Peer Review Process
Initial Assessment – Technical Desk Review
Conducted by the Technical Team, this stage consists of verifying compliance with the Author Guidelines. Aspects such as metadata, duplicate authorship, image copyright, and academic integrity are evaluated. If inconsistencies are identified, the manuscript will be archived and the authors notified. If approved at this stage, the article will be forwarded to the editors for further editorial processing, and the authors will also be notified. After archiving, authors may submit a new submission, provided they carefully adhere to the Journal's Guidelines. In this case, the manuscript will undergo technical review again.
Peer Review Process
The review process of articles submitted to the International Journal of Innovation (IJI) is characterized by a dual evaluation involving two sequential stages: the desk review and peer review.
In the desk review, without knowing the identity of the authors, the editors gather and analyze submitted articles to determine whether they fit the scope of the journal and the possibility that they will make a significant contribution to knowledge in the field of strategy. When necessary, the editors involve members of the scientific committee in this process.
When a submitted work does not comply with the journal’s policies, the authors will be informed of this decision within sixty days following the submission date. Articles that are approved during the desk review stage are forwarded to three specialists who are part of the journal’s team of reviewers for a double blind review, or to outside researchers who are chosen because of their knowledge of the article’s research field.
The reviewers are professors and researchers associated with stricto sensu graduate programs in Brazilian or overseas higher learning institutions. Articles are assessed considering the relevance of the theme they address to innovation, the quality of the writing, and the logical development of their theoretical review with the use of appropriate references. The adequacy of the methodological procedures, the depth and consistency of the analyses, the outline of the conclusions and the relevance of their contributions are also taken into account. All of these aspects are considered, using a pre-defined form provided to the reviewers beforehand. This stage of the review process may last up to three months, at the end of which the authors will be informed of the editor’s decision.
Peer Review - Special Editions
Special issues are related to the focus and scope of the journal, and all submissions go through the same evaluation process as regular issues. Guest Editors are guided and supervised by the Editor-in-Chief, Co-editor, and Associate Editors, and if they have submissions, they will be evaluated independently and will not exceed 20% of the total issue. The credentials of Guest Editors are researched, confirmed, and approved by the Editorial Team. Special issues are publicized with a theme and submission deadlines, which are also done exclusively through the journal's website to ensure they go through the entire technical review process.
What editorial decisions can result from peer review?
Following the review process, the editor will make one of the following decisions:
- Accepted;
- Mandatory Corrections;
- Revisions Required;
- Rejected;
- Resubmit for review.
When the reviewers request adjustments to an article, at the editor’s discretion the authors are given a deadline of thirty to sixty days to incorporate the reviewers’ suggestions and make the required corrections. After the adjustments have been made and verified by the reviewers and editors, the article is proofread to check for grammar and spelling mistakes and to ensure that it is in compliance with the norms of the journal prior to the final editing process. The conclusion of this process does not guarantee immediate publication of the article. It falls to the editors to set the guidelines and decide the right time for publication.
Observation: If there are disagreements between reviewers, the Editor may appoint a third reviewer or reject the manuscript. The entire Peer Review Process can take, on average, up to six months. At the end, authors are informed of the editorial decision.
