Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Etampreneur is a journal that publishes current original research on business studies using an interdisciplinary perspective. This publication contains various scientific writings in the form of research result, theoretical and conceptual studies, practical applications from academics and business practitioners.

The following are suggested areas of interest:

  1. Marketing
  2. Management Information System
  3. Human resources
  4. Entrepreneurship
  5. Operation Management
  6. Consumer Behavior
  7. Financial
  8. Strategic Management
  9. Taxation
  10. Corporate Governance
  11. Auditing
  12. Business Ethics
  13. Knowledge Management

 

Jurnal Etampreneur terbit 2 kali dalam setahun, bulan Januari dan bulan Juli

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

ETAMPRENEUR implement policies Double Blind Peer-Review, every manuscript received will be sent to Reviewers who registered in The Etampreneur. The review process lasts a maximum of up to 30 (thirty) days with the allocation of time given to each reviewer to complete its review process is a maximum of ten (10) working days. If the partners designated bestari previously not able to finish his review work within the time limit specified then chairman of the Chairman of Editorial Board will appoint a replacement to do a review Reviewers manuscript.

Initial evaluation of manuscripts

The editor will first evaluate all submitted manuscripts. Some things that the editor will consider are: originality of the script; suitability of manuscripts with templates; and the suitability of the manuscript with the scope in this journal.

Type of peer review

In the review process, reviewers provide considerations relating to compatibility between the title, abstract, introduction, discussion (results) and conclusion. In addition reviewer also give consideration associated with novelty, scientific impact and references used. Submitted manuscripts will generally be reviewed by three experts who will be asked to evaluate.

Review Process:

1. Author submit the manuscript

2. Editor Evaluation [some manuscripts are rejected or returned before the review process]

3. Double-blind peer review process

4. Editor Decision (Acceptend Submission, Revisions Required, Resubmit For Review, Decline Submission)

5. Confirmation to the authors

The final decision on acceptance of the article will be made by the Editor in accordance with the comments of the reviewers. Publication of articles that are accepted will be carried out by the editor in chief by considering the order in which they were received.

 

Publication Frequency

ETAMPRENEUR Published quarterly :
  • Issue 1 published on January
  • Issue 2 published on July

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Screening for Plagiarism

All authors are suggested to use plagiarism detection softaware to do the similarity checking. Editors check the plagiarism detection of articles in this journal by using a Turnitin Software.

 

Publication Ethics

Duties of AuthorsReporting Standards:

1.      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.

2.      Data Access and Retention: Authors are 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 (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

3.      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.

4.      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.

5.      Acknowledgment of Sources:
Proper acknowledgement 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.

6.      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.

7.      Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another 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.

8.      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.

9.      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.

Duties of Editors

1.      Fair Play:
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

2.      Confidentiality:
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.

3.      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.

4.      Publication Decisions:
The editor board journal 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 editors 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 editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

5.      Review of Manuscripts:
The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Duties of Reviewers

1.      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.

2.      Promptness:
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

3.      Standards of Objectivity:
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

4.      Confidentiality:
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.

5.      Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:
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.

6.      Acknowledgment 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.

 

Retraction Policy

Papers published in the ETAMPRENEUR will be considered for removal in publication if:

1. Manuscripts reported unethical research

2. The script is plagiarism

3. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of errors (eg data generation) or honest errors (eg computation errors or experimental errors).

4. Previous findings have been published elsewhere without cross-reference, permission or proper justification (ie cases of excessive publication).

The mechanism of retraction follow the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf

 

Publication Fee

This journal charges the following author fees.
Article Submission: 0.00 (IDR)
Fast-Track Review: 0.00 (IDR)
Online Article Publication: 0,00 (IDR)

Paper Based Article publication: 0 (IDR)

 

References Management

References to other publications must be in American Psychological Association (APA) style and carefully checked for completeness, accuracy and consistency.

Use Reference Management by Mendeley.