Optimization: Journal of Research in Management (ISSN 0974-0988)
Guidelines for Authors
Optimization: Journal of Research in Management (ISSN 0974-0988) is double blind review journal. It welcomes original papers from both academicians and practitioners on management, business, and organizational issues. Papers, based on theoretical or empirical research should exemplify the practical applicability and/or policy implications of work described.
The manuscript should be accompanied by the following: (1) An abstract of 80‐100 words along with five key words; (2) A brief profile of the author/s describing author’s name, current designation and affiliation, contact address, phone/fax numbers and e-mail address etc. The authors should send a declaration stating that the paper has neither been published nor will it be submitted elsewhere till the editorial decision from ‘Optimization’: Journal of Research in Management has been communicated. Recommended length of the manuscript should not exceed 8,000 words. All tables, charts, and graphs should be placed with the content and should be in black and not in color. Wherever necessary, the source should be indicated at the bottom. The number and complexity of exhibits should be as low as possible. Authors are expected to adhere to standards of correct academic writing. References indicated at the bottom should be complete in all respects, with authors’ names arranged alphabetically.
We request authors to follow the APA Style developed by the American Psychological Association.
Book: Single author
In-Text Citation: (Pegrum, 2009)
Reference List: Pegrum, M. (2009). From blogs to bombs: The future of electronic technologies in education. Crawley, W.A: UWA Publishing.
Book: Two authors
In-Text Citation: (Page & Stritzke, 2015) But when outside parenthesis: Page and Stritzke (2015) suggested that ...
Reference List: Page, A. C., & Stritzke, W. G. K. (2015). Clinical psychology for trainees: Foundations of science-informed practice (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Book: Chapter [ie. article] in edited book
In-Text Citation: (Groundwater-Smith, 2007)
Reference List: Groundwater-Smith, S. (2007). As rain is to fields, so good teachers are to students. In S. Knipe (Ed.), Middle years schooling: Reframing adolescence (pp. 151-170). Frenchs Forest, N.S.W: Pearson Education Australia.
Journal article in print: 8 or more authors
In-Text Citation: (Sohrabi et al., 2011)
Reference List: Sohrabi, H. R., Weinborn, M., Badcock, J., Bates, K. A., Clarnette, R., Trivedi, D. Martins, R. N. (2011). New lexicon and criteria for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Lancet Neurology, 10(4), 299-300.
Journal article online
In-Text Citation: (Gagné et al., 2015)
Reference List: Gagné, M., Forest, J., Vansteenkiste, M., Crevier-Braud, L., van den Broeck, A., Aspeli, A. K., . . . Westbye, C. (2015). The Multidimensional Work Motivation Scale: Validation evidence in seven languages and nine countries. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(2), 178-196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2013.877892
All Correspondence should be addressed to:
GL Bajaj Institute of Management and Research
Plot No. 2 Knowledge Park – III, Greater Noida
G.B. Nagar, (U.P.) – 0201306 India.
E-mail: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
‘Optimization’: Journal of Research in Management reserves the right to make editorial amendments to the final draft of the manuscript to suit the journal’s requirements. Communication regarding editorial changes and proofs for correction will be sent to the first author unless otherwise indicated.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions:
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity:
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest:
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.