Editorial Advisory Board

Members
Prof. D.P.Goyal , Director, IIM Shillong, India
Prof. Paul Shrivastava , Concordia University, Montreal, Canada
Prof. Richard Ponarul , California State University ,USA
Prof. W. Jean Kwon , St. John's University ,USA
Prof. Robert Clift , University of Tasmania ,Australia
Prof. S.K.Sinha , IIM Ahmedabad,India
Prof. Rakesh Sah , Montana State University, USA
Prof. Satyendra Singh , University of Winnipeg, Canada
Prof. Prashant Mishra , IIM Calcutta, India
Prof. Jatin Pancholi, Middlesex University,London, U.K
Prof. Sorin Tuluca , Fairleigh Dickinson University, USA
Prof. Harjeet S.Bhabra , Concordia University, Montreal, Canada
Prof. S. Viswanathan , Nanyang Business School, Singapore
Prof. Phani Tej Adidam , University for Nebraska, Omaha, USA

Review Member

Members
Dr. Goloknath , Vice President and Chief Economic Adviser, CCIL, India
Dr. Matthias Nnadi , School of Management, Cranfield University, UK
Dr. Noel Yahanpath , Eastern Institute of Technology, Napier, New Zealand
Dr. Marcos Ferasso , Professor, SENAC Faculty of Technology, Santa Catarina, Brazil
Dr. S. Venkataramanaiah , Professor, IIM Lucknow, India
Dr. V.K Gupta , Professor, IIM Indore, India
Dr. Seema Bhate , Professor, University of Sunderland, UK
Dr. Sajal Kabiraj , Professor, Dongbei University of Finance and Economics, China.
Mr. R. M. Ganatra , MD and CEO, India SME Asset Reconstruction Company Limited, India
Dr. O.P. Wali , Professor, IIFT, India
Dr. Fred Mugambi , Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Kenya.
Dr. Deepak Tandon , Professor, IMI, India
Dr. Anil K. Sharma , Professor, IIT Roorkee, India
Dr. Seshadev Sahoo , Associate Professor, IIM Lucknow, India
Dr. Saumya Singh , Associate Professor, IIT Dhanbad, India

Submission Guidelines

Submissions should be sent as a Word file by email to journal@iimshillong.ac.in. All accepted contributions are edited for publication.

Submission of a manuscript for review will imply that the submission has original and unpublished work, which is not under consideration for publication anywhere else, and all copyright requirements in respect of material used directly or indirectly in the article have been duly met. In the case of multiple authors, the submission would imply that all the co-authors are committed to publishing in the Journal. The author submitting the manuscript must ensure that the submission has the approval of all the authors, as well as by the responsible authorities – implicitly or explicitly – at the institute where the work has been carried out. The publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any compensation claims. Authors in doubt about what constitutes original and unpublished work should consult the Editor.

Permissions

The author should secure all permissions for the use of copyrighted material, which may include any text, illustrations, charts, tables, photographs, or other material from previously published sources.

Review Policy

The Journal follows a double-blind peer review system. The articles that do not conform to the Submission/Author guidelines are liable for desk rejections. All contributions will be screened for plagiarism. The screened manuscripts are then assessed by the editor/editorial team member for suitability for the Journal, and those judged inappropriate at this stage are rejected. Reasons for rejection are based either on manuscript quality or for not following submission/author guidelines. Papers deemed suitable are then typically sent to reviewers for evaluation. Based on review comments and recommendations, the editor requests revision from the authors, or makes a recommendation of acceptance or rejection. The review process normally takes 3 -6 months.

Author Guidelines and Manuscript Preparation

The text should be clear, readable, and concise. Manuscripts should be well presented with correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

Sections of the paper should appear in the following order: title page, abstract (including keywords and JEL classification numbers), text, appendices, endnotes (including acknowledgments), references, and author biographies.

Format

• The recommended length of papers is 6000-8000 words, inclusive of tables, figures and references.
• Material may be formatted in Times New Roman, font size 12 and double spaced.
• Consistent use of either British or American spelling is advised and not both at the same time.
• Kindly use the decimal system of headings with no more than three levels.
• Maintain one-inch (2.5 cm) margins on all sides.
• Equations, tables, and figures must be numbered consecutively. They should be referred to by number in the text before their appearance.
• Each table and figure should be self-explanatory with notes or captions for clarity or to indicate the source, as necessary; all abbreviations should be expanded.
• The list of references should only include works that are cited in the text.
• Referencing and citations in the text should follow the referencing style used by the American Psychological Association (APA).
• All exhibits should be in black and white only.

Title Page

The manuscript should be accompanied by a title page (first page) containing:

• A short but informative title.
• Full names of all authors and their affiliations (in the same order as they wish them to appear in print) along with their postal address and email address. Details of the authors’ names and affiliation should not appear elsewhere in the manuscript.
• Please indicate the designated corresponding author.

Abstract

Authors should provide a concise and factual abstract of around 200 words, which is complete in itself. The abstract must summarise the objective, methods, key results, conclusions, implication, and relevance of the study. Avoid acronyms, abbreviations, and citations in the abstract. Provide 4 to 6 keywords that can be used for indexing purposes. These should not repeat the title. JEL codes should be below the keywords.

Copyright

The authors will be asked to transfer copyright of the article to the publisher by signing the “Transfer of Copyright” agreement.

Journal Archives

Journals	PDF
JMS- Vol 11-No 2 May-August 2020
JMS- Vol 11-No 1 Jan-April 2020
JMS- Vol 10-No 3 Sep-Dec 2019
JMS- Vol 10-No 1&2 Jan-Aug 2019
JMS- Vol 9-No 3 Sep-Dec 2018
JMS- Vol 9-No 2 May-Aug 2018
JMS- Vol 9-No 1 Jan-Apr 2018
JMS- Vol 8-No 3 Sep-Dec 2017
JMS- Vol 8-No 2 May-Aug 2017
JMS- Vol 8-No 1 Jan-Apr 2017
JMS- Vol 7-No 3 Sep-Dec 2016
JMS- Vol 7-No 2 May-Aug 2016
JMS- Vol 7-No 1 Jan-Apr 2016
JMS- Vol 6-No 3 Sep-Dec 2015
JMS-Vol 6-No 2 May-Aug 2015
JMS-Vol 6-No 1 Jan-April 2015
JMS-Vol 5-No 2 Jul- Dec 2014
JMS-Vol 5-No 1 Jan-Jun 2014
JMS-Vol 4-No 2 Jul-Dec 2013
JMS-Vol 4-No 1 Jan-Jun 2013
JMS-Vol 3-No 2 Jul-Dec 2012
JMS-Vol 3-No 1 Jan-June 2012
JMS-Vol 2-No 2 Jul-Dec 2011
JMS-Vol 2-No 1 Jan-June 2011
JMS-Vol 1-No 2 Jul-Dec 2010
JMS-Vol 1-No 1 Jan-June 2010

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Manuscripts submitted to the IIMS Journal of Management Science (IIMSJMS) are evaluated entirely on the basis of their scientific content. There are no publication charges. All possible measures are taken to uphold the highest standards of publication ethics and to prevent malpractices. Authors who submit papers to our Journals attest that their work is original and unpublished and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. In addition, authors confirm that their paper is their own original work that has not been copied or plagiarized, in whole or in part, from other works and if the authors have used the works of others the same has been appropriately cited or quoted. Our publication ethics and malpractice statement is based on the guidelines for journal editors developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Duties / Responsibilities of Editors

The Editorial Team of the IIMSJMS, comprising the Editorial Board and the Editorial Staff with the Publisher is responsible for taking a decision as to which of the articles submitted to the journal are to be published. The Editors have complete discretion to reject/accept an article. The Editorial Team may confer/deliberate with other reviewers/editors in arriving at its decisions. The evaluation of manuscripts is made on the basis of their scholarly and intellectual content without having regard to the nature of the authors or the institution including gender, race, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. The journal follows a policy of fair play in its editorial evaluation. The editors are expected to exercise caution and ensure that they have no conflict of interest with respect to the articles they accept/reject. The editors and the editorial staff follow strict confidentiality and are required not to disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers and the publisher. Authors are encouraged to correct the errors which are found during the process of review while preserving the anonymity of the reviewers.

Duties / Responsibilities of Reviewers

Editorial decisions are based on peer review. The reviewers are expected to maintain absolute confidentiality with regard to the contents of manuscripts. The reviews are to be conducted objectively and the referees are expected to express their views clearly with supporting reasons. The reviewers should have no conflict of interest with the authors and the subject matter of the research. The reviewers are required to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any observation or argument which has been previously reported should also be accompanied along with the relevant citation. Similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and any other published paper of which the reviewer may have personal knowledge, may also be brought to be attention of the editors. The information or ideas obtained through peer review are of a privileged nature and 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 relationship with any of authors or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties/Responsibilities of the Authors

Authors are required to present an accurate account of the original research work and also an objective discussion of its significance. The paper should contain sufficient details of the literature and references. It is expected that all the authors have significantly contributed to the research. Fraudulent and knowingly made inaccurate statement constitutes unethical behavior and would be unacceptable. Authors are required to ensure that the submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere, and if the authors have used the work of others the same has been appropriately cited or quoted. Applicable copyright laws and conventions are required to be followed. Copyright materials should be reproduced only with permission and due acknowledgement. Authors are not expected to submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently would constitute unethical practice and would be unacceptable. Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be made. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the paper which is submitted for publication. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects in the development of the paper should also be acknowledged. The corresponding author is required to ensure that all co-authors are included in the paper, and that the co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. All sources of financial support should also be disclosed. Upon discovery of any significant error in the published work, it is the responsibility of the authors to promptly notify the editors and cooperate in the retraction or correction of the paper.

Peer Review Policy for the IIMS Journal of Management Science

The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our reviewers therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the IIMS Journal of Management Science and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.

Initial manuscript evaluation

The Editors first evaluate all manuscripts. In some circumstances it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to experts for review. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 4 weeks of receipt.

Type of Peer Review

The IIMS Journal of Management Science employs double blinded review system, where the reviewer remains anonymous to the authors throughout the process.

How the reviewer is selected

Reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our reviewer database contains reviewer contact details together with their subject areas of interest, and this is constantly being updated.

Reviewer reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

• Is original
• Is methodologically sound
• Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
• Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
• Correctly references previous relevant work

Reviewers are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process. Reviewers are requested to refrain from giving their personal opinion in the "Reviewer blind comments to Author" section of their review on whether or not the paper should be published. Personal opinions can be expressed in the "Reviewer confidential comments to Editor" section.

How long does the peer review process take?

Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 12-24 weeks. Should the reviewers' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed a further expert opinion will be sought. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the Editors within 8 weeks and the Editors may request further advice from the reviewers at this time. The Editors may request more than one revision of a manuscript.

Final report

A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the reviewers, and may include verbatim comments by the reviewers.

Editor's Decision is final

Reviewers advise the Editors, who are responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

Special Issues / Conference Proceedings

Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors, conference organizers or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the editorial office.

Becoming a Reviewer for the IIMS Journal of Management Science

If you are not currently a reviewer for the IIMS Journal of Management Science but would like to be considered as a reviewer for this Journal, please contact the editorial office by e-mail at msb@iimshillong.ac.in, and provide your contact details. If your request is approved and you are added to the online reviewer database you will receive a confirmatory email, asking you to add details on your field of expertise, in the format of subject classifications.