Code of Ethics

The publication of a peer-reviewed article is a key point in the development of any coherent and respectable network of knowledge. It is immediate evidence of the quality of the research undertaken by authors and the institutions supporting them. Since reviewed papers are based on the scientific approach, there must be agreement on the publishing standards and ethical conduct applicable to all parties involved in the publishing process.

The publishing code of ethics must be approached as part of the general code of ethics relevant to any scientific and professional environment, in addition to the legal requirements which act as a self-regulatory mechanism in scholarly communities. Their application is closely related to an individual’s personal code of ethics and the professional conscience of scholars, as well as their honesty and integrity.

The Editorial Board of ‘Business Management’ fully shares and adopts as its guiding principle Elsievir’s position regarding the publisher’s code of ethics which must govern the process of reviewing, editing and publishing all scientific papers in order to observe copyright and prevent plagiarism.

The operation of the editorial board is in compliance with the rules prescribed by the Committee on Publication Ethics.


Publication Decision

The Editorial Board of ‘Business Management’ is responsible for deciding which manuscripts will be published. These decisions are based on the acceptance of manuscripts and their significance to research workers and readers.

The decision-making process is governed by the journal’s policy, which has been adopted by the editorial board and is in compliance with the legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

The editor’s decision to accept or reject a manuscript is based on the significance, originality and clarity of the paper and the extent to which it fits the scientific scope of the journal as stated.

When making a decision, an editor may consult other editors or peer reviewers.

Objective Assessment

Editors must assess manuscripts according to their intellectual merits, without discrimination on the grounds of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, or the ethnic or geographical origin of authors.

Privacy Policy

Editors and editorial boards must not disclose any information concerning the submitted manuscript except to its author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors and the publisher, if necessary.

Identifying and Preventing Conflicts of Interest

Submitted unpublished manuscripts must not be used by editors in their own scientific research work without the explicit written consent of the author. Any confidential information or ideas generated in the reviewing process must be kept secret and must not be used to the editor’s personal gain. Editors must require all authors to disclose any potential conflict of interests and publish the necessary corrigendum notice, should a conflict of interests be identified after the publication of the paper. Where necessary, other appropriate measures must be adopted, such as the retraction of the publication, for example.

Participation and Cooperation in Complaints Investigations
When an ethical complaint has been made regarding a submitted manuscript or a published paper, editors and editorial boards must take appropriate measures. These include contacting the author of the manuscript and taking the related complaint or claims under due consideration. Any instance of unethical publishing conduct must be considered and corrected accordingly.


Contribution to Editorial Decision-Making

As a tool for scientific verification, peer reviews help editors in their decision-making processes and enable authors to improve their articles. As a means of formal scientific communication, peer review is at the core of the scientific method. Hence, the foremost responsibility of peer reviewers is to honestly review each piece of work before it is published.

Speed (Promptness)

When a nominated reviewer feels underqualified to review a sumbitted manuscript or is aware that it would be impossible to evaluate it promptly, they should inform the editor and withdraw from the peer review process.

Privacy Policy

All manuscripts presented for review must be treated as confidential documents. Their content must not be disclosed to or discussed with third parties, only with those authorised by the editor.

Integrity Standards

Manuscripts must be reviewed objectively. Personal criticism is considered inappropriate. Reviewer’s opinions must be clearly expressed and supported by sufficient argument.


Reviewers must ensure that any reference to a source of information, or any argument in the article under review is accompanied by relevant citations. They should alert the author or authors to any similarities between the manuscript and other publications that they are aware of. Reviewers should identify any research content or results which have already been published but have not been cited by the author of the manuscript, as well as any other form of plagiarism.

Identifying and Preventing Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must not use any unpublished content disclosed in a submitted manuscript in their own scientific research without the written consent of the author. They must withhold any confidential information or ideas developed in the reviewing process and not use them to their own benefit. Reviewers must not review manuscripts when there is a conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or any other relationships between them and any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the publication.

When a reviewer doubts the integrity of an author, they must inform the editors about this confidentially in writing.


Publishing Standards

Authors must submit their manuscripts with consideration to the requirements regarding the format of publications as published by the editorial board. Source data must be presented accurately in the paper. It is considered as professional to adhere to the rules of scientific discourse and observe the requirements of the genre in which the paper will be published, therefore all texts must have an introduction presenting the author’s goals and motivation for writing the paper, a main body presenting relevant analyses and results, and a third section containing conclusions and acknowledgements. Each article must contain sufficient detail and references to enable other authors to cite and use it correctly in their scientific work. Deliberate inaccuracies are an instance of unethical behaviour and are therefore unacceptable.

Data Access and Storage

Authors may be asked to provide unprocessed data related to the manuscript under review. They must also store such data for a certain period of time after the publication of their work.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must confirm that the contents of their submitted manuscript are original and that they have adequately acknowledged and cited any content reproduced from other authors. Authors must comply with the rules for referencing which the editorial board has prescribed, since plagiarism exists in many forms, varying from unjustified copying and paraphrasing of a significant amount of content from other publications, to declaring as one’s own the results of other scientists’ research.  Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and therefore unacceptable.

Repetitive and Duplicate Publication and Simultaneous Submission

Authors must not submit as an initial publication or to more than one journal manuscripts describing the same scientific research. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal is unethical publishing conduct and is therefore unacceptable. In general, authors must not submit for review papers already published elsewhere.


The work of other individuals must always be acknowledged appropriately. Authors must cite any publication that they have used whilst writing their paper. Information obtained in private, verbally or in writing, or via a discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without the explicit written consent of the source author. Information obtained in the process of providing confidential services, such as reviewing manuscripts or granting applications, must not be used without explicit written consent in writing from the author involved in these services.

Authorship of Publications

Authorship must be attributed to research workers who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, conduct, or interpretation of the published paper. Individuals with a substantive contribution must be named as co-authors. When other people have been involved in significant aspects of the research project, they must be acknowledged and listed as contributors. Co-authorship requirements and responsibilities must be observed by acknowledging not only senior positions and academic titles, but also the contribution of individuals. The author submitting a manuscript must confirm that all co-authors and participants have been named in the publication and have agreed on the final draft of the paper before its submission.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

All authors are obliged to declare any financial or other substantial conflict of interest within their manuscripts that might be considered to have influenced the validity or interpretation of their work. Any sources of financial support to the project must be disclosed. Potential conflicts of interest that should be declared include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patents or registrations, as well as any grants or other type of funding. Any potential conflict of interest must be disclosed as soon as possible.

Key Errors in Published Papers

Should an author identify a significant error or inaccuracy in a published paper of their own, they are obliged to notify the editor immediately and cooperate to retract or correct their paper. When the editor or the publisher are informed by a third party that a published piece of work contains a substantial error, the author will be obliged to retract or correct their paper immediately or to present evidence of the original paper’s accuracy to the editor.
This code of ethics was approved by the Editorial Board of the ‘Business Management’ journal in April 2016.