Articles submitted to the Kafkas University Journal of Management and Informatics undergo a two-stage evaluation process:

This two-step process aims to ensure both scientific quality and adherence to publication ethics. In the first stage, known as the internal review process, the editor and field editors examine whether the submitted manuscripts comply with the journal’s scope, publication policies, and writing guidelines. Manuscripts found suitable are then forwarded to the second stage—the external review process—where they are evaluated by at least two independent expert reviewers under the principles of double-blind peer review.

Articles submitted through the DergiPark system first undergo a pre-editorial control (internal review) conducted by the editor, associate editors, and field editors. In this stage, manuscripts are carefully examined for their alignment with the journal’s aims and scope, publication policy, ethical principles, and formatting guidelines. The scientific adequacy, formal structure, and compliance with journal standards are also evaluated.

In the initial evaluation stage, the editor examines whether the submitted manuscript aligns with the journal’s aims, scope, and publication policy. Manuscripts deemed appropriate are directed to a preliminary review process conducted by the associate editors and field editors. In this process, each manuscript is assigned one associate editor and one field editor to serve as internal reviewers.

The associate editor, acting as the first internal reviewer, checks the manuscript’s compliance with formal standards, writing rules, and ethical principles. The associate editor also reviews the iThenticate similarity report. At this stage, the editor manages all communication between the author and the associate editor.

The field editor, serving as the second internal reviewer, evaluates the manuscript in terms of subject relevance, contribution to the literature, methodological adequacy, data presentation, and discussion of findings. The editor is responsible for coordinating all communication throughout this stage. Based on the field editor’s assessment, a decision is made as to whether the manuscript should proceed to external review. The editor makes the final decision. Manuscripts found suitable are advanced to the external review process, whereas those rejected are returned to their authors with an explanation of the reasons.

In this stage, which constitutes the external evaluation process, manuscripts are reviewed by at least two external referees who are experts in the relevant field and who are not members of the journal’s editorial board. During the selection of reviewers, both the suitability of their expertise to the manuscript’s subject and their institutional independence are taken into consideration. Efforts are made to ensure that the authors and reviewers are affiliated with different institutions. At this stage, reviewers are expected to evaluate the originality of the study, its methodological consistency, contribution to the literature, the interpretation of findings, the validity of conclusions, and the accuracy of references.

If deemed necessary, the editor may assign a third reviewer during the peer-review process. Reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions: acceptance, revision (minor/major), or rejection. For a manuscript to be accepted and published, the majority of reviewers must express a positive opinion. In cases of conflicting reviews, an additional evaluation by a third reviewer is conducted to reach a decision.

At this stage, authors are required to make the necessary revisions in accordance with the reviewers’ suggestions and upload the revised manuscript to the system within the specified time frame. After revision, the manuscript may be re-evaluated by the same reviewers. If the reviewers’ reports remain negative, the editor reserves the right to reject the manuscript.

In the peer-review process, external reviewers must not have any conflict of interest with the authors of the manuscripts they evaluate or with any supporting institutions. Therefore, the review process must be conducted entirely on the principles of impartiality and confidentiality.

Reviewers must not share any information regarding the manuscripts they evaluate with third parties. If they detect plagiarism or any ethical violation, they are obliged to inform the editor. In cases where a reviewer feels not sufficiently qualified in the subject matter of the manuscript or unable to complete the review within the given timeframe, they should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Once the external evaluation process of the submitted manuscripts is completed, the editor makes the final decision on whether the manuscript will be accepted for publication, sent back for revision, or rejected, taking into account the reviewers’ reports. Although favourable reviewer reports play a significant role in the decision-making process, they are not binding for the editor or the editorial board.

Manuscripts accepted for publication undergo a final formatting and language review. The English abstracts of Turkish manuscripts are reviewed by a language editor, while English manuscripts are reviewed by a language specialist. Accepted papers are then scheduled for publication in the relevant issue of the journal, and the author(s) are notified of the acceptance through the DergiPark system.