- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Indexation
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » Retraction
Aim and Scope
The main purpose of the magazine – competent coverage of topical issues in the field of theory and practice upravleniya. Eto scientific platform for the exchange of ideas and views on the development trends of management sciences.
Published in the journal Materials to develop modern management theory, enrich the original practice management solutions and technologies that can be used in the learning process at different levels of education and in scientific research, including thesis.
The magazine is addressed to scientists, experts, managers and practitioners – all in whose sphere of scientific, corporate and professional interests include issues of governance. We invite you to become subscribers of the magazine, as well as to send scientific and practical materials for publication.
Section Policies
Open Submissions Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Publication Frequency
4 issues per year
Open Access Policy
"Management Sciences" is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.
Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these 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.
For more information please read BOAI statement.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
The editorial staff obligatorily carries out a bilateral blind review of all articles submitted for publication that meet the requirements for their design.
Terms and conditions of cooperation. Reviewers perform work for the journal on a volunteer basis. Given that most of these individuals are in full-time employment, their reviewing activities for BFU must, by necessity, not be their top priority. Reviewers are free to decline invitations to review particular manuscripts at their discretion, for example, if their current employment workload and/or other commitments make it prohibitive for them to complete a review in a timely fashion and to do justice to the task in the available timeframe. They should also not accept manuscript review assignments for which they feel unqualified.
Promptness. Reviewers who have accepted manuscript assignments are normally expected to submit their reviews within four weeks. They should remove themselves from the assignment if it becomes apparent to them at any stage that they do not possess the required expertise to perform the review, or that they may have a potential conflict of interest in performing the review (e. g., one resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, institutions, or companies associated with the manuscript).
Confidentiality policy. Privileged information or ideas obtained by reviewers through the peer review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents, and must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the BFU Editor-in-Chief.
Objectivity standards. When conducting their reviews, reviewers are asked to do so as objectively as possible, refraining from engaging in personal criticism of the author(s). They are encouraged to express their views clearly, explaining and justifying all recommendations made. They should always attempt to provide detailed and constructive feedback to assist the author(s) in improving their work, even if the manuscript is, in their opinion, not publishable.
Manuscript assessment. Reviewers should identify in their reviews relevant published work that has not been cited by the author(s), together with any instances in which proper attribution of sources has not been provided. They should call to the responsible editor’s attention any major resemblances between a manuscript under consideration and other published articles or papers of which they are aware, as well as any concerns they might have in relation to the ethical acceptability of the research reported in the manuscript.
Indexation
Articles in "Management Sciences" are indexed by several systems:
- Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
- Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
- SOCIONET
- DOAJ
- Cyberleninka
- WorldCat
- Dimensions
- EDS
Publishing Ethics
The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal «Management Sciences» are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org, and requirements for peer-reviewed journals, elaborated by the "Elsevier" Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications)
1. Introduction
1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: «Management Sciences»
1.2.Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.
1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programmes record «the minutes of science» and we recognise our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned «Management Sciences») is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the «Management Sciences» journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.
2.2.Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
2.3.Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of «Management Sciences» 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.
2.4.Disclosure and Conflicts of interest
2.4.1. 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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.
2.5.Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.
2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1.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. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
3.2.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 of «Management Sciences» and excuse himself from the review process.
3.3.Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
3.4.Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3.5.Acknowledgement 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.
3.6.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
3.6.1.Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
3.6.2. 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.
4. Duties of Authors
4.1.Reporting standards
4.1.1. 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 behaviour and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.
4.2.Data Access and Retention – Authors may be 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.
4.3.Originality and Plagiarism
4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.
4.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment 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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
4.6.Authorship of the Paper
4.6.1. 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.
4.6.2. 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.
4.7.Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
4.7.1. 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.
4.7.2. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. 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.
4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.8.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other 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.
4.8.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.
4.9. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of «Management Sciences» journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.
5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of «Management Sciences» in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
5.2. The publisher should support «Management Sciences» journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.
5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
5.4. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.
The section is prepared according to the files (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf) of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/).
Founder
- Financial University under The Government of Russian Federation
Author fees
Publication in “Management Sciences" is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal doesn't have any Arcticle processing charges.
The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. 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.
Plagiarism detection
"Management Sciences" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in "Management Sciences", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.
As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in "Management Sciences" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.
Glossary (by SHERPA)
Retraction
2014
Retraction of a paper: a paper published in the scientific journal “Management Sciences” (2014 No. 2. p. 47-51) entitled “IMPROVEMENT OF THE RUSSIAN MARKETING SYSTEM BASED ON THE MARKET ORIENTATION MODEL” by Nina Sergeevna Perekalina and Sergey Petrovich (info@mati-marketing.ru, sergey.p.kazakov@gmail.com), retracts from all databases and archives by the editor with the consent of the publisher.
http://www.fa.ru/org/div/edition/upravnauki/journals/2014%20%E2%84%962-R.pdf
The publication’s retraction is due to the identification of duplicate publications titled “IMPROVEMENT OF THE RUSSIAN MARKETING SYSTEM BASED ON THE MARKET ORIENTATION MODEL” // Scientific Works of the Free Economic Society of Russia, T. 179, 2013, by the same authors.
MINUTES of the meeting of the Commission on the publication ethics of the journal "Management Sciences" as of "06" August 2018
Retraction of a paper: a paper published in the scientific journal “Management Sciences” (2014 No. 3. P. 43-47) entitled “ANALYSIS OF MARKETING TOOLS OF TERRITORIAL PLANNING”, sponsored by Svetlana V. Karpova (svetik160966@rambler.ru), Boris Kasayev Sergeevich (bkasaev@mail.ru), Zakharov Igor Sergeevich (igorzakharov_c@mail.ru), retracts from all databases and archives by the editor with the consent of the publisher.
http://www.fa.ru/org/div/edition/upravnauki/journals/2014%20%E2%84%963-R.pdf
The publication’s retraction is due to the identification of duplicate publications titled “Territory marketing as an instrument of strategic planning for the development of a municipality // Property Relations in the Russian Federation. 2014. No.5 (152), sponsored by Dmitry Klimov, M. Yu. Pavlova (dmcompass@mail.ru).
http://www.fa.ru/org/div/edition/upravnauki/journals/2014%20%E2%84%964-R.pdf
MINUTES of the meeting of the Commission on the publication ethics of the journal "Management Sciences" as of "06" August 2018
Retraction of a paper: a paper published in the scientific journal “Management Sciences” (2014 No. 4. P. 30-37) entitled “NEW ENTREPRENEURS PHILOSOPHY - CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY”, authored by Asaul Anatoly Nikolaevich (asaul@yandex.ru), retracts from all databases and archives by the editor with the consent of the publisher.
http://www.fa.ru/org/div/edition/upravnauki/journals/2015%20%E2%84%963-R.pdf
The publication’s retraction is due to the identification of duplicate publications titled “Social Responsibility of Business as a Tool for Measuring the New Economy // Scientific Works of the VEO of Russia. 2014. T. 185 (39), the same author.
MINUTES of the meeting of the Commission on the publication ethics of the journal "Management Sciences" as of "06" August 2018
2015
Retraction of a paper: a paper published in the scientific journal “Management Sciences” (2015 No. 3 (16). P. 76-84) entitled “Labor Activity of Workers in Crisis Conditions”, authored by Podvoisky Gleb Lvovich (GLPodvoyskiy@fa.ru ), retracts from all databases and archives by the editor with the consent of the publisher.
http://www.fa.ru/org/div/edition/upravnauki/journals/2015%20%E2%84%963-R.pdf
The publication’s retraction is due to the identification of the unrecognized borrowing from the thesis “Russian youth in the labor market: social and managerial aspects” (Thesis 2006), authored by Ostanina Nina Aleksandrovna.
MINUTES of the meeting of the Commission on the publication ethics of the journal "Management Sciences" as of "06" August 2018
2016
Retraction of a paper: a paper published in the scientific journal “Management Sciences” (2016 No. 2. P. 70-82) entitled “ANALYSIS OF INDUSTRIAL LOCALIZATION OF SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN REGIONS”, authored by Pinkovaetskaya Julia Semenovna (judy54@yandex.ru ), retracts from all databases and archives by the editor with the consent of the publisher.
http://www.fa.ru/org/div/edition/upravnauki/journals/2016%20%E2%84%962-R.pdf
The publication’s retraction is due to the identification of duplicate publications entitled “On the localization of the provision of services by business structures in the regions” in the ARS ADMINISTRANDI journal. 2015. №4. Pp. 139-152.
MINUTES of the meeting of the Commission on the publication ethics of the journal "Management Sciences" of "06" August 2018
