Editorial and Peer Review Policy

Jurnal Pusat Manajemen (PUSMAN) · e-ISSN 3048-3840

Editorial assessment

Every submission undergoes administrative and editorial screening for conformity with the Focus and Scope, completeness, anonymization, originality, ethical declarations, and basic methodological adequacy. A manuscript may be declined before external review when it is out of scope, seriously incomplete, ethically unacceptable, insufficiently original, or unlikely to meet the journal’s scholarly standard.

Double-anonymized peer review

Manuscripts that pass screening are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers using a double-anonymized process: author identities are concealed from reviewers and reviewer identities are concealed from authors. Editors select reviewers for subject expertise, methodological competence, independence, availability, and absence of conflicts of interest.

Evaluation criteria

• Relevance to management science and a clearly stated research problem or knowledge gap.
• Originality, theoretical or practical contribution, and appropriate engagement with prior literature.
• Suitability and transparency of research design, sampling, measurement, analysis, and interpretation.
• Consistency between objectives, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions.
• Compliance with research ethics, data integrity, authorship, citation, and disclosure requirements.
• Clarity, organization, and adherence to the journal template and reporting conventions.

Editorial decisions and revisions

Reviewers provide recommendations; the handling editor or Editor-in-Chief makes the decision. Possible decisions are decline, major revision, minor revision, or accept. Acceptance is never guaranteed. Revised manuscripts must be accompanied by a point-by-point response. Editors may request additional review when revisions are substantial or reports conflict.

Confidentiality, conflicts, and integrity

Editors and reviewers must keep manuscripts and review records confidential, declare relevant conflicts, and recuse themselves when impartiality may be affected. Unpublished material may not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscripts to public generative-AI services. Suspected misconduct is handled under the Publication Ethics and related integrity policies.

Time and communication

The journal aims to complete initial screening within 7–14 working days and external review within approximately 3–6 weeks after reviewer assignment. These are service targets, not guarantees; complex cases and reviewer availability may require more time. Material delays will be communicated through OJS.