Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo adalah jurnal ilmiah akses terbuka dan ditinjau oleh rekan sejawat yang menerbitkan artikel penelitian asli di bidang manajemen yang luas. Jurnal ini bertujuan untuk menyediakan platform akademik bagi para peneliti, akademisi, praktisi, dan cendekiawan lainnya untuk menyebarluaskan temuan penelitian, perkembangan teori, dan wawasan praktis yang relevan dengan isu-isu manajemen kontemporer.

Jurnal ini bertujuan untuk berkontribusi pada kemajuan pengetahuan manajemen dengan menerbitkan karya ilmiah berkualitas tinggi, orisinal, dan relevan.

Ruang lingkup Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo meliputi, namun tidak terbatas pada:

  1. Kewiraswastaan
  2. Manajemen Keuangan
  3. Strategi Bisnis
  4. Manajemen Pemasaran dan Strategi Pemasaran
  5. Manajemen Risiko Bisnis
  6. Pengambilan Keputusan
  7. Manajemen Operasi
  8. Manajemen Kinerja
  9. Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia

Jurnal ini menerima penelitian empiris, konseptual, dan terapan yang berkontribusi pada pengembangan teori dan praktik manajemen dalam konteks lokal, nasional, dan internasional.

 

Section Policies

Artikel

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Dewan Redaksi Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo telah menetapkan proses peninjauan sejawat berikut untuk memastikan kualitas, orisinalitas, relevansi, dan integritas akademik dari semua manuskrip yang diterbitkan dalam jurnal ini.

Semua manuskrip yang dikirimkan ke Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo harus sesuai dengan fokus dan cakupan jurnal, pedoman penulis, dan persyaratan pengiriman. Manuskrip harus menunjukkan orisinalitas, nilai ilmiah, ketelitian metodologis, dan relevansi dengan bidang manajemen.

Penapisan Editorial Awal

Semua manuskrip yang dikirimkan akan melalui proses penyaringan awal oleh Tim Editorial untuk menilai:

  • kesesuaian dengan fokus dan cakupan jurnal;
  • Kepatuhan terhadap Pedoman Penulis;
  • kelengkapan dan kualitas manuskrip;
  • Orisinalitas dan kebaruan penelitian;
  • appropriateness of the research methodology; and
  • compliance with publication ethics.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected before entering the peer-review process.

Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

All manuscripts submitted to Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo must be original and free from plagiarism.

Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of their manuscripts and are encouraged to perform a similarity check before submission.

The Editorial Team conducts plagiarism and similarity screening using Turnitin as part of the initial evaluation process.

If substantial similarity, plagiarism, inappropriate citation, or other potential ethical issues are identified, the manuscript may be returned to the authors for clarification or revision, or rejected in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policy.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo applies a double-blind peer-review system, in which the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process.

Each manuscript that passes the initial editorial screening will normally be reviewed by at least two independent peer reviewers who have expertise relevant to the subject of the manuscript.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several important aspects, including:

  • originality and novelty of the research;
  • relevance of the topic to the journal's focus and scope;
  • clarity of research objectives;
  • appropriateness and rigor of the research methodology;
  • accuracy and quality of data analysis;
  • objectivity and clarity of the discussion;
  • scientific, theoretical, and/or managerial implications;
  • consistency between the results and conclusions;
  • quality and relevance of references; and
  • overall contribution of the manuscript to the field of management.

Where necessary, the Editor may appoint an additional reviewer to provide further assessment, particularly when there are substantial differences between the recommendations of the initial reviewers.

Editorial Decision

The reviewers provide recommendations and constructive comments to assist the authors in improving the quality of their manuscripts and to support the Editor in making an editorial decision.

The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief and/or the responsible Editor, taking into consideration:

  • the recommendations of the peer reviewers;
  • the scientific quality and originality of the manuscript;
  • the authors' responses to reviewers' comments;
  • compliance with the journal's editorial and ethical standards; and
  • the suitability of the manuscript for publication in Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo.

Peer-review recommendations are an important part of the decision-making process; however, the final publication decision remains the responsibility of the Editorial Board.

Accepted manuscripts will proceed to the editing and production stages before being scheduled for publication in an appropriate issue.

Review Outcomes

Based on the results of the editorial evaluation and peer-review process, a manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

1. Accept Submission

The manuscript is accepted for publication without requiring substantive revision. Minor editorial corrections may still be made during the copyediting and production process.

2. Revision Required

The manuscript requires minor or moderate revisions based on comments from the Editor and/or reviewers.

Authors must revise the manuscript and provide appropriate responses to the comments provided. The revised manuscript may be evaluated by the Editor without requiring another full round of peer review.

3. Resubmit for Review

The manuscript requires substantial or major revisions.

Authors are invited to revise and resubmit the manuscript. The revised manuscript will normally undergo another round of peer review before a final editorial decision is made.

4. Resubmit Elsewhere

The manuscript is considered unsuitable for publication in Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo, particularly because its subject matter, approach, or contribution does not sufficiently correspond to the journal's focus and scope.

Authors may consider submitting the manuscript to another journal that is more appropriate to the subject of the research.

5. Decline Submission

The manuscript is rejected because it does not meet the journal's scientific, methodological, ethical, originality, or publication standards.

A declined manuscript will not proceed further in the editorial process.

6. See Comments

The reviewer or Editor may provide specific recommendations that require the authors' attention before an editorial decision can be finalized.

Authors are expected to carefully address the comments and submit the required revisions or clarification.

Revision Process

Authors who receive a revision decision must carefully address all comments and recommendations provided by the reviewers and Editor.

Authors are expected to:

  • submit a revised version of the manuscript;
  • clearly indicate the changes made;
  • provide responses to reviewers' comments where required; and
  • provide a scientific justification when a reviewer recommendation is not adopted.

Failure to submit revisions within the period specified by the Editor may result in the manuscript being withdrawn from the editorial process.

Final Publication Decision

The final decision to publish a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board where necessary.

Penerimaan suatu artikel bergantung pada orisinalitasnya, kualitas ilmiahnya, ketepatan metodologinya, kejelasan penyajiannya, relevansinya dengan ruang lingkup jurnal, kontribusinya terhadap bidang manajemen, kepatuhan terhadap etika publikasi, dan penyelesaian proses peninjauan sejawat dan revisi yang memuaskan.

Pemimpin Redaksi dan Dewan Redaksi berhak menentukan edisi yang tepat untuk menerbitkan artikel yang diterima berdasarkan pertimbangan editorial dan jadwal penerbitan jurnal.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content based on the principle that articles that are freely available to the public will support the development of science globally. All article manuscripts, which are accepted and have been published, will be available and free to download on the website. Readers can download and print published articles and editions free of charge.

 

Archiving

Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo utilizes the LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) system to establish a distributed digital preservation network among participating libraries. This system enables libraries to collect, store, and preserve journal content to ensure long-term access, preservation, and restoration of published articles.

 

Peer Review Policy

Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo is committed to maintaining the quality, integrity, transparency, and academic credibility of all manuscripts considered for publication. Peer review is an essential component of the journal's editorial quality assurance system and is conducted in accordance with principles of fairness, confidentiality, independence, and scholarly integrity.

1. Purpose of Peer Review

The peer-review process is intended to ensure that manuscripts published in Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo meet appropriate standards of scientific quality, originality, methodological rigor, relevance, and academic contribution.

Peer review also provides authors with constructive scholarly feedback that may improve the clarity, validity, and overall quality of their manuscripts.

2. Peer Review Standard

All research manuscripts considered for publication are subject to independent scholarly evaluation.

The journal applies a double-blind peer-review policy, meaning that the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process.

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers who possess expertise relevant to the subject area of the submitted manuscript.

Detailed information regarding the operational stages of manuscript review is available on the journal's Peer Review Process page.

3. Independence of Peer Review

Peer-review decisions must be based solely on the academic quality and relevance of the manuscript.

Reviewers are expected to exercise independent professional judgment and must not allow personal, institutional, financial, ideological, or other non-academic considerations to influence their evaluation.

Editors are responsible for selecting reviewers who are sufficiently independent from the authors and the research being evaluated.

Whenever possible, reviewers should not have recent collaborative relationships or institutional relationships that may compromise impartiality.

4. Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts and related review materials are treated as confidential documents.

Editors and reviewers must not disclose, distribute, discuss, reproduce, or use information contained in a manuscript for purposes unrelated to the editorial evaluation.

Unpublished ideas, data, interpretations, methods, or other information obtained through the peer-review process must not be used for personal, academic, professional, or commercial advantage.

Confidentiality must be maintained during and after the completion of the review process.

5. Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers are required to disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that could influence their judgment.

Conflicts of interest may arise from:

  • personal relationships;
  • professional relationships;
  • institutional affiliations;
  • recent research collaboration;
  • financial interests;
  • academic competition; or
  • any other circumstances that may reasonably affect impartiality.

A reviewer who believes that a conflict of interest exists should decline the review assignment and notify the Editor.

Editors with a significant conflict of interest concerning a submitted manuscript should not participate in the editorial decision-making process for that manuscript.

6. Objectivity and Fairness

Manuscripts must be evaluated based on their academic merit.

Editorial and peer-review decisions must not be influenced by factors unrelated to the quality of the research, including:

  • nationality;
  • ethnicity;
  • gender;
  • religion;
  • institutional affiliation;
  • seniority;
  • personal relationships;
  • political or philosophical views; or
  • other personal characteristics of the authors.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, evidence-based, and professionally expressed evaluations.

Personal criticism, offensive comments, discriminatory remarks, or unsupported judgments are not acceptable.

7. Reviewer Competence

Reviewers should accept an invitation to review only when they possess sufficient expertise to evaluate the manuscript appropriately.

If a reviewer determines that the manuscript falls substantially outside their area of competence, they should inform the Editor and decline the assignment.

Reviewers should also decline the review if they cannot complete it within the timeframe requested by the journal.

8. Constructive Peer Review

Peer review should contribute to the improvement of scholarly work.

Reviewers are expected to:

  • identify strengths and weaknesses in the manuscript;
  • provide clear and constructive recommendations;
  • identify methodological or conceptual concerns;
  • indicate areas requiring clarification;
  • evaluate whether conclusions are adequately supported by the findings; and
  • recommend improvements where appropriate.

Review comments should be sufficiently detailed to enable authors and editors to understand the basis of the reviewer's assessment.

9. Research Integrity

Reviewers and editors have a responsibility to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

If potential research or publication misconduct is identified during peer review, the matter should be reported confidentially to the Editor.

Potential concerns may include:

  • plagiarism;
  • duplicate or redundant publication;
  • data fabrication;
  • data falsification;
  • manipulated results;
  • inappropriate authorship;
  • unethical research practices;
  • undisclosed conflicts of interest; or
  • other breaches of publication ethics.

Such concerns will be handled in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and Malpractice Policy.

10. Citation Ethics

Reviewers should recommend additional references only when they are academically relevant and genuinely improve the manuscript.

Reviewers must not require authors to cite the reviewer's own publications or other specific publications for the purpose of increasing citation counts or obtaining personal academic benefit.

Editors should not request unnecessary citations for similar purposes.

11. Editorial Independence

Peer reviewers provide scholarly recommendations, but they do not make the final publication decision.

The final decision regarding the acceptance, revision, or rejection of a manuscript rests with the Editor-in-Chief and/or responsible Editor, based on:

  • reviewers' evaluations;
  • scientific quality;
  • originality;
  • methodological rigor;
  • relevance to the journal's scope;
  • ethical compliance; and
  • the adequacy of revisions made by the authors.

Editorial decisions are made independently of commercial considerations, publication fees, or other non-academic interests.

12. Reviewer Accountability

Reviewers are expected to conduct their assessments responsibly and in accordance with accepted standards of scholarly peer review.

Reviewers should:

  • maintain confidentiality;
  • disclose conflicts of interest;
  • provide objective evaluations;
  • avoid abusive or inappropriate language;
  • respect intellectual property;
  • report suspected misconduct;
  • avoid using confidential manuscript information; and
  • submit reviews within the agreed timeframe.

Repeated failure to comply with these responsibilities may result in removal from the journal's reviewer database.

13. Author Responsibility During Peer Review

Authors are expected to participate in the peer-review process in good faith.

Authors should:

  • respond appropriately to reviewer comments;
  • clearly identify revisions made to the manuscript;
  • provide academic justification when they disagree with reviewer recommendations;
  • provide additional information or clarification when requested by the Editor; and
  • avoid attempts to identify, contact, or influence anonymous reviewers.

The journal does not guarantee acceptance of a manuscript merely because revisions have been submitted.

14. Appeals and Editorial Concerns

Authors who believe that an editorial decision has resulted from a significant misunderstanding or procedural error may submit a reasoned appeal to the Editor-in-Chief.

An appeal must clearly explain the academic or procedural grounds for reconsideration.

The submission of an appeal does not guarantee that the original decision will be changed.

Where appropriate, the Editor-in-Chief may seek additional editorial or independent expert evaluation.

15. Separation of Editorial and Financial Decisions

Payment of an Article Processing Charge, publication fee, or any other journal fee does not influence the outcome of peer review or editorial decision-making.

Publication fees, where applicable, are considered only after a manuscript has successfully completed the editorial and peer-review process and has been accepted for publication.

16. Commitment to Ethical Peer Review

Jurnal Manajemen STIE Muhammadiyah Palopo is committed to maintaining a peer-review system that is:

independent, confidential, objective, fair, constructive, transparent, and academically responsible.

The journal periodically evaluates its peer-review practices to maintain the quality and integrity of its editorial process.

For detailed information regarding the sequence and operational stages of manuscript evaluation, authors and reviewers are encouraged to consult the journal's Peer Review Process and Review Guidelines.