Conflict of Interest Policy

To ensure the absolute objectivity, credibility, and transparency of research published within the International Journal of Business Operations and Management Studies, all participants in the peer-review and publication process must disclose any financial or personal relationships that could potentially bias their actions or judgments.

A conflict of interest exists when a primary professional judgment—such as evaluating research validity—may be compromised, influenced, or perceived to be influenced by a secondary interest, such as commercial gain, institutional loyalty, or personal rivalry.

1. Obligations for Authors

Authors must explicitly declare all financial and non-financial competing interests that are directly or closely related to the research framework, datasets, or organizations discussed within the manuscript.

1.1 Financial Disclosures

During the submission phase, authors are required to disclose any financial relationships that could be perceived as potential sources of bias. These include, but are not limited to:

• Direct Funding and Grants: Financial support, institutional sponsorships, or travel grants received from commercial entities, industry associations, or corporate bodies with a direct interest in the research outcomes.

• Employment and Consultancies: Current or recent employment, paid consultancies, or expert testimonies for organizations that stand to gain or lose financially from the publication of the study.

• Financial Holdings: Ownership of stocks, shares, patents, or patent applications related to the tools, frameworks, or corporate entities analyzed in the manuscript.

1.2 Non-Financial and Personal Disclosures

Authors must disclose personal, professional, or academic relationships that might create a conflict. This includes holding an advisory role or board membership at a company evaluated in the paper, or maintaining a close personal relationship with an individual positioned to benefit from the published conclusions.

1.3 Standard Disclosure Statements

The conflict of interest declaration must be embedded in the manuscript file, immediately preceding the reference section. Authors must use one of the following standardized disclosure templates:

Option A (No Conflicts):

"The authors declare no competing financial or non-financial interests regarding the design, execution, analysis, or publication of this research."

Option B (Conflicts Exist):

"The authors declare the following competing interests: Dr. [Author Name] has received research funding from [Company Name]. Professor [Author Name] serves as an advisor to [Organization Name]. The remaining authors declare no competing interests."

2. Obligations for Peer Reviewers

The double-blind peer-review system relies entirely on the neutrality of external referees. Reviewers must immediately recuse themselves from an assignment if they recognize a potential conflict of interest that could compromise their objective evaluation.

                  [Review Invitation Received]
                                │
                                ▼
              [Screening for Potential Conflicts]
                                │
         ┌──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┐
         ▼                                             ▼
 [Conflict Identified]                       [No Conflict Identified]
         │                                             │
         ▼                                             ▼
 [Formally Recuse Self]                      [Accept Review Assignment]
 (Notify Editorial Office)                    (Maintain Anonymity)

Reviewers must decline a review invitation under the following conditions:

• Institutional Affiliation: The reviewer shares a current institutional affiliation with the authors, or has been employed by the authors' host institution within the past three years.

• Recent Collaboration: The reviewer has co-authored publications, joint grant proposals, or active research projects with any of the authors within the past three years.

• Direct Competition: The reviewer is engaged in a highly competitive, identical project that could create a personal incentive to delay or unfairly critique the author's submission.

• Commercial Relevancy: The manuscript evaluates a commercial product or service where the reviewer holds a direct financial stake, patent, or competing consultancies.

3. Obligations for Editors and Editorial Board Members

The final authority to accept or reject a manuscript rests with the editorial leadership. Therefore, editors are held to the most stringent conflict of interest boundaries.

3.1 Recusal Protocol

Editors must hand over the management of a manuscript to an alternative, independent member of the Editorial Board if:

• The manuscript is authored by a colleague working within their same university department or institutional research unit.

• The manuscript is authored by a recent research collaborator or former PhD advisee.

• The editor has a financial or consulting relationship with a corporate entity that is central to the paper’s empirical analysis.

3.2 Submissions by Editorial Board Members

To ensure absolute fairness, manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, or permanent Editorial Board members undergo a separated, confidential workflow.

4. Management of Unreported Conflicts

If an undisclosed conflict of interest is discovered post-submission or post-publication, the journal follows the standard investigation flowcharts established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

If the investigation confirms that a material conflict was intentionally withheld, the journal will issue a formal Expression of Concern or, in severe instances where research conclusions are compromised, proceed with a formal Retraction of the Version of Record.