Peer Review Policy

 

  • All submissions to Contemporary Perspectives on Business and Organization (CPBO) undergo an initial editorial assessment to determine their scope, originality, scholarly quality, clarity, ethical compliance, and adherence to journal requirements. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be declined without external review.

    Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment undergo double-blind peer review, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential, subject to the practical limitations of anonymization. Each manuscript is normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise.

    Reviewers assess the manuscript's originality, significance, theoretical foundation, methodological soundness, analysis, clarity, ethical integrity, and overall scholarly contribution. Reviewers are expected to provide objective and constructive assessments, maintain confidentiality, disclose conflicts of interest, and identify significant methodological, ethical, or research-integrity concerns.

  • Author will be liable for any plagiarism or other likely practice even if it is not pointed out by reviewers, or if it is found post-publicaiton. It can result in article retraction.

  •  

    Based on the reviewers' reports and editorial assessment, the journal may issue one of the following decisions:

    · Accept               · Minor Revision                · Major Revisions                 · Reject

    CPBO is committed to maintaining a fair, independent, objective, confidential, and timely peer-review process. Editorial decisions are based on the scholarly merits of the manuscript and are not influenced by authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, personal characteristics, or ability to pay publication charges.

    Authors may appeal an editorial decision where they can provide clear and evidence-based grounds indicating a significant procedural error or substantive misunderstanding.