Articles Evaluation Standards

To evaluate articles individually commissioned by a member or for the Editorial Board to determine if articles are acceptable for publishing, the following standards apply.

1. Importance of the research topic (theoretical, practical, and educational contribution)
2. Appropriateness and creativity of research methods
3. Effective communication of the research report

Evaluation Process of Articles

1. Only drafts that meet KASBA's contribution guidelines are reviewed. Therefore, if a draft does not meet the contribution guidelines, the editor in chief can request an improved draft from the contributor.

2. When an article is received, the editor in chief must notify the authors of the date of receipt, and at the same time, ask the relevant area editor to select 2 reviewers.

3. If a member of the Editorial Board is submitting his/her own article, the area editor must select an interim editor that will appoint reviewers.

4. Submitted articles must be blindly reviewed (the authors' names are kept secret to the reviewers, and the reviewer's names are kept secret to the authors) by 2 reviewers. After the 1st round of reviewer, the area editor must submit their opinions on whether or not to publish to the editor in chief. The editor in chief must give the area editor's recommendations and the review results to the authors, and can request revisions to the article based on the review' results. If the review results are tied among those in favor and those not in favor of publishing, the editor in chief can consult the area editor and a third reviewer to make a final decision on acceptance.

5. Reviewer commissioned by the editor to review an article must finish their review within 21 days from the date of acceptance, and must return the results to the editor in accordance with the editorial guideline. If a selected reviewer cannot review an article because of unavoidable circumstances, he/she must immediately notify the editor.

6. Authors that receive a revision request from the editor in chief must revise and resubmit their article to the Editorial Board within 3 months after receiving the request. The authors must submit the revised article along with a revision note. If the author does not submit a revised article within the deadline without prior notification, the article will be considered withdrawn from the review process.

7. An article must be revised by the authors, and the revised article must be re-reviewed by the same reviewer from the 1st round. Reviewers assigned to review the revised article must finish the reviewer within 14 days of the commission and return the results to the editor in chief.

8. The editor in chief must publish articles that have passed the above review process.

9. Even articles from invited authors must pass the above review process and undergo necessary revisions before publishing.

The Korean Management Review has no specific draft submission deadline. Also, only regular members of the Korean Academic Society of Business Administration (KASBA) have the right to contribute, and among the invited contributors, the right to contribute is also extended to graduate students. Articles that have undergone the evaluation process and are approved for publication will be published in the Korean Management Review according to their publication approval order. However, the chief editor can adjust this order considering the composition of the journal. Please refer to the following matters when submitting an article, and please submit online.

[Member]
Quasi-member: A person who subscribes only online (homepage) without paying membership fees.
One-year member(regular member): A person who has paid membership fees for the year after registering as a member of THE KOREAN ACADEMIC SOCIETY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION.
Lifetime member(regular member): A person who fulfills his obligation to pay membership fees by paying lifetime membership fees for the membership of THE KOREAN ACADEMIC SOCIETY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION.
Individual Member: 100,000Won (valid for one year), 400,000Won (valid for life) Group Member(Library and Research Institute): 150,000Won (1 year), 3,000,000Won (lifetime effective)

1. Draft submission and revision dates are based on the dates registered on the DBPIA system.

2. When contributing a draft, submitters must conduct an article similarity test through the Korea Citation Index (KCI, https://check.kci.go.kr/) and submit the results. Only articles that do not exceed a 10% similarity rate will enter the evaluation process.

3. The draft must be written in Korean, Korean-Chinese characters, or English.

4. The draft must be written in the A4 paper size in Hangul or MS Word, and the draft should be 20 top/bottom, 30 left/right, 25 header/footer, 160 line spacing, 18 large heading, 10 body text, 37 lines per page, and up to 20 pages.

5. If an article is approved for publication, the authors must revise and submit a final draft to the Editorial Board, and at the same time, the authors must conduct a final check the following matters and submit the following relevant documents to the Editorial Board.

① Check the bibliography and citations (submit self-checklist)
② Check that the publication fee is received (submit deposit receipt)

(6. deleted, Jul. 9, 2019)

7. The English abstract must be Max 200 words including purpose and results, and keywords must be specified on the bottom.

8. If possible, the technical terms must be in Korean, but if a term is difficult to translate, it may be in English; and English can be added after the term in parentheses to help understand the translated term.

9. All charts and figures must be drawn clearly, and a relevant number (ex: <Table 1>, <Figure 3>), title, and description must be included.

10. Footnotes should only be added when absolutely necessary, and the authors should attach the serial number on the upper left of the phrase and the content should be written at the bottom of the page.

11. The bibliography must be written in a different chapter at the end of the text. In the case of English literature, it shall be written in alphabetical and annual order. In the case of Korean literature, Only English are written. The method of notation of reference literature is as follows (English writing: listed in alphabetical order).
Hong, K. D.(2000), “Ganadaramabasa”, Korea Management Review, 49(1), pp.00-00.

12. Citations in the body text must show the name and year of publication. Also, if a specific part is cited, the page number must be included as well. In the body text, the order of citations must follow the order of the bibliography.

(Example) (Kim, 1978) / (Beyer, 1991, p.150)

13. For periodicals, the bibliography must be written in the order of author's name, year, subject of the article, name of periodical (gothic font for domestic articles, italic font for foreign articles), volume, and page number. For non-periodicals, the bibliography must be written in the order of author's name, publication name (gothic font for domestic articles, italic font for foreign articles), published editions (2nd edition or higher), volume (2 volumes or more), place of publication, and name of publisher.

O'Reilly, C., A. Chatman, and D. F. Caldwell(1991), “People and Organizational Culture: Profile Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-Organization Fit,” Academy of Management Journal, 34(2), pp.487-516.
Organ, D. W.(1988), Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The “Good Soldier” Syndrome, Lexington Books, New York.
Rousseau, D. M., and J. M. Parks(1993), “The Contracts of Individuals and Organizations,” in L. L. Cummings and B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwich, CT, JAI Press, pp.1-43.
Gartner, "Gartner's Hype Cycles for 2015: Five Megatrends Shift the Computing Landscape", 2015, Available at http://www.gartner.com.

In order to contribute to the accumulation of knowledge in the business administration field in Korea, the Korean Management Review is a journal that publishes empirical and conceptual research articles across all fields of business administration, provides an opportunity for academic discussions among the members of the Korean Academic Society of Business Administration (KASBA), and provide academic materials for research and education. Therefore, the Editorial Board aims to quickly and fairly evaluate, edit, and publish high quality business administration articles for the academic development of KASBA.

1. Contributors to the "Korean Management Review" are limited to the members of KASBA. However, invited contributors or graduate student coauthors are exceptions.

2. The research articles but not have been published in other periodicals.

3. Authors are responsible for the contents of the article.

4. Unless otherwise specified, the copyright of the article belongs to KASBA.

5. After an article is confirmed for publication, the authors must pay the 200,000 KRW (if there is outside research funding) or 100,000 KRW (if there is no outside research funding) publication fee if the volume is less than 20 pages, and the authors must pay an additional 5,000 KRW per page if the article is 21 or more pages. (Applies from Volume 48, Issue 6, changed Aug. 21, 2019)

5. Contributed articles are not returned.

7. Evaluation Process of Articles

① Only drafts that meet KASBA's contribution guidelines are evaluated. Therefore, if a draft does not meet the contribution guidelines, the chief editor can request an improved draft from the contributor.

② When an article is received, the chief editor must notify the authors of the date of receipt over the Internet, and at the same time, ask the relevant chief area editor to select 2 evaluators.

③ If a member of the Editorial Board is contributing his/her own article, the chief editor must select an interim member that will appoint evaluators.

④ Contributed articles must be blindly evaluated (the authors' names are kept secret to the evaluators, and the evaluator's names are kept secret to the authors) by 2 evaluators. After the 1st round of evaluation, the chief area editor must submit their opinions on whether or not to publish to the chief editor. The chief editor must give the chief area editor's recommendations and the evaluation results to the authors, and can request revisions to the article based on the evaluators' results. If the evaluation results are tied among those in favor and those not in favor of publishing, the chief editor can consult the chief area editor and a third party to make a final decision on publishing.

⑤ Evaluators commissioned by the chief editor to evaluate an article must finish their evaluation within 21 days from the date of commission, and must return the results to the chief editor over the Internet in accordance with the manner designated by the Editorial Board. If a selected evaluator cannot evaluate an article because of unavoidable circumstances, he/she must immediately notify the chief editor.

⑥ Writers that receive a revision request from the chief editor must revise and resubmit their article to the Editorial Board within 3 months of receiving the request. The write must submit the revised article along with a revision outline. If the writer does not submit a revised article within the deadline without prior notification of his/her circumstances, the article will be considered withdrawn from the evaluation process.

⑦ An article must be revised by the authors, and the revised article must be reevaluated by the same evaluators from the 1st round. Evaluators commissioned with evaluating the revised article must finish the evaluation within 14 days of the commission and return the results to the chief editor over the Internet.

⑧ The chief editor must only publish articles that have passed the above evaluation process.

⑨ Even articles from special contributors must pass the above evaluation process and undergo necessary revisions before publishing.

8. The standards for publishing an article in accordance with Article 10 of the Detailed Enforcement Regulations are as follows:

① Importance of the research topic (theoretical, practical, and educational contribution)

② Creativity of the content

③ Validity of the research method

④ Effective communication of the article's contents

⑤ Other editing technical requirements

1. Are all the documents cited in the text written in the reference?
2. Are all the references cited in the text?
3. Have you complied with the body citation form of this journal?
4. Did you observe the bibliography of this journal?
5. Did you confirm that there is no plagiarism in the paper?

• Author Checklist

The purpose of these Regulations on Research Ethics (hereinafter Ethics Regulations) is to ensure the ethical research and integrity of the members of KASBA (hereinafter members) and present standards for preventing research misconduct and fairly verifying misconduct.

These Ethics Regulations apply to all persons related to the Korean Management Review. These regulations correspond to the members of KASBA, the Editorial Board of the Korean Management Review, and also non-members that are potential contributors.

Chapter 1 Integrity of the Research and Social Responsibility

Article 1 (Integrity of the Research)

① The authors must conduct all research activities (research proposal, research execution, report and presentation of research results, research evaluation and assessment, etc.) honestly and truthfully.
② The authors must objectively and accurately describe the contents of research and their importance, and must not arbitrarily delete or add research results.
③ The authors must ensure that all research activities are conducted without bias or prejudice.

Article 2 (Obligation to Record, Preserve, Report, and Disclose Research Information)

① All research information must be reported accurately, and must be recorded, processed, and preserved clearly and accurately so that it can be interpreted and verified.
② The authors must use appropriate research methods and statistical analysis methods, and disclose them if necessary.

Chapter 2 Fairness of Researcher Relationships

Verse 1 Responsibility and Obligation of the Authors

Article 3 (Joint Research)

If an author has conducted joint research with other researchers, the author must clarify the researchers' roles and relationships, and bear such responsibilities. Mutual agreement and understanding must be achieved over the objectives and expected results of the research topic, the respective roles in the collaboration, data collection/storage/sharing methods, decision of who will be the authors and their naming order, selection of research managers, intellectual property and ownership rights, etc.

Article 4 (Responsibility and Obligation of the Authors)

① An author is only responsible as an author for research that he/she has personally conducted or contributed to, and is also recognized for his/her contributions.
② The corresponding or responsible author is overall responsible for the article data and naming of the other authors, and is also responsible for supervising the research of joint researchers.
③ The authors must comply if there is a request for evidence of contribution from the authors.

Article 5 (Corresponding Author)

① The corresponding author must be someone that can take overall responsibility of the research results and their evidence.
② The corresponding author must take responsibility for proving the naming order of the authors and the naming of the joint authors.

Verse 2 Author Decision Standards and Naming

Article 6 (Author Decision Standards)

① The naming order of the authors must accurately reflect the academic contributions to the research content or results, regardless of their relative positions. A person's position alone does not justify including them as an author or recognizing them as the 1st author.
② A person that has not academically contributed to the research contents or results must not be included as an author as an expression of gratitude or courtesy. However, other contributions, such as data collection or input, translation into other languages, etc., may be indicated in a note as an expression of gratitude.

Article 7 (Deciding the Author Naming Order)

The author naming order must be decided fairly, reflecting the research contributions, in consultation with all the authors.

Article 8 (Displaying the Affiliation of the Authors)

In principle, an author's affiliation at the time of the research should be displayed. However, in areas where the practice is different, follow that different practice.

Chapter 3 Research Misconduct and Other Unethical Research Conducts

Verse 1 Citation Method and Principle

Article 9 (Citation Method and Principle)

① Authors can directly or through translation cite some of the text of another's writing by introducing, referring to, or commenting on their work.
② Authors must ensure that the source labels and bibliography are accurately written. Authors must make sure all the elements of the citations (author's name, journal volume and issue, page, published year, etc.) come from their original sources, without relying on secondary sources, but a secondary source may be cited and labeled as such if such a circumstance is unavoidable.
③ Authors must cite works in a reasonable manner, based on the principle of good faith, so that they can be clearly distinguished from other works.
④ Authors must cite published work, in principle, and if obtaining undisclosed academic materials through article evaluation, research proposal evaluation, or private communication, the author must obtain consent from the relevant researcher.
⑤ If adapting an idea or theory already introduced and published in another work, authors must specify its original source.
⑥ If borrowing intensively from one source, authors must make sure readers can clearly identify which ideas are form the referenced source and which ideas are the authors' own.
⑦ If a disclosed document has had a significant influence on the direction of the research, or if it is significant in helping the reader understand the contents of the research, unless theoretically or empirically known by the author, it must be included in the bibliography.
⑧ Even if authors have used abstracts for reviewing previous research, authors must avoid citing such works as academic articles in the bibliography.
⑨ While using the published version of an article, authors must avoid using the initial or preliminary version of the article published in article presentation collections at conferences.

Article 10 (Citing General Knowledge)

① When using another's idea or information about facts provided by them, the source must be revealed, but generally known or recognized materials are exempt.
② When in doubt about whether or not a concept or fact is general knowledge, it is best to cite it.

Verse 2 Research Misconduct

Article 11 (Definition of Research Misconduct)

"Research misconduct" refers to forgery, tampering, plagiarism, unfair naming of authors, duplicate publishing, etc., during the entire research process (research proposal, research execution, reporting and presentation of research results, evaluation and assessment of research, etc.).

1. "Forgery" refers to the act of making up nonexistent data or research results.
2. "Tampering" refers to the act of distorting the results and contents of research by artificially manipulating the research procedure or arbitrarily modifying or deleting research data. (Here, "deleting" refers to the act of intentionally excluding data that interferes with the creation of expected research results and only selecting favorable data.)
3. "Plagiarism" refers to the act of using the copyright protected work, research ideas, hypotheses, theories, and results without justified approval or citation, and passing it off as the author's own or results of their own research.
4. "Unfair naming of authors" refers to not naming a person that has contributed academically to the contents or results of a research without a just reason, or granting authorship to a person that has not contributed academically whatsoever.
5. "Duplicate publishing" refers to re-submitting and reprinting an article with entirely or almost identical text at another academic journal without informing the editor or reader of the existence of the already published article.

Article 12 (Plagiarism of Ideas)

① "Plagiarism of ideas" refer to the act of stealing ideas (explanations, theories, conclusions, hypotheses, metaphors, etc.) by modifying all or part of the original creator's achievement.
② Authors usually have an ethical responsibility to reveal the source of ideas through footnotes or citations.
③ Authors must not steal others' ideas discovered through peer review of others' research proposals

Article 13 (Plagiarism of Text)

"Plagiarism of text" refers to the act of copying a part of one's own or other's written text without revealing the source.

Article 14 (Mosaic Plagiarism)

"Mosaic plagiarism" refers to the act of combining, adding or inserting words, or replacing words with synonyms in a part of one's own or other's written text without revealing the source.

Article 15 (Duplicate Publishing)

Authors must not attempt to contribute or publish their already published work (including those pending publication or under evaluation) as new research, whether at home or abroad.
① If the main contents are the same as the author's previously published article, the article is considered a duplicate even if the later published article uses slightly different viewpoints or perspectives, or uses slightly different analysis of the already published data.
② To publish an already published article, the author must provide the relevant publishing information to the chief editor of the Korean Management Review and confirm whether or not it may be duplicate publishing.

Article 16 (Avoiding Research Misconduct and Copyright Infringement)

① The copyright of the cases and articles published in the Korean Management Review usually belong to the authors, but when using the cases and articles for educational or other public purposes, the publisher of the Korean Management Review, KASBA, has the right to use them.
② Duplicate publishing must be avoided because it may be subject to copyright infringement.
③ If extensively citing a copyright protected source, it should be noted that it may still be subject to copyright infringement even if quotation marks were properly used and the content was properly applied.

Chapter 4 Improper Writing

Article 17 (Improper Writing)

The following correspond to improper writing:
1. Citing improperly
2. Distortion of the bibliography
3. Relying on the abstract, etc., while citing the published article
4. Citing works without reading or understanding them
5. While extensively borrowing from one source, only partially revealing the source
6.Recycling the text

Article 18 (Distorting the Bibliography)

① The bibliography must only include literature directly related to the contents of the article. The bibliography should not intentionally include literature with questionable relevance for the purpose of distorting the list of citations for the academic journal or article, or to increase an article's chance of publication.
② Authors must not exclusively include literature that is favorable to their own data or theory, and have an ethic

Article 19 (Recycling the Text)

① "Recycling the text" refers to reusing a part of texts that the author has already used in previous writing.
② Recycling the text is contrary to the spirit of ethical writing, so authors must avoid recycling already published text, but if recycling is unavoidable, authors must follow standard citation procedures, such as using quotation marks and proper application, and avoid copyright infringement.

Chapter 5 Fairness of the Evaluation Process

Verse 1 Responsibility and Obligation of the Evaluator

Article 20 (Responsibility and Obligation of the Evaluator)

① Evaluator must faithfully evaluate the article commissioned by the Editorial Board of the Korean Management Review and return the results to the Editorial Board or a member of the Editorial Board within 21 days as established by the evaluation regulations. If an evaluator judges that the evaluator him/herself is not the right person to evaluate an article, he/she must notify the Editorial Board without delay.
② As intellectuals, evaluators must respect the character and independence of the authors. The evaluators can reveal their personal judgements on the assessment, they must include detailed explanations of their opinions in sections that the think require supplementation.
③ Evaluators must keep the confidentiality of the articles they evaluate. Unless specifically seeking advice for the assessment of an article, it is not advisable to show the article or discuss the contents of the article with others.

Verse 2 Unethical Behavior by Evaluators

Article 21 (Unethical Behavior by Evaluators)

① Evaluators must not use specific information learned from the research proposal or through the article evaluation process for direct or indirect research without the consent of the original author.
② The following actions must be avoided because they may correspond to unethical research behavior:
1. Soliciting a student or third party to evaluate a commissioned article
2. Discussing the contents of the article under evaluation with the academic department or academic society colleagues
3. After the evaluation, retaining, not destroying, the copy of the article
4. During the evaluation process of the submitted article, making defamatory statements or carrying out personal attacks
5. Evaluating/assessing without reading the article

Verse 3 Personal and Professional Conflict of Evaluators

Article 22 (Personal Conflict)

Evaluators must avoid personal bias when evaluating articles. If there is a conflict of interest, including personal conflict, evaluators must notify the Editorial Board immediately.

Verse 3 Personal and Professional Conflict of Evaluators

Article 23 (Professional Conflict)

Evaluators must leave their personal academic convictions behind and make fair assessments based on objective standards. Evaluators must not fail articles for conflicting with their personal viewpoints or interpretations.