Peer Review Process

The Indonesian Journal of Agile Management (IJAM) implements a rigorous, transparent, and objective peer review process to ensure the scientific quality of every article published. This process aligns with national standards and international best practices (e.g., COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics), while also fostering a strong academic culture. The peer review workflow outlined below is proposed as the standard editorial policy for the next five years:

A. Initial Editorial Screening

  • Each submitted manuscript undergoes an initial screening by the editorial team to ensure alignment with the journal’s Focus and Scope, completeness of manuscript components (abstract, keywords, references, data attachments), and adherence to the journal template.

  • A plagiarism check is conducted using reliable software (e.g., Turnitin or iThenticate). Manuscripts with a Similarity Index above the threshold (generally 25%) will be returned for revision or rejected outright.

B. Reviewer Assignment

  • The editor assigns a minimum of two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript topic.

  • Reviewers may come from universities, research institutions, or academic partners, both national and international.

  • The journal applies a double-blind review system, where the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed to maintain objectivity.

C. Peer Review Process

  • Reviewers conduct an in-depth evaluation of the manuscript based on the following criteria:

    1. Research novelty

    2. Clarity of the problem statement and objectives

    3. Appropriateness of the research method

    4. Validity of data and analysis

    5. Relevance of findings to current literature

    6. Strength of arguments and scientific contribution

  • Reviewers will provide one of the following recommendations:

    1. Accepted without revision

    2. Accepted with minor revision

    3. Accepted with major revision

    4. Rejected

  • Reviewers are expected to provide constructive comments and revision notes, submitted through the journal system.

D. Author Revisions

  • Authors are given a specific timeframe (typically 2–4 weeks) to revise their manuscript based on the reviewers’ feedback.

  • The revised manuscript must be accompanied by a Response to Reviewers document outlining the changes made in response to each comment.

E. Revision Verification and Final Decision

  • The editor and/or reviewers will re-examine the revised manuscript.

  • The editor will issue the final decision:

    1. Accepted for publication

    2. Returned for additional revision

    3. Rejected if revisions are inadequate

F. Proofreading and Publication Preparation

  • Accepted manuscripts undergo final proofreading to ensure:

    1. Language and grammar quality

    2. Citation and referencing style

    3. Formatting of tables, figures, and appendices in accordance with journal standards

  • Authors must approve the galley proof before publication.

G. Online and Print Publication

  • Articles are published electronically on the official IJAM website.

  • Printed editions may be issued according to institutional policy.

  • Article metadata will be registered with national and international indexing databases (e.g., SINTA, Google Scholar, Crossref).