•  
  •  
 

Policies and Publishing Ethics

Policies and Publishing Ethics

Philosophy of Management Dynamics

Management Dynamics accepts empirical studies, perspectives, management and teaching cases, systematic literature reviews, and book reviews.

For more information, please see Management Dynamics Aims and Scope page.

Management Dynamics Journal requires all journal submissions to adhere to the highest of ethical standards and best practices in publishing. All writing and research submitted to Management Dynamics is expected to present accurate information and to properly cite all content referenced from other materials.

General Submission Rules

Submitted articles should not have been previously published, nor be forthcoming in an archival journal or book (print or electronic). Please note: "publication" in a working-paper series does not constitute prior publication. In addition, by submitting material to Management Dynamics, the author is stipulating that the material is not currently under review at another journal (electronic or print) and that he or she will not submit the material to another journal (electronic or print) until the completion of the editorial decision process at Management Dynamics.

Publishing Ethics

Editorial Policies

The Journal follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and endorses the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals as well as the GPP3 guidelines regarding authorship.

Submission of a manuscript to the journal implies that all authors have read and agreed to its content and that the manuscript conforms to the journal’s policies.

Management Dynamics is committed to respecting high standards of ethics in the editorial and reviewing process and outlines the best practice, guidelines, and principles, which aim to achieve high standards in publishing.

Affiliations

You and your co-authors must list all relevant affiliations to attribute where the research or scholarly work was approved and/or supported and/or conducted.

  • For non-research articles, you must list your current institutional affiliation.
  • If you moved to a different institution before the article has been published, you should list the affiliation where the work was conducted and include a note to state your current affiliation.
  • If you do not have a current relevant institutional affiliation, you should state your independent status.

    • Journal policies on Authorship and Contributorship

    Authorship

    Listing authors’ names on an article is an important mechanism to give credit to those who have significantly contributed to the work. It also ensures transparency for those who are responsible for the integrity of the content.

    Authors listed in an article must meet all of the following criteria:

    1. Made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that’s in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis, and interpretation, or in all these areas.
    2. Have drafted or written, substantially revised, or critically reviewed the article.
    3. Have agreed on the journal to which the article will be submitted.
    4. Reviewed and agreed on all versions of the article before submission, during revision, the final version accepted for publication, and any significant changes introduced at the proofing stage.
    5. Agree to take responsibility and be accountable for the contents of the article and to share the responsibility to resolve any questions raised about the accuracy or integrity of the published work.

    Any changes in authorship before or after publication must be agreed upon by all authors, including those being added or removed. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to obtain confirmation from all co-authors and to provide a full explanation about why the change was necessary. If a change in authorship is necessary after the publication of the article, this will be amended via a post-publication notice. Any changes in authorship must comply with our criteria for authorship, and requests for significant changes to the authorship list after the article has been accepted may be rejected if clear reasons and evidence of author contributions cannot be provided.

    Authorship Criteria

    Authorship credit should be based only on substantial contributions to each of the three components mentioned below:

    1. Concept and design of study or acquisition of data or analysis and interpretation of data;
    2. Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and
    3. Final approval of the version to be published.

    Participation solely in the acquisition of funding or the collection of data does not justify authorship. General supervision of the research group is not sufficient for authorship. Each contributor should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content of the manuscript. The order of naming the contributors should be based on the relative contribution of the contributor towards the study and writing the manuscript. Once submitted the order cannot be changed without the written consent of all the contributors. The journal prescribes a maximum number of authors for manuscripts depending upon the type of manuscript, its scope, and the number of institutions involved (vide infra). The authors should provide a justification if the number of authors exceeds these limits.

    Contribution Details

    Contributors should provide a description of contributions made by each of them toward the manuscript. The description should be divided into the following categories, as applicable: concept, design, definition of intellectual content, literature search, clinical studies, experimental studies, data acquisition, data analysis, statistical analysis, manuscript preparation, manuscript editing, and manuscript review. The authors' contributions will be printed along with the article. One or more authors should take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole from inception to published article and should be designated as 'guarantors'.

    Appeals and complaints

    The journal follows Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on appeals to journal editor decisions and complaints about a journal’s editorial management of the peer review process.

    We welcome genuine appeals to editor decisions. However, you will need to provide strong evidence or new data/information in response to the editor’s and reviewers’ comments. This is important given a majority of the journal scholarly articles are reviews and original research, reliant on accurate scientific data. For scholarly articles of an opinion nature, an appeal is less likely to overturn an editor's decision. These can include viewpoints and opinion pieces where editorial judgment about readability and relevance weighs most heavily. In any case, all opinion-led articles should be evidence-based and fully referenced. For opinion-led articles, you should always present your evidence and explain how it led you to form your opinion.

    Editors don’t expect frequent appeals and they rarely reverse their original decisions. Therefore, if you receive a decision to reject your manuscript, you are strongly advised to submit it to another journal. The decision to reject a manuscript for publication will often involve the editor’s judgment of priority/ importance. These are things that authors usually cannot address through an appeal. However, if you believe that there is a case to be made for a genuine appeal please follow the instructions below.

    Journal policies on conflicts of interest / competing interests

    The author(s) and co-author(s) must declare any competing interests relevant to, or which can be perceived to be relevant to the article.

  • A competing interest can occur where you (or your employer, sponsor or family/friends) have a financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationship with other organizations, or with the people working with them which could influence the research or interpretation of the results.
  • Competing interests can be financial or non-financial in nature. To ensure transparency, you must also declare any associations which can be perceived by others as a competing interest.

    • Examples of financial competing interests include (but are not limited to):

  • Employment or voluntary involvement
  • Collaborations with advocacy groups relating to the content of the article
  • Grants from an entity paid to the author or organization
  • Personal fees received by the author/s as honoraria, royalties, consulting fees, lecture fees, testimonies, etc.
  • Patents held or pending by the authors, their institutions or funding organizations, or licensed to an entity whether earning royalties or not
  • Royalties being received by the authors or their institutions
  • Stock or share ownership
  • Benefits related to the development of products as an outcome of the work

    • Examples of non-financial competing interests include (but are not limited to):

  • Receipt of drugs, equipment, or access to data by an entity that might benefit or be at an advantage financially or reputationaly from the published findings.
  • Holding a position on the boards of industry bodies or private companies that might benefit or be at an advantage financially or reputationaly from the published findings.
  • Writing assistance or administrative support from a person or organization that might benefit or be at an advantage from the published findings.
  • Personal, political, religious, ideological, academic, and intellectual competing interests are perceived to be relevant to the published content.
  • Involvement in legal action related to the work.

    • All authors of a manuscript submitted to the journal will be required to complete a competing interest declaration which will be listed in the Disclosure section at the end of the article. If an author is in doubt over whether they need to disclose a competing interest, they should consult with their institution or the journal Editor, who can guide them on the right course of action.

    If there are no competing interests to declare, the following statement will be added to the article “The authors declare that they have no competing interests.”

    Sponsorship of clinical trials

    Authors employed by pharmaceutical companies or other organizations which sponsor clinical trials must declare this as a competing interest.

    Authors should adhere to the Good Publication Practice guidelines for pharmaceutical companies (GPP3), which guides to ensure responsible and ethical standards are maintained.

    Conflicts of interest (COIs, also known as ‘competing interests’) occur when issues outside research could be reasonably perceived to affect the neutrality or objectivity of the work or its assessment. Potential conflicts of interest must be declared – whether or not they actually had an influence – to allow informed decisions. In most cases, this declaration will not stop work from being published nor will it always prevent someone from being involved in a review process.

    If unsure, declare a potential interest or discuss it with the editorial office. Undeclared interests may incur sanctions. Submissions with undeclared conflicts that are later revealed may be rejected. Published articles may need to be re-assessed, have a corrigendum published, or in serious cases be retracted.

    Conflicts include:

    Financial – funding and other payments, goods, and services received or expected by the authors relating to the subject of the work or from an organization with an interest in the outcome of the work

    Affiliations – being employed by, on the advisory board for, or a member of an organization with an interest in the outcome of the work

    Intellectual property – patents or trademarks owned by someone or their organization

    Personal – friends, family, relationships, and other close personal connections

    Academic – competitors or someone whose work is critiqued


    Journal’s policy on ethical oversight

    Management Dynamics Journal is committed to ensuring that all research published in the journal adheres to the highest standards of ethical conduct. The journal follows the guidelines and principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and expects all authors, reviewers, and editors to comply with these standards. In case of any ethical oversight, the journal editorial board informs author(s) to clarify their stand. If substantial proof of unethical publishing is found, the paper is retracted.

    Duties of Editors

    The editorial board is responsible for publication decisions, considering reviewer recommendations while ensuring compliance with legal standards. Confidentiality is maintained throughout the review process, and unpublished materials cannot be used without the author's consent. Editors ensure fair and unbiased peer review, with clear authorship criteria and policies for handling submissions from board members. Reviewers are encouraged to identify ethical concerns, plagiarism, and misconduct, and their contributions are acknowledged while maintaining review quality standards. Editors uphold quality assurance by verifying ethical approvals, addressing intellectual property issues, and promptly correcting errors or misleading statements.

    Duties of Reviewers

    Reviewers play a crucial role in editorial decisions by providing objective, well-supported feedback to help authors improve their work, avoiding personal criticism. They should decline reviews if unqualified or if conflicts of interest exist. Confidentiality must be maintained, and privileged information should not be misused. Reviewers should also ensure proper citation of relevant published work and report any significant similarities or overlaps with existing literature.

    Duties of Authors

    Authors must present accurate research findings, provide public access to raw data for at least two years, and avoid fraudulent statements. Originality is essential—plagiarism and duplicate submissions are unethical. Authors must disclose conflicts of interest and sources of financial support. The corresponding author must ensure proper authorship, including all contributors while excluding inappropriate ones. If a significant error is found post-publication, authors must promptly inform the editor to retract or correct the work.

    Peer Review Process

    All manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review to ensure academic excellence, where both author and reviewer identities remain anonymous. The editorial board makes the final acceptance or rejection decision based on reviewer recommendations. For submissions with ethical, security, or societal concerns, the Research Integrity team may seek external expert advice and take necessary actions, such as involving specialized reviewers or declining the submission.

    Desk rejection policy

    1. The topic / scope of the study is not relevant to the field of the Journal.
    2. There are publication ethics problems, non-adherence to international standard guidelines, and plagiarism (set at a similarity index of higher than 30 percent).
    3. The topic does not have a sufficient impact, nor does it sufficiently contribute new knowledge to the field.
    4. There are flaws in the study design.
    5. The objective of the study is not clearly stated.
    6. The study of the organization is problematic and/or certain components are missing.
    7. There are problems in writing or series infelicities of in the style of grammar.
    8. The manuscript does not follow the submission guideline of the Journal.

    Data falsification/fabrication

    Where deliberate action has been taken to inappropriately manipulate or fabricate data. This is considered a serious form of misconduct and is designed to mislead others and damage the integrity of the scholarly record with wide-reaching and long-term consequences.

    When submitting a manuscript to the journal, authors must ensure all data contained within their manuscript is accurate and correctly represents their work. To help assist the journal with manuscript evaluation, authors are expected to retain all raw data represented in their manuscripts. If the original data cannot be produced on request, acceptance of a manuscript or published paper may be declined or retracted.

    Duplicate submission/publication

    Authors are required to declare upon submission that the manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere, and as such the detection of a duplicate submission or publication is typically considered to be a deliberate act. This includes articles previously published in another language. For acceptable forms of secondary submissions or publications (e.g. an article translated into English), in accordance with ICMJE guidance, authors must seek permission from the publisher and copyright holder of the original article and must inform the Editor of the receiving journal about the history of the original article. It must also be made clear to readers that the article is a translated version, with a citation provided to the original article.

    As a general rule, authors should refrain from submitting previously published papers to another journal for consideration.

    Images and figures

    The author(s) should only use images and figures in your article if they are relevant and valuable to the work reported. Please refrain from adding content of this type which is purely illustrative and does not add value to the scholarly work. As a warranty in the Journal Author Publishing Agreement, you make with us, you must obtain the necessary written permission to include material in your article that is owned and held in copyright by a third party, including – but not limited to – any proprietary text, illustration, table, or other material, including data, audio, video, film stills, screenshots, musical notation, and any supplemental material.

    Journal’s policy on intellectual property

    The Management Dynamics journal requires that all submissions must be original work of the author(s) and that it does not infringe on any intellectual property rights of others. The journal follows a strict policy on intellectual property and plagiarism.

    Plagiarism

    The journal has a strict policy against plagiarism, where the journal does not tolerate using others’ ideas, words, or work without acknowledgment. Submissions containing plagiarism in whole or part, duplicate and redundant publication, or self-plagiarism (same or a different language), will be rejected. The Preprint archive will not be considered a duplicate publication. The corresponding author is responsible for the manuscript through and after the evaluation and publication process with the authority to act on behalf of all co-authors. All submitted manuscripts are checked for plagiarism using professional plagiarism-checking software. Submitted manuscripts with an unacceptable similarity index resulting from plagiarism are rejected immediately.

    Journal’s options for post-publication discussions and corrections

    Management Dynamics journal provides options for post-publication discussions and corrections to ensure the accuracy and integrity of published articles. The journal welcomes comments, criticisms, and suggestions from readers, which are published alongside the original article. These comments are reviewed by the editorial board and may be forwarded to the original authors for their response.

    In the case of any errors, retractions, or corrections to published articles, the journal follows the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Corrections and retractions are published with the article, and the original article is updated to reflect the changes.

    Authors are also encouraged to notify the journal of any errors or corrections that need to be made to their published articles. The editorial board will investigate the issue and work with the author to make any necessary changes to the article.

    Funding

    The journal requires that authors declare all the sources of funding including financial support in their manuscript. The authors should describe the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in any of the stages from study design to submission of the manuscript for publication. They should also state if the sponsor(s) had no such involvement. Please ensure that this information is accurate and in accordance with your funder’s requirements.

    Advertising

    The journal does not accept advertisements from third parties.

    References

    1. COPE Codes of Conduct
    2. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidelines on Editors in Chief sharing