Management Rules

Base Management Rules

 

Introduction


These management rules aim to make clear how the BASE organizational structure works, what are the roles of those involved, eligibility criteria and other requirements that meet the standard proposed by the Best Scientific Editorial Practices Handbook of Anpad

Journal Goal

The journal goal is to publish scientific articles of high quality, relevance and scientific rigor in the areas of Management and Accounting, for professionals and academics from these two areas and also by the general public.

 

Management Structure


The diagram below shows BASE management structure.

  0    Editorial Policy Board 
  1  Editors
  2  Scientific Editorial Boar
  3  Reviewers

The journal has a lean organizational structure, composed by the Editorial Policy Board, the editors of the journal, the scientific editorial board and the reviewers. Below we define the eligibility criteria and responsibilities of those involved.

It is important to highlight that this structure is renewed and/or revalidated every three years. The journal editors are defined under the supervision of the Editorial Policy Board. The members of this committee and the members of the Scientific Editorial Board are also renewed or revalidated every three years. Renewals in both groups occurs only partly (maximum 50% of members) in order to preserve, as far as possible, the history and accumulated knowledge in the journal management.


Editorial Policy Board

Eligibility Criteria

A member of the Editorial Policy Board must have:

  • Leadership and acknowledgement as a researcher in the field of Management or Accounting.
  • History of qualified publication in journals.
  • History of good performance as a journal reviewer and/or journal editor.
  • Career as representative of its area in external institutions (research institutions, associations, etc.).

Roles

This is an interdisciplinary group composed of experts in Management and Accounting of different institutions in Brazil and abroad. The Editorial Policy Board sets the editorial policy of the journal and work together in meetings and voting (face to face or virtually).This committee has no involvement with the content of articles or specific numbers of the journal. Rather they supervise the collection of the journal as a whole. This board establishes guidelines to journal practices.

 

Editors

Eligibility Criteria

The choice of editors is supervised by the Editorial Policy Board, considering the following criteria:

  • Leadership and acknowledgement as a researcher in the field of Management or Accounting.
  • History of qualified publication in journals.
  • History of good performance as a journal reviewer.
  • Cordiality and good interpersonal relationships with researchers and other professionals.
  • Competence to review manuscripts with high quality.
  • Work plan for the journal.

Roles

  • To supervise the entire publishing process of the journal.
  • To publish guidelines to authors and keep it updated.
  • To publish guidelines for the peer review process and keep it updated.
  • To make pre-assessment of submitted manuscripts (desk review) within 30 days maximum. To communicate the editorial decision to authors.
  • To allocate reviewers to double blind review of articles.
  • When necessary (in case of discrepancy of reviews between two reviewers) to require a third reviewer.
  • To ensure that the reviews observe:
  • The originality of the analyzed manuscript;
  • The importance of the work to the areas of Management or accounting;
  • A sound theoretical research foundation;
  • The rigor in the research method used;
  • Aspects for improvement and a verdict about the manuscript publication or rejection.
  • To ensure the accomplishment of review deadlines by the reviewers.
  • To coordinate the submission of evaluations by reviewers, solving doubts and promoting the quality of advice and communication with authors.
  • To make the final decision about publishing a manuscript or not, considering its originality, clarity and relevance to the area of Management or Accounting.
  • To request assurances that articles that address sensitive issues (health, children's conditions, among others) have been approved by an appropriate ethical agency.
  • To not allow that individual interests or interests from institutions that finance the journal compromise its academic standards.
  • To ensure the confidentiality and integrity of all materials submitted to the journal, especially during the review stage.
  • To publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when necessary.
  • To readily withdraw an article that for any reason (and based on evidence) is identified as fraudulent.
  • To manage conflicts of interest involved in the editorial process: those of authors, reviewers, members of the Editorial Policy Board or from the Scientific Editorial board, and their own.
  • To disclose the means to send complaints about the journal, and seek to answer them as soon as possible.

Reviewers

Eligibility Criteria

The choice of reviewers is made by the editors and supervised by the Editorial Policy Board, considering the following criteria:

  • A reviewer must be a doctor in his/her area of expertise.
  • History of qualified publication in journals.
  • Competence to review manuscripts with high quality.
  • Cordiality and capacity to constructive criticism.

Roles and guidelines for reviewers

  • A reviewer should only accept the task of evaluating a manuscript if he/she is professionally qualified in the manuscript subject.
  • A reviewer should inform the editor if he/she knows the author's identity. Reviewers can not belong to the same institution of any of the manuscript authors or if them are usually co-authors.
  • A reviewer should carefully read the editorial policy and instructions to reviewers, which are updated whenever necessary.
  • The reviews should be well prepared, constructive and delivered on time to BASE editors. Be sure that the review considers:
  • The originality of the analyzed manuscript;
  • The importance of the work to the areas of Management or accounting;
  • A sound theoretical research foundation;
  • The rigor in the research method used;
  • Aspects for improvement and a verdict about the manuscript publication or rejection.
  • The main purpose of a review is to help to improve the manuscript, so it is requested that reviewers use a positive tone, a cordial and constructive evaluation.
  • It is recommended to make a review after a full, in depth read of a manuscript, in a single work session. Reviewers have to do their best to point out any changes considered appropriate in the first review of a manuscript.
  • A reviewer should try to avoid the influence of paradigm differences in his/her decision on a manuscript. Consider the innovation and relevance of the evaluated articles.
  • A reviewer must point out the correctable flaws in an article and indicate what can be done to overcome them. A reviewer has to evaluate the cost-benefit of each change requested to authors, in order to improve the manuscript quality.
  • Whenever necessary, a reviewer has to suggest to the authors references and relevant information for improving the manuscript.
  • If some flaws in the paper are incorrigible, evaluate the possibility of pointing them out as limitations of the article. If a reviewer recommend the rejection of a paper, he/she has to point out the reasons for rejection with objectivity and clarity.


ISSN: 1984-8196 - Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License

São Leopoldo, RS. Av. Unisinos, 950. Bairro Cristo Rei, CEP: 93.022 -750. Atendimento Unisinos +55 (51) 3591 1122