The iRASD Journal of Management (iRASD-JOM) fosters a collaborative and supportive environment for authors and reviewers alike. We believe in the significance of peer review as a cornerstone of scholarly publishing, contributing to advancing knowledge and disseminating high-quality research.

To ensure the rigorous evaluation of submitted manuscripts, the journal adheres to a Peer Review Policy having the following salient features:

  • The iRASD Journal of Management (iRASD-JOM) employs a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are concealed throughout the review process. This unbiased approach is crucial in maintaining the integrity and fairness of the evaluation.
  • Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the field relevant to the submitted manuscript. The iRASD Journal of Management (iRASD-JOM) maintains a diverse and global pool of reviewers drawn from different regions and academic institutions worldwide. Our goal is to assemble a reviewer panel that encompasses a breadth of perspectives and ensures a thorough evaluation of the submitted work.
  • Reviewers are chosen for their specialised knowledge of the subject matter of the submitted article. We strive to match manuscripts with reviewers with the expertise to provide constructive feedback and insightful evaluations.
  • Reviewers are provided with clear guidelines on evaluating manuscripts, emphasising the importance of constructive feedback, scholarly rigour, and ethical considerations. Reviewers are encouraged to provide thorough and detailed assessments that help authors improve the quality of their work.
  • The iRASD Journal of Management (iRASD-JOM) values the time and effort of our reviewers. We strive to maintain an efficient review process and request timely responses from our reviewer panel. Authors are promptly informed of the status of their submission, and any delays are communicated transparently.
  • Authors receive comprehensive feedback from reviewers, facilitating the revision process. The iterative nature of peer review allows authors to enhance the quality and impact of their work based on constructive suggestions from experts in the field.