The editorial process of the Journal of Human Resource Management – Advances and Developments (JHRM-AD) is strictly followed and proceeds through the following stages:
1. Preliminary inspection: Upon submission of an article (via Click to Submit Paper), the editorial office verifies its originality using a plagiarism detection system, in line with ethical publishing standards. If plagiarism is detected, the author is notified and the manuscript is rejected.
2. Initial editorial assessment: If no significant similarity with existing sources is found (step 1), the article is reviewed for alignment with the journal’s thematic scope, timeliness, scientific quality, language adequacy, and adherence to the “Guidelines for authors” (Click to see the instructions). This evaluation is conducted by the Editors-in-Chief and Associate Editors. Manuscripts that do not meet these standards may be rejected at this stage. If positively assessed, the article proceeds to the peer review stage (step 3).
3. Peer review: The JHRM-AD operates on a transparent and rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure high academic standards. The Executive Editor is responsible for the review process and coordinates it with support from the Editorial Board and the Editors-in-Chief. The blinded peer-review process is ensured by two independent reviewers, selected based on expertise in the relevant HRM domain. If their assessments significantly differ, a third reviewer is invited. The average review time is 30 days. The peer review process is continuously monitored for timeliness and fairness. Reviewers are approached from among the academic and research spheres, considering their scholarly and publication history. The emphasis is placed on efficient and fair evaluation, to adhere to the set peer-review processes. Key evaluation criteria include:
– Results originality
– Value of the theoretical and empirical contributions
– Structure and clarity of the manuscript
– Relevance of the topic to current scientific discourse
– Relevance and possible application of results in organisational practice
– Academic honesty
In structured reviews, reviewers may recommend one of the following outcomes:
(1) acceptance without revision,
(2) acceptance with minor revisions,
(3) revision and resubmission with major changes, or
(4) rejection.
4. Editing of the article by the authors: Authors are informed of the peer review outcome, including all reviewers’ recommendations and questions. If revisions are requested, the authors are expected to submit a revised version within two weeks. The manuscript is then subjected to peer review again (step 3).
5. Final editorial decision: The final decision is made by the Editorial Committee (Editors-in-Chief, Associate Editors), based on peer review results and internal evaluations. The corresponding author is notified promptly via email.
6. Proofreading and manuscript editing: Following a positive final decision (acceptance), the manuscript is subject to professional English language editing and a comprehensive formal check to verify adherence to the manuscript template, including formatting requirements and the correctness of bibliographic references (Click to see the instructions). The operational collaboration with the author(s) of the article continues until the final manuscript is approved by the Executive Editor.
7. Publication: The finalized article is published on the JHRM-AD website in open access format after the Publishing Agreement is signed.
The entire editorial process typically takes 3 to 4 months, depending on the complexity and duration of the peer review phase.
Acceptance rate in 2023: 27.27%
Acceptance rate in 2024: 19.01%
Published articles are archived on the website of the co-publisher the Slovak Academic Association for Personnel Management (SAAPM). Should the journal’s website become unavailable or the publication cease, the archive remains accessible.
