Peer Review Policy

Overview

The Academia Journal of Strategic Management and Finance (AJSMF) is a peer-reviewed journal. All research articles are evaluated through a double-blind peer review process to ensure that only original, methodologically sound and relevant research in strategic management, finance and related business disciplines is published.

Type of Peer Review

  • Double-blind review: the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the process.
  • Number of reviewers: each manuscript that passes initial screening is reviewed by at least two independent expert reviewers (normally four: two internal and two external) in the relevant field.
  • Independence: reviewers are not members of the authors' institution and have no conflict of interest with the authors.

Editorials and other non-research content may be reviewed by the editors only and are clearly labelled as such.

Peer Review Workflow

  • 1. Submission: manuscripts are submitted through the journal's online system (OJS).
  • 2. Initial editorial screening (1–2 weeks): the editor checks scope (strategic management, finance and business), adherence to the author guidelines, ethical requirements and similarity using Turnitin or an equivalent tool. Manuscripts that do not meet these standards are desk-rejected.
  • 3. Reviewer assignment: suitable reviewers are selected based on subject expertise and publication record, and must declare that they have no conflict of interest.
  • 4. Peer review (3–4 weeks): reviewers submit a detailed report and recommendation.
  • 5. Editorial decision: the handling editor considers the reviewer reports and makes a decision: Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions or Reject.
  • 6. Revision (2–4 weeks): authors revise the manuscript and respond point by point. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to the reviewers.
  • 7. Final decision and publication: accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, proofreading and publication.

The average time from submission to first decision is 4–6 weeks.

Review Criteria

  • Originality and contribution to knowledge
  • Relevance to the journal's scope
  • Theoretical grounding and methodological rigour
  • Validity of data analysis and findings
  • Practical and policy implications
  • Clarity of writing and structure
  • Compliance with research and publication ethics

Editorial Decisions

Final decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or the handling editor, based on the reviewers' reports and the editor's own assessment. Decisions are based solely on scholarly merit and are not influenced by the authors' nationality, institution, gender, religion or ability to pay the APC.

Submissions by Editors

Manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, editorial board members or staff of the publisher go through the same double-blind review. The author is excluded from any part of the editorial process for their own manuscript, which is handled by another independent editor.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose all financial and non-financial competing interests. Editors and reviewers must decline to handle any manuscript where they have a conflict of interest, such as a close collaborative, institutional, personal or financial relationship with the authors.

Reviewer Responsibilities

  • Keep the manuscript and the review process strictly confidential
  • Provide objective, constructive and timely feedback
  • Declare any conflict of interest and decline when necessary
  • Not use unpublished data or ideas for personal advantage
  • Not contact the authors directly
  • Not upload manuscripts to generative AI tools

Appeals

Authors who disagree with a decision may submit a formal appeal to the Editor-in-Chief, with a clear justification and supporting evidence. The appeal may be assessed by an independent editor or reviewer. The decision on the appeal is final. See also our Author Appeals Policy.

Ethical Standards

AJSMF follows the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, and the publishing quality standards of the Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan.

Reviewer Recognition

  • A list of reviewers is published annually (with their consent)
  • Certificates of review are available on request
  • Outstanding reviewers may be invited to join the editorial board