Author Appeals Policy

At the International Journal of Business, Management & Financial Insight (IJBMFI), we are committed to a fair, objective, and transparent editorial and peer review process. While editorial decisions are made with careful consideration, we recognize that authors may occasionally have valid concerns that warrant re-evaluation. This policy outlines the formal process for submitting appeals and ensures that such concerns are addressed with integrity and professionalism.

1. Grounds for Appeal

Authors may submit a formal appeal under the following circumstances:

  • Substantive Misinterpretation: The decision was based on a significant misunderstanding or misreading of the manuscript’s content or methodology.

  • Factual Errors: Material inaccuracies or omissions in reviewer feedback or editorial handling may have influenced the decision.

  • Conflict of Interest or Bias: Evidence of bias, undeclared conflicts of interest, or unethical conduct during the review process.

⚠️ Appeals solely based on disagreement with reviewer opinions—without supporting evidence—will not typically be considered.

2. How to Submit an Appeal

Authors who wish to appeal a decision must adhere to the following process:

Submission Timeline

Appeals must be submitted within 20 calendar days of receiving the editorial decision. Appeals submitted beyond this period may not be reviewed.

Formal Appeal Letter

Authors must submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief that includes:

  • A clear statement of intent to appeal.

  • A detailed explanation of the reasons for appeal.

  • Specific references to reviewer comments or editorial remarks in question.

  • Any evidence that supports the appeal (e.g., clarification of misunderstood points, rebuttal of inaccurate critique).

Revised Manuscript (If Applicable)

If the appeal includes a revised manuscript addressing key concerns, all changes must be clearly tracked and justified with respect to reviewer and editor feedback.

3. Appeals Review Process

Once an appeal is submitted, the following steps are taken:

Initial Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief will conduct a preliminary review of the appeal and may consult the handling editor and/or editorial board members for input.

Additional Review (if warranted)

If the appeal presents a compelling case, the Editor-in-Chief may:

  • Share the appeal and revised manuscript with original reviewers for reconsideration.

  • Assign new, independent reviewers not involved in the original decision to provide an impartial evaluation.

The most appropriate route will be chosen based on the nature of the appeal.

Final Decision

After review, the Editor-in-Chief will issue a final decision, which may include:

  • Upholding the original decision.

  • Inviting a revised submission for further consideration.

  • Accepting the manuscript (with or without additional revisions).

???? Authors will receive a written explanation outlining the rationale behind the final decision.

4. Appeal Scope and Limitations

  • No Guarantee of Acceptance: An appeal does not ensure reversal of the original editorial decision. All appeals are evaluated strictly on their academic merit and compliance with journal standards.

  • One Appeal Per Manuscript: Only one appeal is permitted per submission. Repeated or unfounded appeals will not be entertained.

5. Ethical Oversight

If an appeal raises ethical concerns—such as reviewer misconduct, conflict of interest, or procedural irregularities—the matter will be escalated to an independent ethics review, following COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.

Remedial actions may include:

  • Reassigning the manuscript to a new editor or review panel.

  • Initiating a formal investigation.

6. Communication and Timelines

  • Acknowledgment of Receipt: Appeals will be acknowledged within 5 business days.

  • Review Timeline: Most appeals are processed within 4 to 8 weeks, depending on complexity and whether further peer review is required.