Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Leadership, Ethics, Governance, and Sustainable Innovation (JLEGSI) undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure academic quality, accuracy and integrity.

In this system, both author and reviewer identities remain strictly confidential, promoting an impartial and fair evaluation of scholarly work.

Stages of the Review Process

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts via the journal’s website. All submissions must include supporting documents such as author declarations, ethical approval (where applicable) and metadata for indexing.

1. Initial Screening

The Editorial Office conducts a preliminary assessment to confirm that the submission complies with the journal’s formatting, ethical and thematic requirements. The Editor-in-Chief determines whether the manuscript aligns with the journal’s scope and meets the quality standards necessary to proceed to peer review.

1. Peer Review Assignment

Suitable manuscripts are sent to at least two independent experts in the relevant discipline. Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, academic reputation and absence of conflicts of interest.

1. Review Process

Reviewers critically evaluate the manuscript’s originality, methodology, significance, ethical soundness and overall contribution to the field. They provide constructive, evidence-based feedback to help authors improve their work.

1. Editorial Decision

After receiving reviewer reports, the Editor-in-Chief or assigned Section Editor makes a decision to:

1. • Accept the manuscript as submitted;
   • Request minor or major revisions; or
   • Decline the manuscript, with reasons and recommendations provided to the author.
2. Revision and Resubmission

Authors are invited to revise their manuscripts in line with reviewer and editorial comments. Revised manuscripts must be accompanied by a response letter explaining how each recommendation was addressed. Revised versions may be re-evaluated by the original reviewers where necessary.

1. Final Approval and Publication

Once the manuscript meets the journal’s quality and ethical standards, it proceeds to copy editing, proofreading and layout formatting. The final version is reviewed by the author for approval before publication in the upcoming issue.

Key Principles of the Peer Review Process

• Expert Evaluation

Each manuscript is reviewed by qualified experts who assess its academic contribution, methodological rigour and relevance to the journal’s focus areas.

• Confidentiality
  The entire review process is conducted in strict confidence. Manuscripts and communications may not be shared or cited prior to publication.
• Constructive Feedback

Reviewers are encouraged to provide objective, detailed and respectful feedback to help authors refine and strengthen their research.

• Integrity and Fairness

Reviews are expected to be unbiased and based solely on the scholarly merit of the submission.

• Timeliness
  The journal aims to complete the initial peer review within five weeks, although the timeframe may vary depending on reviewer availability and the scope of revisions required.