About the Journal

The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management is an online open access journal that publishes articles and papers that contribute to the development of both theory and practice in the field of Knowledge Management.
Papers submitted to the journal are first evaluated by the Editor or an appointed Associate Editor and those selected for consideration are submitted to a double-blind peer review process by members of the Review Board. On the basis of these reviews, the Editor and/or Associate Editor then either:
  1. Accepts the paper for publication with no changes
  2. Accepts the paper for publication with only minor, editorial changes
  3. Accepts the paper for publication provided it is amended in line with the reviewers comments
  4. Recommends a more major re-write and offers the chance to resubmit for consideration in another issue
  5. Rejects the paper as unsuitable for publication
  6. In all instances, reviewers' comments are passed to the authors.
In accordance with the practice in the open access journal community authors are now asked to pay a nominal sum to publish in EJKM, which is intended to cover some of the costs of publishing. The current publication charge is GBP400 + VAT, which may be recoverable by some authors/universities. This amount is payable only after a paper has been accepted for publication. There will continue to be no charge to access the journals on screen or by printing the papers.
 
Continuous Publication
EJKM now follows a continuous publication model. This means that once a paper has been finally accepted, an invoice for the publication fee will be sent. On receipt of payment the paper will pass through to production and authors will receive page proofs to check. We will endeavour to publish the paper within two weeks of authors accepting the page proofs.  The journal will continue to gather articles for between two and three issues per year, but the  journal’s website will be continuously updated throughout the year. When the deadline of an issue has passed, it is closed and the next issue is begun. This model allows for faster publication of articles that no longer need to wait for the issue to be completed,  allowing authors to see their work published as soon as possible. The exception to this process is special issues. In this case authors will be kept informed as to progress of the issue, and where possible all papers will be published together.
 
Aims and Scope
The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management provides perspectives on topics relevant to the study, implementation and management of knowledge management and intellectual capital.
The journal contributes to the development of both theory and practice in the field of knowledge management and intellectual capital. The journal accepts academically robust papers, topical articles and case studies that contribute to the area of research in, and practice of knowledge management and intellectual capital.

Research Papers
These may be qualitative or quantitative, empirical or theoretical in nature and can discuss completed research findings or work in progress.

Case Studies
Case studies are welcomed illustrating practise in the field of iknowledge management and intellectual capital.

View Points
View points are less academically rigorous articles usually in areas of controversy which will fuel some interesting debate.

Book Reviews
Anyone who areads a book that they feel contributes to the area of knowledge management or intellectual capital is encouraged to submit a review for publication.
 
Conference Reports and Book Reviews
Anyone who attends a conference or reads a book that they feel makes a contribution within the scope of  EJEL is encouraged to submit a review for publication.

Contribution and Dates
Papers can be submitted at any time. The period from submission to publication varies but as the journal operates a conintuous publication model, papers will be published when it has been finally accepted and the publication fee has been received.
 

Ethics Guidelines
Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited is committed to the highest ethics practices. In pursuance of this our prospective authors, our reviewers our editors and administrators are required to adhere to a code of practice. The principles which underpin this code of practice are listed below for each of these groups.

Competing interests
Authors, reviewers and editors must declare any conflicting or competing interests relating to a given article. 

Author Responsibilities
Authors will:-

  1. Ensure that all researched work submitted is original, prepared to a high scholarly standard and fully referenced using the prescribed referencing system.
  2. All authors are represented accurately and other appropriate acknowledgements are clearly stated including sources of funding if any.
  3. Open and full disclosure of the source of all data and how it was acquired.
  4. Certify that all the data has been acquired in keeping with recognised ethical research practices.
  5. If the work involves the use of human subjects, the author should ensure that the work described has been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for experiments involving humans. 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.
  6. Read carefully, agree and sign a licence to publish form.
  7. Correspond and comply with the editor and publisher in any requests for source data, proof of authorship or originality in a timely manner.
  8. Co-operate with any consequent investigations if any issues are raised by reviewers, editors or the publisher.
  9. Provide appropriate information for errata if such an event occurs.
  10. Remain in good communication with the editor(s), publisher and any co-authors if the need arises.
  11. Agree to submit only one paper at a time, waiting for the current paper process to be completed before submitting another.
  12. Recognise that the Editorial Board has the final decision to publish.
  13. To ensure funds are available to pay the publishing fee of £400 + VAT if the paper is accepted. If payment is not made made, we will be unable to consider any further submissions from those authors to the journal in the future.

Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers will:-

  1. Only review papers that are relevant to their own expertise.
  2. Read the papers with appropriate care and attention and use their best efforts to be constructively critical.
  3. Regard the work being reviewed as confidential and will not discuss it with others and will keep their own identity from authors.
  4. Review submitted work in a timely manner.
  5. Report any suspected ethical misconduct which appears in the work.
  6. Avoid any offensive language in their appraisals of the papers.
  7. Agree to review a reasonable number of future versions of the work and provide follow up advice where necessary.
  8. Seek advice from the editor if anything is unclear at any time during the review process or if there is any possible conflict of interest.
  9. Communicate with both the publisher and editor in a timely fashion.
  10. Treat all papers reviewed fairly without any favour of prejudice.

Editor Responsibilities
Editors will:-

  1. Only authorise for publication content of the highest quality.
  2. Ensure that a thorough, objective and blind peer review is conducted for original article submissions.
  3. Clearly identify articles which will not be peer reviewed (i.e. invited opinion).
  4. Be transparent with regards to the review and publication process with appropriate care that individuals will not be identified when it is inappropriate to so do..
  5. Provide advice to the authors during the submission process when necessary.
  6. Provide the right to appeal any editorial decision.
  7. Be attentive to the possibility of third party material being  included in papers for which there may not be sufficient permission..
  8. Be prepared to publish errata when necessary.
  9. Communicate with both the publisher and the author(s) in a timely manner.
  10. Treat all submissions fairly without any favour of prejudice.

Administrator Responsibilities
Administrators will:-

  1. Log all submissions received in a timely manner.
  2. Acknowledge receipt of submission to the lead author.
  3. Check the title of the paper and the abstract for relevance to the e-Journal and where it is not relevant inform the author.
  4. If the submission form is incomplete, inform the author and hold the paper until a completed form is received.
  5. Request the author to abbreviate the paper if it is over the word limit.
  6. Forward the paper to the Editor.
  7. Obtain clearance from the editor to proceed to review if the paper is below the minimum number of words.
  8. Distribute the paper to appropriate reviewers and remind them periodically about the required review date.
  9. Despatch the reviews to the authors and remain as a conduit between the authors and the reviewers until the paper has been accepted or withdrawn.
  10. Treat all authors and reviewers fairly without favour or prejudice.

Our procedures when an issue of Ethics is raised
If an issue of Ethics is raised by a reviewer or the Editor or a reader of the e-Journal, then the person raising the issue will be asked to submit the concern in writing to the publisher. On receipt of this the publisher will present the written statement to the Ethics Review Panel, which will give the matter its close attention. The person or persons about whom the concern has been raised will be immediately informed about this matter and invited to reply.

Any report of possible ethics impropriety is a major issue for the e-Journal and will be investigated appropriately. If misconduct has been committed the paper will be withdrawn, an apology will be called for and if not forthcoming the author/s may be excluded from having any future paper reviewed by the e-Journal.

Dan Remenyi PhD
Publisher

Peer review policy Last updated January 2022

The peer review process aims to ensure that high quality manuscripts relevant to the topics of the journal are published. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below

Administrative submission evaluation
All submissions are checked by the Journal Administrator to ensure that they conform to the paper requirements outlined on the author information page of the journal website. Issues such as paper length, standard of the English language, format of diagrams, referencing style, etc. are considered. If the submission does not meet all or some of these criteria the submission will be declined, and the authors asked to resubmit after addressing the issues.

Initial Editorial evaluation
One of the Chief Editors evaluates all submitted manuscripts. A manuscript can be rejected at this stage due to not being insufficiently original, having serious scientific flaws, having poor language, or for being outside the aims and scope of the journal. Manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria are either managed by the Chief Editor or passed to an Associate Editor to manage the peer review process.
Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will usually be informed within one month of receipt.

Double-Blind Peer Review
The Journal adopts ‘double blind’ peer reviewing. This means the reviewers remain anonymous to the author(s) throughout and following the review process, and the identity of the author(s) is also unknown to the reviewers.

Selecting a Reviewer
Whenever possible, reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise, details of which are held on our reviewer database.

Reviewer reports
Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

  • Is original as to thought and method (including data)
  • Is methodologically sound
  • Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
  • Correctly and extensively references previous relevant work
  • Follows appropriate ethical guidelines, especially as concerns plagiarism
  • Clearly adds to the knowledge and development of the field

Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but reviewers are encouraged to suggest corrections of language and style to the manuscript, or to suggest whether the manuscript requires proof reading. In the final round, the handling Editor will check matters of linguistic and stylistic accuracy and may suggest or apply corrections at this point. In some cases, the manuscript may be returned to the author(s) for a full linguistic and stylistic revision.

How long does the review process take?
The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the reviewers. The typical time for the first round of the review process is approximately 6 weeks, with a maximum of three months. Should the two reviewer’s evaluations contradict one another, or a review is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion may be sought. In rare cases when it is extremely difficult to find a second suitably experienced individual to review a manuscript, and the one report received has thoroughly convinced the handling Editor, a decision to accept, reject or ask the author for revisions may be made, at the handling Editor’s discretion, on the basis of only one review. The handling Editor’s decision will be sent to the author with the reviewer recommendations, usually including the latter’s verbatim comments. As a rule, revised manuscripts are sent to the initial reviewers for checking, who may then request further revision or recommend a reject if it is felt that insufficient changes have been made to the manuscript.

The Chief Editor's decision is final
Reviewers advise the Chief Editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

Open Access Publishing
The Electronic Journal of e-Learning operates an Open Access Policy. This means that users can read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, is that authors control  the integrity of their work, which should be properly acknowledged and cited. Papers can be freely redistributed and reused under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY NC ND) or any Creative Commons License that the author has chosen.

Repository Policy

Authors are encouraged to deposit a copy of their accepted paper in an institutional repository of their choice. Referred to as the Accepted Author Manuscript (AAM)  the Accepted Author Version, or Personal Copy, this is the version accepted for publication after it has undergone peer review, but before any copyediting or formatting has been applied by the publisher. 

Long term paper preservation
The journal subscribes to the PKP Preservation network. Details can be found here https://pkp.sfu.ca/pkp-pn/

Publication Fees
In accordance with the practice in the open access community authors are asked to pay a nominal sum to publish in EJKM, which is intended to cover some of the costs of publishing. The current publication charge is GBP400 (+ 20% VAT), which is recoverable by some authors/universities). This amount is payable only after the paper has been accepted for publication and there is no charge for submissions.