Home > Editorial Policies
Focus and Scope
Journal of Modern Project Management
This journal flagship is the applicability academic research on project, program and portfolio management field.
The mission of the JMPM – Journal of Modern Project Management is to advance knowledge and science and to stimulate greater thought and effort in the fields of PM theory and practice by providing readers with:
- New and helpful information;
- New PM theory or techniques;
- Research generalizations about PM thoughts and practices;
- PM understanding by researchers and practitioners;
- Creative views and syntheses of dispersed concepts in PM and;
- Articles in subject areas which have significant current impact on thought and practice in PM, which present challenges for the future.
Regular articles accepted for publication in JMPM must have clear implications for practitioners who manage product and process design, operations, and supply chains based on one or more of a variety of rigorous research methodologies. Manuscripts accepted for publication must meet the following criteria:
- Research papers in the field of PM in manufacturing and services.
- Research rigor applied through the scientific theory-building approach.
- Managerial relevance.
- All manuscripts should be submitted in English. It covers all topics in projects to product and process design, operations, and supply chain management and welcomes papers using any research paradigm.
The focus of articles for the JMPM should be on the managerial situation or the theory being studied rather than the solution techniques being developed or used. Highest priority is thus given to studies that are anchored in the real world and build, extend or test generalizable theories or frameworks of managerial significance. Most often such studies result from either identifying an actual, new managerial situation for which existing theory is inadequate – thereby resulting in an addition to theory – or else testing multiple existing theories against actual managerial situations to determine their relevance – thereby enhancing theory through subtraction.
Journal articles include four categories of material:
- Articles that report empirical research. Such survey research must justify its contribution to the discipline.
- Articles that report on the development of methodologies and techniques that can enhance PM decision making.
- Articles reporting the application of decision tools to generic or specific PM problems. Such applications must either generalize current insight or extend the application of such decision tools.
- Invited articles from acknowledged leaders in the PM discipline.
General topics covered by the journal, while not exclusive, include the following:
- Project and Organizational design, planning, decision and sense making, decomposition systems and innovation
- Project and Operations management in process, manufacturing and service organizations; digital services
- Project, Program and Portfolio strategy and policy;
- Product and service design, development and innovation;
- Manufacturing and service systems design;
- Technology management for operations;
- Multi-site operations management;
- Capacity planning and analysis;
- Operations planning, scheduling and control;
- Project management;
- Human resource management for operations;
- Work design, measurement and improvement;
- Performance measurement and productivity;
- Quality management;
- Purchasing/sourcing systems;
- Materials and inventory management;
- Logistics, transportation, distribution, and materials handling;
- Supply Chain management;
- International and comparative operations;
- Operations and information management;
- Environmental issues in operations.
Manuscripts should be between 8.000 and 10.000 words, typically 15-20 double-spaced, typewritten pages. Articles of shorter length are also acceptable.
The primary audience includes researchers who are interested in advancing the field and practitioners who manage projects, programs, portfolio, product and process design, operations, and supply chains. The journal presents to this audience the concepts, theories, and research methods that address currently unresolved issues in project management.
Peer Review Process
Articles are considered for publication if they have not been published or accepted for publication elsewhere and are not being concurrently considered elsewhere. Authors will usually be notified of acceptance, rejection, or need for revision within 8 weeks of submission.
When editing by Journal staff is extensive, articles are returned to the author(s) for review prior to being typeset. No manuscript is accepted for the JMPM until it has been reviewed by the Editor or one of the Associate Editors and at least two outside reviewers who are experts in their respective fields. In most cases, the reviewers are drawn from the Review Board and represent a combination of practitioners and academics. Manuscripts are reviewed simultaneously by geographically separated reviewers.
The author’s name(s) and credentials (i.e., the cover page and “about the authors” page) are removed prior to review to maximize objectivity and ensure that the manuscripts are judged solely on the basis of content, clarity, and contribution to the field. The author’s name(s) should not appear anywhere except the cover page and the “About the Authors” page.
All manuscripts are judged on their contribution to the advancement of the science and/ or practice of PM. JMPM editors expect all manuscripts to follow accepted standards for scholarly work. Manuscripts are judged not only on depth and scope of ideas presented and their contribution to the field, but also on their clarity, organization, readability, and comprehensibility. Manuscripts should be written in a manner that is interesting and readable to both practitioners and academics. It is beneficial to include a section regarding managerial implications and discussion of the consequences of applying the proposed ideas. Technical terms should be defined.
Manuscript Review Process
Submissions to the editorial office are first evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief for their appropriateness to the mission and objectives of JMPM. If deemed appropriate, the paper is then sent out for review using a double blind process. The first review of every manuscript is performed by two anonymous referees. In addition, the reviews for every paper submitted are reviewed by a member of the Associate Editor Board. The paper is then either accepted, rejected, or sent back to the author(s) for revision. Revised papers are then sent back to an Associate Editor who makes an evaluation of the acceptability of the revision. Based upon the Associate Editor’s evaluation, the paper is then either accepted, rejected, or returned to the author(s) for another revision. The second revision is then evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief, possibly in consultation with the Associate Editor who handled the original paper and the first revision, for a usually final resolution. The editorial office strives to respond to all authors within three months for the first submission, two months for a revision and one month for a second revision.
JMPM is a Quad-Monthly publication.
It gives us great pleasure to announce the engaging contents of the new issue of the Journal of Modern Project Management. This issue features a considerable range of topics, from understanding projects in service and manufacturing organizations to cooperation between product lifecycle and innovation in all kind of industries.
We expect that this discussion about project management has strength the fundamentals themes such as “inspiring” for all the industries today.
Finally, we hope that you find both the issues interesting and thought-provoking.
Ethics and Malpractice Statement
A publication ethics and publication malpractice statement
This terms are composed using the Publishing ethics resource kit and in compliance with Elsevier recommendations.
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal JMPM is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.
Mundo Press as publisher of the journal JMPM takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.
We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Mundo Press and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
Duties of authors
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.
Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ëopinioní works should be clearly identified as such.
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 data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ëpassing offí anotherís paper as the authorís own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of anotherís paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
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. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
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. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the authorís obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Duties of the Editorial Board
The editor of a peer-reviewed journal JMPM is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor 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, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
Duties of reviewers
(These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPEís Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors).
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Elsevier shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees 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 an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewerís own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.