Peer Review Guidelines and Process

CU Global Management Review (CUGMR) strictly adheres to a robust and efficient double- blind peer review process, ensuring confidentiality of both the reviewer and author identities. Each manuscript undergoes a thorough evaluation by three referees. All submissions receive prompt review upon receipt, and typically within eight to ten weeks, an editorial decision is reached.

Reviewers, possessing expertise in the primary study area of the submissions, along with at least one reviewer from a discipline different from the author's, meticulously assess the manuscripts. Initial scrutiny by the editors ensures that only submissions meeting the editorial and methodological standards of the journal and aligning with its objectives progress to external review.

The recommendations provided by the reviewers determine whether an article is:

Accepted
Accepted with minor modifications
Accepted subject to resubmission with significant changes
Rejected.

The same set of reviewers will assess articles requiring modifications to ensure the acceptable quality of the updated content.
In cases involving multiple authors, the designated "corresponding author" assumes responsibility for collecting and submitting the copyright form from each co-author after acceptance.

Review Process Guidelines:

• After receiving the manuscript, the foundational structure of the paper will undergo a thorough review, adhering to the guidelines outlined by the journal.
• The Editor will conduct a plagiarism check, and any instance of plagiarism will be addressed with a strict zero-tolerance policy.
• If the Editor-in-Chief/Editor is dissatisfied with the assessment of the initial two aspects mentioned, the manuscript may be returned for further refinement.
• Once the Editor-in-Chief/Editor approves the aforementioned requirements, the manuscript will be assigned to two reviewers, namely Reviewers 1 and 2, based on its subject matter. In addition, a third reviewer, who is a member of the English faculty, will assess the manuscript specifically for grammar.
• Upon satisfaction with the aforementioned requirements, the manuscript will be assigned to two reviewers (Reviewers 1 & 2) based on its subject matter. If Reviewers 1 and 2 offer congruent comments, whether positive or negative, the manuscript will not proceed to Reviewer 3.
• However, in cases where Reviewers 1 and 2 present divergent opinions, the manuscript will be forwarded to Reviewer 3 for additional evaluation.
• The final decision to either reject the manuscript or advance it to the next phase will be based on the collective feedback from Reviewers 1, 2, and 3.
• Upon receipt of the reviewers' feedback, the author(s) will be invited to revise the manuscript accordingly.
• The revised version will be reevaluated by the same set of reviewers who assessed the initial submission.
• The acceptance or rejection of the manuscript for publication will be determined based on the feedback provided by the reviewers. Once accepted by the Editorial Board, the articles will be published in a designated issue.