Editorial Process and Peer Review Policy

All submissions undergo editorial peer review. Senior Editors are responsible for soliciting contributions and making decisions regarding the acceptance and publication format of each submission.

If a submission is accepted for peer review, it will follow either a double-blind or an open peer review process:

  • Double-blind peer review involves at least two independent reviewers. Authors who require this process (e.g., PhD students or due to institutional policies) must indicate their request in the Letter to the Editors during submission.

  • Open peer review is the standard review format of the journal. It is also used in cases where anonymity is not feasible (e.g., for video-based materials), when authors opt for it, or at the discretion of the handling Senior Editor. This process includes soliciting critical responses and encouraging ongoing dialogue. Authors are required to suggest suitable peers who are willing to review and respond to their submission. Additional reviewers may be invited by the editors, and multiple rounds of exchange may follow.

A core value of the journal is mutual academic support. By submitting a manuscript, authors agree to participate in this scholarly exchange and are expected to be available to review other submissions when requested.

By submitting to the journal, authors confirm their acceptance of all conditions outlined on the journal website. The journal and its governing body, GWS e.V., assume no liability for damages arising from adherence to submission policies or from technical issues during submission or peer review.

Good Research Practice
The editorial board is committed to upholding integrity in academic publishing. Reasonable steps are taken to identify and prevent publication of manuscripts involving misconduct, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, or data falsification. Allegations of misconduct will be handled according to COPE guidelines.

Code of Conduct
The journal maintains a zero-tolerance policy for abusive or disrespectful behavior. Any form of offensive communication, including discriminatory, sexist, racist, or aggressive remarks or behavior, will result in immediate termination of the review or editorial process. (See also: Publication Ethics.)

Dispute Resolution
The Editor-in-Chief holds the final decision-making authority within the peer review process. In cases where the Editor-in-Chief is involved in a dispute, the matter may be escalated to the GWS Senior Advisory Board (SAB), the journal’s governing body. The SAB makes decisions by a simple majority vote. Its members are appointed by the Board of Directors of GWS e.V. and must be members of the society. The SAB must consist of at least three members.

Governance Structure
The Senior Editors constitute the Senior Editorial Board (SEB), which defines the journal’s strategic and thematic direction in collaboration with the broader Editorial Board. The SEB consists of at least three members. The Editor-in-Chief (EiC) is elected by the SEB through a simple majority vote and must be confirmed by the Board of Directors of GWS e.V., the governing body of the journal.*

The founding members of the SEB are the members of the Board of Directors of GWS e.V. New members of the SEB are elected from among the Editorial Board by a two-thirds majority vote of the current SEB members. Any changes to the journal’s governance structure, rules, or editorial processes require a majority vote within the SEB and must be formally approved by the Board of Directors of GWS e.V.

The Board of Directors of GWS e.V. retains final authority over the journal’s governance and strategic alignment with the mission and statutes of the Society. This includes:

  • Ratifying appointments to key editorial roles (e.g., Editor-in-Chief)

  • Approving significant editorial policy changes

  • Overseeing the journal’s adherence to the values, principles, and legal frameworks upheld by the Society

In the event of disputes within the editorial structure or deviations from the journal’s founding principles, the Board of Directors of GWS e.V. holds final adjudicating power.

The governance structure is designed to ensure both academic independence and alignment with the not-for-profit, transdisciplinary mission of the Society for Managerial and Social Cybernetics (GWS e.V.).

*All voting thresholds (e.g., simple or two-thirds majority) refer to the number of members present in the respective meeting.

Publication Frequency
The journal follows a continuous publication model. Each editorial cycle constitutes a new volume, the length and timing of which are determined by the Senior Editorial Board. The frequency of publication may range from one to four volumes per year, depending on thematic focus, organizational factors, and the volume of submitted and reviewed articles.