SCHEMA: Studies of Contemporary Approaches and Management applies a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and academic integrity of every manuscript submitted to the journal. The peer-review process is designed to support fair editorial decisions and to improve the scholarly quality of published articles.

All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the editorial team to determine their suitability with the journal’s focus and scope, compliance with author guidelines, originality, academic quality, and adherence to publication ethics. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s basic requirements may be returned to the authors or declined before being sent for peer review.

Review Model

Review Type	Double-blind peer review
Reviewer Identity	The identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors.
Author Identity	The identities of authors are not disclosed to reviewers during the review process.
Estimated Review Period	The review process normally takes approximately 4–8 weeks, depending on reviewer availability, manuscript quality, and revision requirements.

Stages of the Peer Review Process

No.	Stage	Description
1	Initial Submission	Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal’s online submission system. The manuscript must follow the journal template, author guidelines, and ethical publication standards.
2	Editorial Screening	The editorial team checks the manuscript for focus and scope suitability, formatting, completeness, plagiarism indication, reference quality, and basic academic standards.
3	Reviewer Assignment	Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers who have expertise relevant to the topic of the manuscript.
4	Peer Review	Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on originality, relevance, theoretical contribution, methodology, analysis, discussion, references, and overall contribution to management studies.
5	Editorial Decision	Based on reviewer recommendations, the editor makes an editorial decision regarding the manuscript.
6	Revision	Authors may be asked to revise the manuscript according to reviewer and editor comments. Revised manuscripts must be resubmitted with clear responses to the reviewers’ comments.
7	Final Decision	After revision and further editorial evaluation, the manuscript may be accepted, returned for further revision, or rejected.

Editorial Decisions

The possible editorial decisions include:

• Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted for publication.
• Revisions Required: The manuscript requires minor or moderate revisions before further consideration.
• Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires substantial revision and may be sent for another round of peer review.
• Decline Submission: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal.

Review Criteria

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

• Relevance to the focus and scope of the journal
• Originality and novelty of the study
• Clarity of research objectives or problems
• Appropriateness of theoretical framework and literature review
• Soundness of research methodology
• Quality of data analysis and interpretation
• Strength of discussion and contribution to knowledge
• Accuracy and relevance of references
• Compliance with publication ethics
• Clarity, structure, and academic quality of writing

Confidentiality and Ethics

All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality and must not share, discuss, or use any information from the manuscript for personal advantage. Reviewers are also expected to provide objective, constructive, and unbiased feedback.

Reviewers who have a conflict of interest with the authors, research topic, institution, or funding source must inform the editor and decline the review invitation. The journal is committed to maintaining transparency, fairness, and ethical standards throughout the editorial and peer-review process.