Focus and Scope
Sebelas Maret Business Review, hereafter SMBR, provides a forum for academics and professionals to share their ideas about the latest development of management and business, especially in the Southeast Asia context. SMBR could also be an outlet for a solid recommendation in order to assist organizations or other entities in the current business world situation. SMBR publishes both empirical and non-empirical (contextual, descriptive, case-study) articles. To cope with the current advancement of the publishing world especially in the academic journal article, SMBR follows the modern style of article journal presentation. Each article published in SMBR has an outstanding story inside, strong background and contribution, robust analysis and/or empirical testing, and convincing conclusion and managerial implications. SMBR operates blind review processes for each submitted article to ensure a rigorous publishing process. More several other changes in SMBR are informed in the Journal History.
Section Policies
Articles
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Peer Review Process
Every paper submitted to the journal will be received first by the Managing Editor (ME). Under the approval of the Editor-in-Chief (EiC), the ME then allocates the article to the Section Editor (SE) who will be responsible for the "accompanying" paper from the reviewing phase until published. The SE will choose the 1-2 reviewers and distribute the article to them. The SE could remind the reviewers if they are late to review the paper. If the reviewers have reviewed the paper and made recommendations, the SE will communicate to the ME and EiC whether the paper will continue to the revising process or be rejected or be accepted as it is. Normally, no paper can be directly accepted without reviewing and revising process.
If the paper is approved to be revised, the SE then will inform the authors to revise the paper based on the reviewer's recommendation. Once the authors have finished making revisions in their paper, they should upload the revision to the website and the editor will be automatically notified when the revision has been uploaded. The SE and ME will check whether the revision has been made appropriately. If it is complete, the SE under the approval of ME and EiC will distribute the revised paper to the reviewers again, to see whether the reviewers have been satisfied with the revision.
The reviewers then can submit a recommendation to the editors to accept the article if they are satisfied. However, the decision of accepting and rejecting the article is on the ME and EiC. If the article is accepted, the SE will send it to the copyediting stage and the journal editorial staff will start to work on this until the PDF of the article is available online on the website.
To sum up, the review process in SMBR contains of five phases.
- The author submits the paper
- Editor's Evaluation (some manuscripts denied or returned before the review process)
- A blind peer review process
- Editor's Decision
- Confirm to an author
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
Archiving
This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...
Publication Ethics
Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair play
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Duties of Authors
Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Plagiarism Consent
In this publication, the Sebelas Maret Business Review (SMBR) strongly opposes plagiarism because of its own abilities. The SMBR is committed to blocking plagiarism, including self-plagiarism.
The author must ensure that the author has written the original work fully if the author has used the work and/or words of others who have been quoted correctly, and if found indications of plagiarism (above 25%) in the text, then the SMBR automatically has the right to reject the manuscript. The SMBR strongly recommends, too, an important part of the manuscript before it is published. The author also appreciates writing in the SMBR of publications, duplicates, or excessive fraud.
Before the author submits the manuscript to the SMBR at least to examine the use of plagiarism. When submitting articles published for authenticity checks, the SMBR recommends the use of Turnitin, Scanner from http://turnitin.com/. Before using Turnitin Plagiarism for the first time, we strongly recommend that the writer read the instructions for using this plagiarism detector. The plagiarism detection system for the SMBR uses and is affiliated with Turnitin.
The article has not been published in other media and does not contain plagiarism. Preferably t7he author must use reference management software, for example for Mendeley. Bibliography and reference system for the SMBR using Mendeley and Turnitin.
