The journal employs a ''''''''double blind''''null review process. In this process information which identifies the authors is removed from the paper. The paper is sent to at least two reviewers who are academic referees and subject area specialists. Reviewers do not know whose manuscripts they are reviewing, and the authors do not know who their reviewers are. They judge the suitability of the paper for publication. The following criteria are considered:
· New contribution to the field in terms of theory, methodology or practice; · Relationship between the paper to what has already been written in the field; · If the arguments employed are valid and supported by the evidence presented; · Paper structure, ease of reading and logical flow of thought; · Validity of the conclusions and fulfilment of the objectives.
Based on the recommendations of the reviewers, the editorial advisory board decides whether the particular article should be accepted as it is, accepted subject to minor revisions/clarifications, resubmitted for review after major revisions, or rejected. Then, the authors are contacted and comments made by the reviewers are communicated.