Publication Ethics

The editorial policy of the journal "Management Issues" is based on the ethical principles of scientific periodicals, supports the Code of Ethics of Scientific Publications formulated by the Committee on Ethics of Scientific Publications (Moscow, Russia) and is based on the ethical standards of editors and publishers, enshrined in the Code of Conduct and guidelines of Best Practice for the editor of the journal (Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors) and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers, developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics - Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Borrowing and plagiarism

When reviewing an article, the Editorial board of the journal verifies the material using the Anti-Plagiarism system. In case of detection of numerous borrowings, the editorial board acts in accordance with the COPE rules.

In its policy on the ethical use of artificial intelligence (AI), the Management Issues Journal is guided by the recommendations of the ENA (European Network for Academic Integrity).

If artificial intelligence (AI) was used in writing a manuscript, creating images or graphic elements of an article, or collecting and analyzing data, the journal asks the authors to disclose which tool was used in the "Methods" section of all versions of the article. If the editorial team assesses that the use of AI has compromised the integrity of any aspect of the article, the published (or accepted/pending) article may be withdrawn (rejected).

In addition, any violation of publication ethics may result in the withdrawal of a published article, rejection of an article that has been accepted or is under review, or other actions necessary to ensure that "Management Issues" maintains the highest standards of research integrity when publishing rigorous, new, and relevant research.

Responsibilities of the Editorial Board:

1. Decision on publication

1.1. The editorial board of the peer-reviewed journal "Management Issues" is responsible for deciding which articles will be published in the journal. The decision is made based on the reviews submitted to the article.

1.2. The Editorial Board adheres to the journal's policy and acts within the framework of legal requirements, since it is responsible for copyright infringement.

2. Privacy

2.1. Reviewers or any of the editorial staff should not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors and the publisher, as it is confidential.

3. Information disclosure and conflict of interest

3.1. Unpublished materials contained in the submitted article should not be used in the own research of the scientific editor and reviewers without the special written permission of the author.

Responsibilities of reviewers:

Reviewers assist the editor-in-chief in making editorial decisions, as well as help the author improve his work.

1. Privacy

1.1. Any manuscripts received for review should be treated as confidential documents. They cannot be shown or discussed with other persons, except those authorized by the editorial board.

2. Confirmation of sources

2.1. Reviewers should identify the published work that has not been cited by the author. Any statement that an observation, origin, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by an appropriate reference. The reviewer should also inform the editorial board about any significant similarity or partial overlap between the manuscript being reviewed and other already published work that he is familiar with.

3. Information disclosure and conflict of interest

3.1. Private information or ideas that have arisen during the review process must remain confidential and cannot be used for personal gain. The reviewer should not review the manuscript if there is a conflict of interest as a result of his competitive, partnership or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or organizations associated with the publication material.

Responsibilities of authors:

1. Originality and plagiarism

1.1. Authors must ensure that they have written a completely original work. If the authors have used the work and/or words of other authors, this should be indicated and cited accordingly.

2. Data access and security

2.1. The author should be ready to provide access to the data related to the publication material, if possible. In any case, the author should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable period of time after publication.

3. Reusable, redundant, or competing publication

3.1. An author should not publish papers that describe essentially the same research more than once or in more than one journal.

3.2. Submitting a manuscript to more than one journal at the same time means unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4. Confirmation of sources

4.1. It is necessary to provide proper confirmation of the works of other authors. The authors should cite the publications that were important when creating the submitted work.

5. Authorship of the material

5.1. Authorship should be limited to those persons who have made a tangible contribution to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the claimed work. All those who have made a significant contribution should be included in the list of co-authors.

5.2. The author must ensure that the list of authors contains only actual authors and does not include those who are not related to this work, as well as that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the article and agreed to its publication.

6. Information disclosure and conflict of interest

6.1. All authors should report if there is a financial or other conflict of interest in their work that may affect the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

7. Errors in published works

7.1. If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work, his duty is to immediately inform the editorial board of the journal or the publisher and cooperate with the editorial board in correcting errors.

8. Violation of ethics

8.1. Identification of ethics violations

1.1. Violation of publication ethics can be detected and brought to the attention of the editor or publisher by any person at any time.

1.2. Ethics violations may include, but are not limited to, the examples given in the section on publication ethics.

1.3. Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such behavior must provide sufficient information or evidence to initiate an investigation. All applications should be considered in the most serious manner until a final decision or conclusion is reached.

8.2. Investigation

2.1. The initial decision should be made by the editor, who should consult with the founder when appropriate.

2.2. All necessary data should be collected, but it should be avoided to spread information beyond the circle of those who are supposed to be aware.

8.3. Minor violations

3.1. Minor violations can be dealt with without involving third parties. In any case, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any accusations.

8.4. Serious violations

4.1. Serious violations may require notification of the accused's employer. The editor, together with the publisher or members of the scientific community, must decide whether it is appropriate to inform the employer either through independent study of the available data or through further consultations with a limited number of experts.

8.5. Consequences  (according to the degree of their severity; can be applied both separately and in combination)

5.1. Informing or educating the author or reviewer about the facts of misunderstanding or violation of publication standards.

5.2. A warning letter to the author or reviewer, revealing the facts of ethical violations and warning of possible consequences.

5.3. The official publication on the website about the revealed facts of violations.

5.4. Publication of an editorial text detailing the nature of the violations.

5.5. A formal letter to the head of the department where the author or reviewer works.

5.6. Formal review of the article from the journal, along with informing the head of the department in which the author or reviewer works, the international databases indexing the journal and the readers of the journal.

5.7. The imposition of a ban on the publication of this author (the involvement of this reviewer) for a certain period.

5.8. Report the reported case to a professional organization or a higher authority for further investigation and further action.

8.6. Review (retraction) of articles

When considering situations related to the withdrawal (retraction) of articles, the editorial board and the publisher of the journal are guided by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE Retraction Guidelines) and the RASS Ethics Council (Rule of withdrawal (retraction) of an article from publication).

Grounds for article review:

• detection of incorrect borrowings (plagiarism) in a publication;
• duplication of an article in several editions;
• detection of falsifications or fabrications in the work (for example, falsification of experimental data);
• the discovery of serious errors in the work (for example, incorrect interpretation of the results), which casts doubt on its scientific value.;
• incorrect composition of the authors (there is no one who deserves to be an author); persons who do not meet the criteria of authorship are included);
• hidden conflict of interest (and other violations of publication ethics);
• republication of an article without the author's consent;

The article may be withdrawn upon the official request of the authors, who have explained the reason for their decision, as well as on the initiative of the editorial board of the journal or the publisher on the basis of their own expertise. In the latter case, an official letter is sent to the author (or the lead author in the team of authors) with information about the reasons for the review of the article.

After the review, the article remains on the journal's website as part of the corresponding issue and retains the DOI identifier, but is marked as withdrawn. The same note is made in the table of contents of the issue. The PDF version of the article is replaced with an identical version with a watermark indicating on each page that the article has been withdrawn.

The editorial board publishes a statement on the withdrawal of the article, indicating the reasons and date of retraction on the official website of the journal and in the next print issue. Information about the review of the article and its PDF version with the appropriate labeling are sent to the NEL (elibrary.ru ) and other bibliographic databases in which the journal is included. The information is also transmitted to the Ethics Council RASS.