Ethical rules for authors
Originality and plagiarism
The editorial team at International Management (Mi) fully adheres to the values of non-disclosure and rigour that define the ethical and intellectual integrity of any scientific community that is active at the international level.
The editors of Mi therefore place the utmost importance on adhering to the highest academic standards of moral and legal responsibility toward authors who submit their scientific work to Mi for publication.
Authors must meet the high standards of publication ethics, as defined by the Commission on Publication Ethics (COPE). Data falsification or fabrication, plagiarism—including duplicate publication of the author’s own work without proper citation, and the misappropriation of work are all unacceptable practices. Making false or deliberately inaccurate statements is contrary to the ethics of scientific publishing and is therefore unacceptable. Any instance of unethical conduct is taken very seriously and will be dealt with in accordance with COPE guidelines.
In other words, authors who submit a manuscript must not plagiarize others or themselves (a practice commonly referred to as “self-plagiarism”). Authors must explicitly cite the source of any words, ideas, results, or other information derived from previously published works by third parties and/or themselves, so that the editorial team can distinguish between what is original in the submitted text and what is not.
Management international has a zero-tolerance policy toward plagiarism and all forms of scientific fraud. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are systematically screened with plagiarism detection software before the peer-review process begins. This screening ensures that contributions are original and in compliance with ethical standards for scientific publication. If there is any doubt or if an anomaly is detected, the editorial team may request clarification from the authors or reject the manuscript in accordance with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
.
Multiple, redundant, and simultaneous publication
Texts submitted to Mi must never have been published before (in whole or in part) in another journal, and they must not be under review elsewhere at the same time they are being reviewed by Mi.
Authors agree not to submit work that has already been published in another journal or to submit an original article based on work mainly or exclusively published elsewhere. Authors also agree not to submit manuscripts to multiple journals at the same time.
In response to a call for papers, authors may submit no more than one article.
References
All quotations (or uses of other authors’ work) must be identified as such and accompanied by the proper references presented in accordance with the journal’s guidelines. If authors wish to refer to information obtained privately (conversations, correspondence), they must make every effort to obtain permission to do so from the persons identified as the source of this information.
The authorship of work
The list of co-authors must only include the persons who made a significant contribution to designing, conducting, or interpreting the research, or to writing the manuscript submitted to the journal. All authors, with their affiliations, must be listed in alphabetical order or according to their level of involvement in the research or in the writing of the manuscript. The corresponding author must ensure that only the appropriate co-authors are mentioned and that all co-authors have agreed to the manuscript being submitted for publication once they have seen and approved the final version of their contribution. The authors are solely responsible for the opinions and/or positions expressed in their articles. The authors do not speak on behalf of International Management, which strives to be a forum for a variety of perspectives but does not take a political stance.
Policy on artificial intelligence
The authors must disclose any use of generative AI tools (large language models, or LLM) capable of producing content such as references, text, images, or any other form of content.
Artificial intelligence bots must not be listed among the authors of an article.
If their submission has been primarily or partially generated using AI, the authors must indicate this when they submit their manuscript so that the editorial team can evaluate the generated content. If applicable, please clearly indicate the use of LLMs in the manuscript by specifying which model was used and for what purpose. It is the authors’ responsibility to verify the accuracy, validity, and appropriateness of any content or quotations generated by LLMs and to correct any errors, biases, or inconsistencies.
Authors must cite the original sources rather than the generative AI tools as primary sources in their references. Please note that there is a risk of plagiarism if the LLM reproduces a substantial amount of text drawn from other sources.
Authors must check the original sources to make sure that they are not plagiarizing someone else’s work.
Inappropriate use of generative AI includes the generation of inaccurate text or content, plagiarism, or the improper citing of earlier sources. Although submitted manuscripts are not rejected because the use of generative AI has been disclosed, if during the review process, the editor-in-chief and/or the reviewers realize that the authors have used generative AI inappropriately in a submission and/or without prior disclosure, they reserve the right to stop the publication process.
Conflicts of interest
Authors must disclose any potential professional or financial conflicts of interest. When they submit their manuscript, each author must disclose any direct or indirect financial interest or connection, or any other situation that could raise questions about bias in the work presented or in the conclusions, implications, or opinions stated. This includes sources of commercial funding or other types of funding relevant to the individual author or to any associated department or organization, as well as personal relationships or any direct academic competition. All non-public sources of funding used in the research presented in the submission must be explicitly named
Errata
Authors who discover a major error or inaccuracy in their work after publication are required to report it promptly to the journal’s editorial board and to cooperate with the board to publish an erratum or, if necessary, to announce the retraction of the article. If the journal’s editorial team learns from a third party that an article that has already been published contains a major error, it must inform the author. The author must then request to either retract or correct the article or provide information demonstrating that the passage in question is not in fact inaccurate.
Access to research data
At the request of the editorial team, authors may be asked to provide data related to their research. To the extent that it is possible, authors must agree to make their data publicly available and to keep them for a reasonable period of time after publication.
After acceptance
All authors whose manuscripts have been accepted for publication in Mi must complete and sign a copyright assignment form.
Ethical rules for the editorial team and reviewers
Quality of the journal
The editorial board of International Management oversees the journal’s scientific quality, by following good practices. More specifically, it ensures that the compositions of its editorial board and scientific committee are regularly updated with a view to professional rigor. Mi follows the guidelines and the best practices defined by the Commission on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Review process
International Management is an academic journal. It publishes high-quality articles that have undergone a strict peer-review process, in accordance with the principles, rules, and practices for upholding the double-blind review process. All manuscripts submitted to Mi are screened with plagiarism-detection software. The procedure is as follows. The editor-in-chief conducts an initial review of articles to determine whether they align with the journal’s objectives, scope, and standards and checks them for plagiarism. Articles that violate the journal’s editorial policy, that do not meet the publication standards of Mi, or that have little chance of being accepted by our reviewers may be immediately desk rejected.
Articles submitted in response to a call for papers posted on Mi‘s website are handled in the same manner by the issue editors, referred to here as guest editors. They make sure the articles align with the journal’s objectives and those of the call for papers. When necessary, they issue a decision to immediately reject an article. Articles submitted for peer review are subject to the same process and standards as articles submitted spontaneously to Mi.
If an article meets the journal’s expectations, it is then sent to three reviewers who have been selected from among recognized researchers in the field addressed in the manuscript. The authors are asked to provide a list of reviewers with whom they have a conflict of interest. This list will remain confidential.
The reviewers receive a manuscript review guide that explains the requirements for producing reviews that are clear, respectful, and constructive. They are provided two review grids, one for the author and one for the editors. The author does not know the identity of the reviewers, and the reviewers do not know the identity of the author.
Authors who have submitted a manuscript to Mi are regularly updated on the status of their manuscript in the peer review process. They also receive an explanation if there are delays. Based on the reviewers’ reports and their own review, the editor makes one of the following decisions within a reasonable timeframe (approximately 3 months) after receiving the manuscript:
- Acceptance of the manuscript as submitted to the journal
- Rejection
- Rejection with an invitation to resubmit an entirely new version of the manuscript
- Acceptance subject to major revision
- Acceptance subject to minor revision
- Conditional acceptance
In the last case (6), the editor-in-chief makes a final decision that is based on whether the author has incorporated the reviewers’ suggestions and comments. The editor-in-chief studies the peer reviewers’ reports attentively and takes all comments into consideration before making a clear and duly justified editorial decision.
A summary report and an editorial decision based on the peer review reports are written and sent to the authors. In the interest of transparency, while adhering to the principles, rules, and practices of double-blind review, the editors of MI provide the author and the reviewers with a copy of the decision and the (detailed) review reports that support it. Articles are published immediately after the proofs are finalized, an individual DOI is assigned, and the issue is finalized
.
Conflicts of interest
Mi has a strict policy on conflicts of interest. The members of the Editorial Board and the reviewers must recuse themselves if they have a conflict of interest with the author or in relation to the content of the manuscript under review. A potential conflict of interest can result from relationships, loyalties, or hostilities to groups, organizations, or specific interests, which could unduly influence a person’s judgment or actions. Furthermore, reviewers who know that they are not qualified to review a manuscript or that they will be unable to review it in a reasonable amount of time are required to inform the editorial board and recuse themselves. The editor-in-chief, members of the editorial team (the associate editors), and members of the editorial board may not make submissions to Mi during their tenure. Moreover, guest editors for a thematic or special issue may not publish in the issue that they are editing.
Impartiality
Manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual and scientific content without regard for the ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, university affiliation, and political opinions of the author.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential. No information concerning a manuscript submitted for review may be disclosed to anyone other than the author, potential reviewers, and, in certain cases, the editor.
Policy on artificial intelligence
Reviewers who use generative AI tools to produce their review or to improve the quality of the language are responsible for verifying the content and its accuracy. Reviewers whose use of generative AI tools to produce their review is inappropriate will not be invited to review again, and their review will not be taken into consideration in the final decision. Moreover, reviewers who suspect that generative AI tools have been used in a submission inappropriately or without disclosure must inform the journal’s editor-in-chief of their concerns.
.