The Journal of Business and Management (JBM) published by School of Business, Pokhara University is a peer-reviewed publication highlighting the scholarly contributions of higher education faculties; as is the nature of refereed journals, acceptance and publication of original manuscripts is a competitive process. The following peer reviewer guidelines provide detailed information to assist reviewers in the thorough and systematic review of manuscripts submitted for potential publication in the journal.  The reviewer’s task is to provide a complete, fair, thoughtful evaluation of manuscripts to ensure all published articles are of acceptable quality.

All submissions are evaluated by a double-blind, peer-review process. The procedures guiding the selection of articles for publication in JBM requires that no manuscript be accepted until after it is has been reviewed by the Editorial Board and sent to at least two reviewers. The decision of the Editorial Board to publish the manuscript is influenced considerably by the judgments of these advisors, who are experts in their respective fields. The author's name and credentials are removed prior to forwarding a manuscript to reviewers to maximize objectivity and ensure that a manuscript is judged solely on the basis of its content and contribution to the field. Reviewers have responsibility in anonymously evaluating manuscripts submitted by researchers. The task of each reviewer is to provide impartial evaluation, feedback and decisions concerning the quality and relevance of each manuscript. Manuscripts will be coded and sent electronically to all reviewers. Reviewers then have 4 weeks to complete evaluations and return to the Editorial Board.

The Peer Review Board consists of senior faculties, and professionals selected by the Editorial board for their contribution to research, teaching and learning. Reviewers are selected from the board and the reviewers commit their time and expertise to the fair, conscientious, and thorough review of all submitted manuscripts. The Peer Review Board is held to the same demanding standards adopted by premier journals; reviewers must:

• present a clear decision regarding publication;
• support the recommendation with a detailed, comprehensive analysis of the quality and coherence of the study’s conceptual basis, methods, results, and interpretations;
• offer specific, constructive suggestions to authors; and
• maintain the confidential nature of all submitted material.

• Members of the JBM Peer Review Board are appointed by the Editorial Board. They may be replaced by the Editorial Board at any time.
• The review process is double-blind. Only the Editorial Board knows the identity of the author and the reviewers.
• The Editorial Board has the final authority for the acceptance or rejection of any article.
• No formal articles by the members of the Editorial Board may be submitted for publication in  JBM during the Editor's term of office. 

Editorial Board: The Editorial Board is responsible for the content in JBM and has final authority over the acceptance of all manuscripts. However, the Editorial Board must follow the guidelines for appropriateness and be responsive to the recommendations of the reviewers. In cases where the Editorial Board has a conflict of interest with a given submission, The Editor-in-chief will be assigned to handle that manuscript.

Reviewers: Reviewers come from the Peer Review Board, which is determined by the Editorial Board. In addition, ad hoc reviewers who are not members of the Peer Review Board review articles.
Step-by-Step Review Process

• The members of the Editorial Board check the submission for adherence to JBM guidelines and forward it to the Editor-in-chief.
• The Editorial Board identifies desk rejects and sends this decision to the authors. For other manuscripts, the Editorial Board chooses 2 to 4 reviewers.
• The reviewers are contacted and asked to evaluate the submission within four weeks. Additional reviewers are solicited as needed with the goal of at least two completed reviews.
• The input of the review team is sent to the Editor-in-chief, who drafts and sends a decision based on this input.

Prior to dissemination to reviewers, Editorial Board will have conducted a preliminary appraisal for content, substance, and appropriateness to the journal; reviewers will not receive any manuscripts that are clearly inappropriate to the journal. Manuscripts will be electronically sent to a minimum of two reviewers for blind evaluation. While the Editors will attempt to match manuscripts and reviewers according to content, interests, and topical relevance, the broad focus of the journal dictates that papers be written for applicability to a wide audience. As such, reviewers may not be content experts in a relevant, matching academic discipline.

The manuscript must be reviewed and evaluated according to the following dimensions:

• Relevance – The most important feature of a manuscript is its relevance; the decision to accept or reject a manuscript is typically based on the substantive core of the paper. As such, manuscripts should introduce the substance of the theoretical or research question as quickly as possible and follow the main theme throughout the article in a coherent and explicit manner.
• Significance – Related to relevance, significance refers to the value of a manuscript for substantially impacting the enhancement of management practice and education relevant to Nepalese context. Significant manuscripts will clearly highlight the value, importance and worth of a relevant topic within a context relevant to the field of business and management.
• Practical Utility – As highlighted previously, the goal of the journal is to enhance management practices through the exchange of scholarly ideas. With this purpose in mind, all manuscripts should emphasize the practical value, relevance or applicability of information to research, teaching and learning in area of business and management.
• Originality – The most effective articles are those that inspire other researchers through innovative practices, approaches and techniques. Thus, manuscripts that highlight original approaches or perspectives will be given priority. Per the nature of published work, all contributions should be the original work of the author or provide explicit credit for citations.
• Scholarship of Teaching – Contributions to the enrichment of teaching and learning of management discipline should be grounded in relevant theoretical concepts and empirical evidence. As such, articles should be free from flaws in research substance/methodology and theoretical interpretation.
• Generalizability – The broad goals and varied audience of the journal mandate that manuscripts be written for consumption across a range of disciplines that allows generalizability of findings and implications.
• Clarity – All manuscripts must be written in a clear, professional manner free from grammatical flaws and errors in writing style. The purpose of the manuscript should be clearly defined, relevant and supported by the evidence provided. All manuscripts should be structured in a manner that promotes a clear, cohesive understanding of the information presented.

Based upon the feedback and recommendations of the anonymous reviewers, the Editorial Board will make a final publication decision. Decisions fall into the following categories:

• Reject – Rejected manuscripts will not be published and authors will not have the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of the manuscript to the journal. All rejections will be handled in a courteous manner that includes specific reasons for rejection.
• Accept Pending Revisions – A manuscript accepted-pending-revisions meets all the major requirements for publication but may need improvements in substantive, mechanical or methodological issues. Once these issues are adjusted for, the manuscript will receive an additional review by the Editorial Board prior to publication. Very rarely is an article accepted with no changes required; as such, most manuscripts are accepted in this category.
• Accept – Accepted manuscripts will be published “as-is” with no further modifications required.

All manuscripts are judged on their contributions to the advancement of the science and/or practice of business and management. All articles are expected to follow the rules for scholarly work, namely:

• It must be based on sound evidence, whether through literature review, theory, or empirical research.
• It must be of value to management educators, policymakers and practitioners. That is, the information must be considered new, insightful, and important by the business and management educators, policymakers, researchers and practitioners who constitute the readership of JBM.
• It must make a contribution to knowledge in management discipline. It must provide new insights, new ideas, and/or new empirical results.
•  Use references to previous work when developing your model or theory. Do not assume other work on the subject does not exist, giving yourself credit for all the ideas in your manuscript.
• When data collection is discussed, consider the relevance of the sample to the subject matter. Carefully chosen sample groups are preferable to haphazardly chosen participants who have little knowledge of or relevance to the subject being studied.
• Give as much information as possible about the characteristics of the sample and its representativeness of the population being studied.
• Do not ignore the non-respondents. They might have different characteristics than the respondents.
• Give consideration to the limitations of your study, model, and/or concepts and discuss these in your manuscript. Be objective.
• Use appropriate statistical procedures.
• Address the reliability and validity of any empirical findings.

JBM reviewers fulfill two integral roles within the scientific peer review process: gatekeeper and consultant. As a gatekeeper, reviewers are tasked with submitting a recommendation to Editorial Board regarding the acceptance, rejection, or revision and resubmission of the manuscript to the authors. Reviewers are encouraged to exercise conscientiousness with their responsibility in maintaining the integrity of the posterity of published works within the scientific literature.

As a consultant, reviewers are tasked with submitting a constructive and sufficiently detailed narrative appraisal to the Editorial Board, which is responsible for providing this information to the authors. Despite the inability of JBM to publish every article submitted, reviewers are tasked with providing thorough feedback to authors regardless of a manuscript’s acceptance status. This feedback should encourage authors of rejected manuscripts to revise and resubmit their best works, as well as provide authors of accepted manuscripts with direction for future manuscripts.

The manuscripts to be reviewed are considered confidential communication. Once an unpublished manuscripts is set in a fixed, tangible form (e.g., typed on a page), it is entitled to copyright protection. The author of an unpublished manuscript owns the copyright and is entitled to the same rights as an author of a published work. As such, reviewers may not engage in the circulation, quotation, citation, or reference of the unpublished manuscript, nor may they use the information contained within the unpublished manuscript to further their own work without explicit permission from the author. Prior to sharing the unpublished manuscript with any other person, such as a colleague or student, reviewers must receive permission from the Editorial Board. It is not acceptable to share the manuscript with students for educational purposes. Reviewers are expected to delete/destroy copies of the manuscript upon completion of the review.

Referees advise the Editorial Board, which is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

All published material is copyrighted by the JBM with future-use rights reserved. This does not limit the author's right to use his or her own material or place it in future works, provided full credit is given to the JBM.