MANUSCRIPT SUBMITTED TO THE JOURNAL IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWING PROCESS:

1. Submission and Initial Screening
• Manuscript Submission: Authors submit their manuscripts through the SAJMR online submission system or through e-mail.
• Anonymization: Editors are instructed to remove all identifying information from the manuscript to ensure a double-blind review.
• Initial Check: The editorial office performs an initial check to ensure the manuscript complies with the journal’s submission guidelines and policies. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements are returned to the authors for correction.
2. Desk Review by Editors
• Editorial Review: The editor-in-chief or assigned handling editor reviews the manuscript to assess its relevance, originality, and adherence to the journal’s scope and standards.
• Decision to Proceed: The editor decides whether to send the manuscript for peer review or reject it outright. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic criteria are desk rejected, and the authors are informed.
3. Selection of Reviewers
• Identifying Reviewers: The handling editor selects at least two reviewers who are experts in the manuscript’s subject area.
• Anonymity: The identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process to maintain the double-blind review.
• Invitation to Review: Selected reviewers are invited to review the manuscript. The invitation includes the manuscript’s title and abstract to help reviewers decide if they are qualified and available to review.
4. Peer Review
• Review Process:Reviewers conduct a thorough evaluation of the manuscript, focusing on its originality, methodology, significance, clarity, and contribution to the field.
• Anonymity: Reviewers must treat the manuscript and its contents as confidential.
• Constructive Feedback: Reviewers provide detailed, constructive feedback to help authors improve their manuscript. They also recommend one of the following actions:
• Accept without changes
• Accept with minor revisions
• Major revisions required
• Reject
5. Editorial Decision
• Review Reports: The handling editor reviews the feedback and recommendations from the reviewers.
• Decision Making: Based on the reviewers' comments and their own assessment, the handling editor makes a decision on the manuscript:
• Accept:If the manuscript meets the journal’s standards with no or minor revisions.
• Minor Revisions: If the manuscript requires minor changes before acceptance.
• Major Revisions: If substantial revisions are needed, the manuscript is returned to the authors with reviewer comments and a request to resubmit.
• Reject: If the manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or is not suitable for publication.
• Communication to Authors: The editorial decision and reviewers' comments are communicated to the authors. If revisions are required, authors are given a deadline to submit the revised manuscript.
6. Revision and Resubmission
• Author Revisions: Authors revise their manuscript according to the reviewers' and editor’s feedback and resubmit it within the given timeframe.
• Follow-Up Review: The revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for a follow-up review to ensure all concerns have been addressed.
• Final Decision: The handling editor makes the final decision on the revised manuscript based on the reviewers’ feedback and their own assessment.
7. Acceptance and Publication
• Final Acceptance: Manuscripts that meet all requirements are accepted for publication.
• Copyediting and Proofreading: The accepted manuscript undergoes copyediting and proofreading to ensure accuracy and clarity.
• Publication: The final version of the manuscript is published in the South Asian Journal of Management Research(SAJMR) and made available online.
8. Post-Publication
• Corrections and Retractions: Post-publication issues, such as errors or allegations of misconduct, are addressed promptly. Corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern are published as necessary.
9. Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest
• Confidential Handling:All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers and editors must disclose any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict exists.
10. Continuous Improvement
• Reviewer Feedback: Reviewers are encouraged to provide feedback on the review process to help improve the system.
• Process Evaluation: The editorial board regularly evaluates the peer review process to ensure it remains effective, fair, and transparent.
11. Guidelines for Authors
• Remove Identifying Information: Authors should ensure that their manuscripts do not contain any identifying information such as names, affiliations, or acknowledgments
• Separate Title Page: Submit a separate title page containing the authors' names and affiliations. This will be kept confidential and not shared with reviewers.
12. Guidelines for Reviewers
• Ensure Anonymity: Reviewers should avoid comments that could reveal their identity or speculate about the authorship of the manuscript.
• Provide Constructive Feedback: Aim to provide clear, detailed, and constructive feedback to help authors improve their manuscript.