Submissions

Author Guidelines

Become a Reviewer: 
Researcher in Global Business and Economics are invited to mail their interests to become reviewer of this journal and contribute to the development of knowledge creation and diffusion among the researcher across the globe. Please e-mail to the Managing Editor or Co-Managing editor at laval.mamun@gmail.com

Instructions for Authors
Complete guidelines for preparing and submitting your manuscript to this journal are provided below.
The instructions below are specifically directed at the authors who wish to submit a manuscript to the Global Business and Economics Journal (GBEJ).
The Global Business and Economics Journal (GBEJ) considers all manuscripts on the strict condition that they have been submitted only to it; that they neither have been published yet, nor they are under consideration for publication or in press elsewhere. It should be clearly indicated if a submission was previously declined by another journal. Authors who fail to adhere to this condition will be charged with all costs which the Global Business and Economics Journal incurs and their paper will not be published.
Contributions to the Global Business and Economics Journal (GBEJ) must report original research and will be subject to peer-review.
General Information
All papers are to be written in English. The Global Business and Economics Journal (GBEJ) is an internationally refereed journal designed to further the frontiers of knowledge in global business and economics. Each article is reviewed by at least two experts, appointed by the Editorial Board, who will examine the manuscript through a double-blind refereeing process in terms of its relevance, academic rigor and high level applications. An electronic copy prepared in MS Word and printed in Times New Roman typeface should be submitted to the Editorial Board following the requirements presented below.
Structure of the Article
An article should include the following parts: title, authors’ names, name and address of their work place, summary, keywords, introduction (the object and goal of the research, the methods applied, the review of literature and its analysis, etc.), the main text, conclusions or recommendations, references, short biographical note about the contributors at the end of the article (name, surname, academic title and scientific degree, duties, research interests).
Format of the Article
The text of the article should be printed with single intervals on 210×297 mm format pages with the print area of 150×255 mm each. The length of the article should not be less then 8 pages and cannot exceed 25 pages.
The title of the article should be printed in 11 pt bold type and should be centered. There should be a single line space between the title and the author’s name.
The name and surname of the authors should be printed in small letters of 11 pt bold type and should be centred. Below the author’s surname, the name of the institution (represented by the author or coauthors) must be printed in 10 pt italic; its address and the author’s e-mail written and centred.
Abstract and Keywords should be printed single spaced, in 9 pt typeface, in one column and after the institution address and space of three lines below the institution address should be left. Words Abstract and Keywords must be printed in bold. The size of the abstract cannot be less than 600 typographic signs. There should be a space of one line between the abstract and keywords. 6-10 keywords should be provided and selected according to Thesaurus, e.g. http://www.esds.ac.uk/search/hassetSearch.asp.
Introduction, main text and conclusions should be printed in 11 pt type single interval in one column at the distance of 1 line from keywords.
Figures or tables should be mentioned in the text and the place should be indicated in the separate line. The numbers of figures and tables and inscriptions below are written in 9 pt regular typeface. Figures and tables are separated from the text by one-line space.
The titles of chapters and sub-chapters are printed in small letters, 11 pt bold-regular type and aligned left. The introduction, titles of chapters and conclusions are numbered. The titles of chapters and sub-chapters should be separated from the text by one-line space.
The name of the author of the source, the year of publication and pages should be presented in the text in brackets. The list of references is given after the conclusions. The word References is spelled in small letters, 11 pt bold-regular type, left ranged and the list of references in 9 pt. The references are to be presented in the alphabetical order, in the original language; translation into English is given in square brackets. References according to the Harvard citation style, e.g. http://libguides.library.uwa.edu.au/harvard.
The GBEJ put high emphasis on the quality and originality of paper before it decides for publication. No plagiarism is allowed. We use the following software for plagiarism checking.
http://research.ithenticate.com/?code=2377

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement 
General approach to ethics
All research activities must respect fundamental ethics principles. These principles include the need to ensure the freedom of research and the need to protect the physical and moral integrity of individuals and the welfare of animals.
Ethics is an integral part of research from beginning to end, and ethical compliance is seen as pivotal to achieve real research excellence. There is a clear need to make a thorough ethical evaluation from the conceptual stage of the publication not only to respect the legal framework but also to enhance the quality of the research. Ethical research conduct implies the application of fundamental ethical principles and legislation to scientific research in all possible domains of research.
Publisher the journal follows the recommendations and core practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) regarding ethical policies and dealing with misconduct. Misconduct includes falsifying data, plagiarizing others’ works, and breach of confidentiality. Each case will be considered by the publisher and Editor-in-Chief, and in all cases the author (or reviewer) will be contacted directly. However, the publisher reserves the right to speak directly to the author’s or reviewer’s institution or other appropriate organization if severe misconduct is suspected.
Note that if misconduct is suspected during the review process the manuscript will be held until any concerns have been resolved. If misconduct is confirmed during the review process the manuscript will be immediately rejected. If misconduct is proved after publication then the article will be retracted.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Global Business and Economics Journal (GBEJ) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. Authors who submit papers to GBEJ attest that their work is original and unpublished, and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. In addition, authors confirm that their paper is their own; that it has not been copied or plagiarized, in whole or in part, from other works; and that they have disclosed actual or potential conflicts of interest with their work or partial benefits associated with it.

DUTIES OF EDITORS
Decision on the Publication of Articles
The Editors in Chief of GBEJ are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The Editors in Chief may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and subjected to such legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Decision making Editor in Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Review of Manuscripts
Peer review methodology
GBEJ journal uses external experts to help evaluate articles and assist the editors to make a decision.
When articles are submitted they will be checked and any that appear out of scope of the journal, or otherwise unsuitable for consideration, will be rejected immediately.
All other original research articles will be sent out for review. Reviewers are selected based on their experience of the subject matter of the article. They may be selected from the Editorial Board of the journal as well as from elsewhere. The journal editorial offices and editors will identify suitable experts and invite them to review. Some journals welcome suggestions from authors, but reserve the right to select their own reviewers. Equally, if authors have a good reason to request that a particular person should be excluded from review (e.g. because they are working in a competing laboratory), then they may say this when they submit the article. However, the editors’ judgement of reviewer is final.
The journals operate a single-blind method of peer review. This means that the authors’ names are disclosed to the reviewer, but the reviewer names are not disclosed to the authors. If the authors have a specific reason why their name should be blinded from the reviewers they may request this on submission.
Invitations are sent to reviewers and the articles are only sent to them when they agree to review. The reviewing operation is managed through the submission system. Reviewers are given between 2-3 weeks to return their review (some journals set their own time limit), and reminders are sent. However, the journal cannot guarantee a time to decision since reviewers may be late, or there may be problems in finding the right reviewer. In all cases the journal editorial office will endeavor to manage the process as speedily as possible.
When the editors have received at least 2 reviews they will make a decision.
1. Ethical peer review – guideline for reviewers
Publisher complies with the Committee on Publication Ethics Guidelines for Peer Reviewers (https://publicationethics.org/files/Ethical_Guidelines_For_Peer_Reviewers_2.pdf) which provides a comprehensive guide to the ethics of peer review.
Each submission is checked for suitability when received by the editorial office, and may be rejected without review if it is outside the scope of the journal, is obviously of insufficient quality, or is missing important sections.
The journal invites external experts (not only Editorial Board members) to review each article that is considered suitable for consideration. The publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief after receiving at least two external reviewer reports with recommendations.
Authors are encouraged to suggest suitable reviewers, but the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial office reserves the right to select different reviewers. The reason for asking authors to suggest reviewers is that they are best placed to know who is an expert in the field. In addition, the suggested reviewers may be suitable for other articles on the same topic. Therefore, obtaining these names can help the editorial office to ensure that it is approaching suitable people to review all articles.
The journal uses single-blind peer review, which means that, by default, author names are revealed to reviewers but reviewer names are withheld from the authors. Authors can request to “blind” their names.
On receipt of at least two reviews, the Editor-in-Chief will make a decision of (1) accept, (2) minor revision, (3) major revision, or (4) reject. The reasons for the decision will be communicated to the authors.
When the decision of minor/major revision is made, and the authors do not revise their articles satisfactorily after receiving reviewer reports, then the Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject the article. When revised articles are received they will either be sent out for further review or the Editor-in-Chief will make a decision depending on the level of revision requested.
The time to review and make a decision is extremely variable since it is sometimes difficult to find suitable reviewers, and there may be delays in receiving reviewer reports. The Editor-in-Chief and editorial office make all efforts to minimize the time from submission to first decision. The journal aims to make a first decision (after review) within 40–60 days, but cannot guarantee this.
Note that articles that do not report original research (e.g. letters to the editor, editorials) are not externally reviewed and the Editor-in-Chief makes the decision to publish
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
A Conflict of Interest is defined as a situation where personal relationships (e.g. friend, colleague or family), business relationships (e.g. working in a competing company), or financial influences (e.g. funding) will affect the judgement of any person during the publication of the journal.
Authors are required to declare (within the article and to the Editor-in-Chief) any Conflict of Interest (COI) that may have affected their research (e.g. funding) or decision to submit to the journal.
Reviewers are required to declare if they have any Conflict of Interest (COI) that may affect their judgement of any article they review. The COI may not prevent them reviewing the article, but must be declared to the Editor-in-Chief as soon as it is known.
Editors are excluded from any publishing decision in which they may have a Conflict of Interest (COI). For example, if an article by a colleague of the Editor-in-Chief is submitted to the journal, the peer review and all editorial decisions will managed by another editor.
Fair play
Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit without regard to authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
Confidentiality
The Editors in Chief/editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Promptness
In case, any reviewer feels that it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then the same must be communicated to the editor, so that the same could be sent to any other reviewer.
Confidentiality
Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers 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. Any statement that had been previously reported elsewhere should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
What reviewers are asked to do
Reviewers are asked to evaluate the articles for the following:
* Is there a clear objective for the article (e.g. a clear research question)?
* Does the author make suitable reference to other work in the same area of research?
* Is the methodology suitable to support the research?
* Is the reporting of findings clear and complete (so far as can be determined)?
* Do the tables and figures support the text?
* Do the discussion and conclusions accurately reflect on the findings?
* Is the title suitable for the article?
* Is there any suspicion of ethics violation?
Reviewers are asked to always be polite and constructive in their report, and never to be abusive or to make unjustified criticisms of the work.
DUTIES OF AUTHORS
Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others this must be appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple Publications
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Article submissions/ editorial correspondence
Please send your articles to the following e-mails:
info@gbercc.ca
mamun.laval@gmail.com
sparvin@tru.ca
XII. Special issue/s:
Prospective researchers in global business and economics area can send an email to get the permission to publish a special issue.
Please send your request: mamun.laval@gmail.com
XIII.  Abstracting & Indexing: Google Scholar, Research Gate, academia.edu.