Publication Ethics

This statement outlines the ethical standards for all parties involved in the publication process of articles in the Journal of Integrated Management Systems (JIMS), including authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher. These guidelines are adapted from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

1. Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards
Authors are required to present an accurate and objective account of the research conducted, including a clear discussion of its significance. Data must be reported honestly without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation. Manuscripts should provide sufficient detail and references to enable replication. Any form of fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statement constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable. Authors must comply with the journal’s submission guidelines.

Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. Proper citation and acknowledgment of prior work, including their own, must be provided. Manuscripts must not be submitted simultaneously to more than one journal unless explicitly permitted. Any direct quotations must be clearly indicated and appropriately cited.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. Redundant publication of the same research in multiple journals is considered unethical. If multiple publications arise from a single research project, this must be transparently disclosed and the primary publication properly cited.

Acknowledgment of Sources
All sources of data and references that significantly influenced the research must be properly acknowledged. Proper credit must always be given to the work of others.

Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All contributors who meet these criteria should be listed as co-authors. Others who contributed in a lesser capacity should be acknowledged appropriately. All listed authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that may influence the results or interpretation of the manuscript. All sources of funding must be clearly stated.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works
If authors discover significant errors in their published work, they are obligated to promptly inform the editor and cooperate in correcting or retracting the publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
Any research involving hazardous materials, procedures, or equipment must be clearly identified. Studies involving human or animal subjects must adhere to ethical standards and be explicitly stated in the manuscript.

2. Duties of Reviewers

Confidentiality
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose or discuss the content with others except as authorized by the editor.

Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should ensure that all relevant sources are properly cited by the authors. They should identify any significant published work that has not been referenced. Any suspected similarity with other works or ethical concerns must be reported confidentially to the editor.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews must be conducted objectively and supported by clear arguments. Reviewers should provide constructive feedback to improve the manuscript and distinguish between essential revisions and optional enhancements.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Reviewers must not use unpublished information for personal advantage and should decline to review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest. In a double-blind review process, any potential identification of authors that leads to a conflict must be reported to the editor.

Promptness
Reviewers should complete their evaluations within the agreed timeframe. If unable to do so, they must promptly inform the editor so alternative arrangements can be made.