (JAM) | e-ISSN 3048-345X

Journal of Accounting and Management (JAM) manages submission, review, revision, production, publication, and post-publication records through Open Journal Systems (OJS). The workflow is transparent, traceable, role-based, and designed to protect confidentiality, academic independence, metadata quality, and the integrity of the Version of Record.

TraceableMaterial actions and decisions are recorded in OJS.

Role-BasedAcademic, production, and financial responsibilities are separated.

Version-ControlledOnly the approved Version of Record is released.

1. Purpose and Boundary

This page maps the operational journey of a manuscript through OJS. It does not redefine review criteria, ethics standards, fees, withdrawal, or post-publication actions. Those rules remain on their dedicated policy pages.

2. Roles in the Workflow

Role	Operational Responsibility
Author	Submit through OJS, provide accurate metadata and declarations, respond to reviews, approve proofs, and remain accountable for the work.
Editorial Office / Journal Manager	Technical checks, anonymization, file and metadata control, communications, and workflow records.
Editor-in-Chief / Handling Editor	Scope and quality screening, reviewer appointment, conflict management, decision, and ethics escalation.
Independent Reviewers	Confidential scholarly assessment and reasoned recommendations.
Copyeditor / Layout Editor / Proofreader	Language and consistency editing, layout, metadata quality, proof preparation, and final technical checks.
Publisher / OJS Administrator	Platform security, DOI and preservation infrastructure, continuity, and business-practice separation.

3. Editorial and Publishing Stages

OJS SubmissionThe corresponding author uploads the editable DOCX manuscript, separate identifying information where required, supplementary files, metadata, and all declarations. Email submission does not replace OJS.

Administrative CheckThe office checks template use, completeness, scope category, author metadata, anonymization, references, ethics and funding statements, and file readability. Incomplete submissions are returned.

Editorial ScreeningAn unconflicted editor evaluates scope, contribution, reporting, methodology, ethics, and readiness. Similarity software informs—not decides—the assessment.

Reviewer AssignmentNormally at least two independent external experts are invited under the double-anonymous model. Identity and conflicts are checked.

Peer ReviewReviewers evaluate the manuscript and relevant supplements, provide confidential comments where needed, and recommend accept, revision, or rejection.

Editorial DecisionThe editor weighs evidence and reports, may seek an additional review, and communicates a reasoned decision through OJS.

Author RevisionAuthors upload a clean revision, marked version when requested, and point-by-point response. New analyses and ethics implications must be disclosed.

Re-review and Final DecisionThe editor or reviewers assess the revision. The Editor-in-Chief or delegated editor records the final academic decision independently of payment.

Copyediting and LayoutAccepted content undergoes language, reference, metadata, figure, license, and format checks. Substantive editorial changes require author confirmation.

Author Proof and PublicationAuthors correct production errors—not introduce new results. JAM assigns the issue/article details, registers or updates the DOI, publishes dates and license, and deposits preservation metadata.

Post-Publication StewardshipErrors, concerns, corrections, retractions, and reader reports follow the dedicated post-publication policies with visible linked notices.

4. Decision and Revision Control

All substantive decisions and author responses are recorded in OJS.
A revision is not an acceptance and may undergo additional review.
Major new data or changes of authorship require explanation and may trigger new ethics, conflict, or review checks.
Acceptance precedes any applicable publication payment; payment status does not influence the decision.
Only the approved Version of Record is published; silent replacement is prohibited.

5. Operational Time Targets

Activity	Target	Important Qualification
Administrative and initial screening	7–14 working days	Returned submissions restart after complete correction.
Reviewer report after acceptance	About 4 weeks	Reviewer availability and manuscript complexity may extend this.
Author revision	Stated in decision letter	Extensions should be requested before the deadline.
Production after acceptance	Scheduled by the issue plan	Proof correction, payment where applicable, DOI, and metadata checks must be complete.

No guaranteed acceptance or publication date
Targets support service monitoring; they are not a promise of acceptance, favorable review, expedited scientific assessment, or publication in a particular issue.