Reviewer Guidelines

Generally speaking, manuscripts that reach the review stage, are viewed by the Editorial Team as having the potential of meeting the journal's publication threshold (with revision). The guidelines below aim to ensure that the highest ethical standards and overall scientific quality are met. It may also be helpful to consult our Article Types, Submission Preparation Checklist, and especially the Author Guidelines and Open Science pages.

General criteria applicable to all article types

• Does the submission contribute to the scope of the journal?
• Does the submission meet at least one of the Sustainable Development Goals?
• Does the submission employ open science principles wherever possible?
• Do authors address the human impact of their work by explicitly articulating how their research contributes to the well-being, development, and overall betterment of individuals, teams, or organizations?
• Introduction & theory: thematic classification of the research question, consideration of the relevant literature, derivation and explanation of the hypotheses.
• Method: appropriateness of sample, study design,  discussion of confounding variables, quality of measures or observation method,  appropriateness of statistical prodecures.
• Discussion of the results: reference to the research question, integration and evaluation, discussion of limtitations, comprehensible conclusions.
• Quality of tables, figures and abstract.
• Comprehensibility of the presentation.
  
  

Article type related review criteria

Original Research Papers

• Does the submission present new and original findings from empirical field studies or experiments?
• Does the submission contribute to the existing body of knowledge in the field and are based on primary data collection or analysis?

Empirical Reports

• Does the submission report primarily data-driven results and involve the collection and analysis of new data?
• Does the submission investigate research questions where the underlying theory is not yet fully developed?

Reviews

• Does the submission provide comprehensive summaries and critical evaluations of existing literature on a specific topic?
• Does the submission help researchers and practitioners to understand the current state of knowledge, identify gaps, and highlight areas for further investigation?

Theoretical Contributions

• Does the submission focus on advancing theoretical frameworks, conceptual models, or new perspectives on topics related to the journal's scope?
• Does the submission contribute novel insights and guiding future research?

Point-Counterpoint Discussions

• Does the submission offer a dynamic and intellectually stimulating platform for presenting divergent perspectives on a specific topic within the journal’s scope?
• Does this submission allow for the simultaneous publication of two papers, each presenting different opinions, viewpoints, or contrasting research findings on the same subject?

Case Analyses

• Does the submission analyse a case in-depth of specific real-life situations, organizations, or event?
• Does the submission involve detailed and comprehensive investigations of a particular case to understand its context, complexities, challenges, and outcomes?

Emerging Scholars' Showcase (Student Paper)

• Does the submission reports research undertaken in the context of Bachelor and Master study programmes, or other student research programmes?
• Is the idea creative and sound?
• Is the research plan and implementation sound?