Submissions

Author Guidelines

Submission Process

• Cases submitted for review must be written in the English language (UK) and typed in double-space or single-space using Times Roman 12-point font to be printed on A4-size paper with 1" margin on all sides. Cases should be described in the past tense. The journal prefers short and medium-length cases of not exceeding 6,000 words.
  
  
• Three files should be uploaded.
• The first file will contain the case which ends with discussion questions. This file should be anonymous.
• The second file will contain the teaching notes. Without teaching notes, the case will not be processed, and authors will be notified accordingly. The teaching notes should include the following:
  -The learning objectives addressed in the case.
  -The relevant management issue observed in the case.
  -Linkages with available literature on the issues highlighted in the case.
  -Answer of the Discussion questions
• The third file is the title page. This file should contain the title of the case, names and affiliations of all the authors and the abstract of the case. 

• The case write-up must contain the abstract of the case. This appears after the title on the first page of first file
• Figures and tables essential to the case content should be embedded in the text and numbered consecutively.  A reference list should be provided at the end. The case must follow APA style for references, exhibits, figures and tables. The details of the reference format have been provided at the end of this section. 

• The manuscript should be submitted by using online submission system

• Copyrights to be held by Kulliyyah of Economics and Management Sciences.

• All contributions will be fully refereed by the double-blind review process.
• The language of the case should be proofread by a professional proofreader. 
• CASES SUBMITTED WHICH DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE ABOVE REQUIREMENTS WILL BE RETURNED TO THE AUTHORS.

Case writers must solicit necessary permission from the company before identifying the organisation or person concerned.

Details of the references format: 

JOURNAL ARTICLES

One Author

Williams, J. H. (2008). Employee engagement: Improving participation in safety. Professional Safety, 53(12), 40-45.

Two to Seven Authors [List all authors]

Keller, T. E., Cusick, G. R., & Courtney, M. E. (2007). Approaching the transition to adulthood: Distinctive profiles of adolescents aging out of the child welfare system. Social Services Review, 81, 453-484.

MAGAZINE ARTICLE

Mathews, J., Berrett, D., & Brillman, D. (2005, May 16). Other winning equations. Newsweek, 145(20), 58-59.

BOOK

Alexie, S. (1992). The business of fancydancing: Stories and poems. Brooklyn, NY: Hang Loose Press.

CHAPTER IN A BOOK

Booth-LaForce, C., & Kerns, K. A. (2009). Child-parent attachment relationships, peer relationships, and peer-group functioning. In K. H. Rubin, W. M. Bukowski, & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (pp. 490-507). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

PROCEEDINGS

Abd. Aziz, M. J., Darus, S., Hassan, M. K., T. Wook, S. M., Ismail, M. N., Lek Chuan, J. K., et al. (2003, 30 September-2 October 2003). LSA and its applications in automated essay grading. Paper presented at the International Symposium in Information Technology (ITSIM 2003), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

ONLINE RESOURCES

Online Report from a Nongovernmental Organization

Kenney, G. M., Cook, A., & Pelletier, J. (2009). Prospects for reducing uninsured rates among children: How much can premium assistance programs help? Retrieved from Urban Institute website: http:// www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=411823

Online Report with No Author Identified and No Date

GVU©s 10th WWW user survey. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cc.gatech.edu/user_surveys/survey-1998-10/

 

Publication Ethics Statement

IIUM Journal of Case Studies in Management (IJCSM)

Introduction

The IIUM Journal of Case Studies in Management (IJCSM), published by the Kulliyyah of Economics and Management Sciences, International Islamic University Malaysia, is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. This document outlines the roles and responsibilities of authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers, in alignment with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and best practices in scholarly publishing. It also provides a statement against publication malpractice.

1. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

1.1 Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. The submission of plagiarised or self-plagiarised content is strictly prohibited. Any materials or data from other sources must be properly cited.

1.2 Multiple or Concurrent Submissions

It is unethical to submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. Authors must wait for the editorial decision before submitting the paper elsewhere.

1.3 Authorship and Acknowledgment

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the study. All contributors must be acknowledged. Ghost authorship and guest authorship are unethical.

1.4 Data Integrity and Availability

Authors must present accurate data and disclose any conflicts of interest. Raw data should be made available for editorial review if requested.

1.5 Citations and References

Authors must properly cite all sources and ensure that references are complete and accurate.

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

2.1 Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat the manuscript as a confidential document. They must not disclose or discuss it with others except as authorized by the editor.

2.2 Objectivity and Constructive Criticism

Reviews should be conducted objectively, and critiques should be constructive, without personal criticism of the author.

2.3 Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must decline to review a manuscript if there is any conflict of interest with the authors, institutions, or the content of the manuscript.

2.4 Timeliness

Reviewers should complete their evaluations within the given timeframe. If unable to do so, they should notify the editor promptly.

3. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

3.1 Editorial Independence

Editors are responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of manuscripts, based on reviewers’ evaluations and the relevance of the work.

3.2 Fair Play

Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on academic merit, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

3.3 Confidentiality

Editors must ensure the confidentiality of the submitted manuscripts and the identities of authors and reviewers.

3.4 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not use unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without the author’s written consent.

4. Responsibilities of the Publisher

4.1 Transparency and Integrity

The Kulliyyah of Economics and Management Sciences at IIUM, as the publisher, ensures that all publication practices comply with ethical standards and COPE guidelines.

4.2 Financial Support and Open Access

IJCSM does not charge any publication fees. All costs are fully borne by the Kulliyyah through its allocated budget, reinforcing its commitment to accessible and ethical scholarly communication.

4.3 Dealing with Misconduct

The publisher supports editors in investigating and resolving any allegations of research misconduct, including plagiarism, data falsification, and ethical violations.

5. Publication Malpractice Statement

IJCSM takes all forms of publication malpractice seriously and will not tolerate:

 Plagiarism or self-plagiarism

 Fabrication or falsification of data

 Misrepresentation of authorship

 Redundant or duplicate publication

 Breaches of copyright

 Failure to disclose conflicts of interest

 Unethical conduct in human or animal research

Cases of misconduct will be investigated thoroughly. Sanctions may include rejection or retraction of the article, blacklisting of the authors from future submissions, and notification to relevant institutions.

6. Complaint and Appeals Process

Any complaints or appeals regarding editorial decisions or ethical violations can be directed to the Editor-in-Chief via the official IJCSM contact email. Complaints will be investigated with confidentiality and impartiality, and appropriate corrective measures will be taken.

7. Commitment to Ethical Publishing

IJCSM is dedicated to ethical publishing grounded in Islamic values of trust (amanah), justice ('adl), and excellence (ihsan). By adhering to international best practices and COPE guidelines, IJCSM ensures scholarly integrity and contributes to the global body of ethical academic research.

8. Editorial decision-making

The editorial decision-making process at the IIUM Journal of Case Studies in Management (IJCSM) is structured to uphold academic integrity, transparency, fairness, and the highest ethical standards. Below is a step-by-step breakdown of the process, including the roles of the editorial team, reviewers, and decision criteria:

1. Manuscript Submission

Initial Submission Platform: Manuscripts are submitted through the official IJCSM submission portal or email, depending on the journal’s standard operating procedures.

 Compliance Check: The Managing Editor first checks if the manuscript complies with the journal’s scope (management case studies), formatting guidelines, language quality, and ethical declarations (e.g., originality and no simultaneous submission).

b.Plagiarism Screening

Similarity Check Tool: A plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin or iThenticate) is used.

Threshold Policy: Manuscripts with similarity indices exceeding an acceptable threshold (typically 15–20%) are rejected outright or returned for revision.

 Self-plagiarism: Duplicate or redundant publication by the same author is flagged and treated seriously.

c.Initial Editorial Review

 Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor evaluates:

   Relevance to IJCSM’s scope (case-based, management-focused)

   Contribution to knowledge or practice

   Coherence and clarity of case narrative

   Compliance with ethical standards

Desk Rejection Possibility: If the manuscript lacks originality, academic merit, or proper structure, it may be desk rejected without proceeding to peer review.

d.Double-Blind Peer Review Process

Reviewer Assignment: Two qualified reviewers are invited based on subject matter expertise. Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and vice versa.

Reviewer Guidelines: Reviewers assess based on:

   Case novelty and teaching/research value

   Contextual relevance and accuracy

   Rigor in analysis, discussion, and recommendations

   Ethical soundness (e.g., permissions, consent in cases)

 Review Outcomes:

   Accept without revision

   Accept with minor revisions

   Major revisions needed

   Reject

 

e.Evaluation of Reviewer Reports

 Handling Editor Decision:

   If both reviewers agree (e.g., minor revisions), the editor follows the recommendation.

   If one reviewer accepts and the other rejects, a third reviewer is appointed.

   Editor may override the reviewers only with strong justification (documented).

 Confidentiality: Reviewer identities are not disclosed to the author at any stage.

 

f.Revision and Resubmission

Authors’ Response Document: Authors are expected to revise the manuscript and provide a point-by-point response to reviewer comments.

 Editor Checks Revisions: The editor assesses whether the revisions address concerns adequately. For major revisions, the manuscript may be sent back to reviewers.

 

g.Final Decision

 Final Decision Options:

   Accept

   Accept with final editorial polishing

   Reject (with explanation and feedback)

 Communication: Authors are informed of the decision with reviewer comments (anonymized) and editorial notes.

 

h.Copyediting and Proofing

 Once accepted:

   Manuscript undergoes copyediting for grammar, formatting, and style.

   Proofs are sent to authors for final checking.

   Final version is uploaded to the journal website or included in the upcoming issue.

 

i.Publication

 Open Access Model: IJCSM is fully open access, and there are no publication fees. All costs are covered by the Kulliyyah of Economics and Management Sciences.

 Indexing and Archiving: Published manuscripts are indexed in selected databases and archived for long-term accessibility.

 

1. Ethical Safeguards and Misconduct Protocol

 Misconduct Investigations: If a reviewer, editor, or reader reports misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, falsified data), the editorial team investigates, informs the authors, and may retract the paper.

 Corrections and Retractions: IJCSM follows COPE’s flowcharts on corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern.

 Appeals: Authors may appeal a decision by submitting a written justification to the Editor-in-Chief, who will initiate a review process by independent editors.

 

IJCSM’s editorial decision-making process reflects:

 Academic integrity

 Islamic values of amanah (trust), adl (justice), and ihsan (excellence)

 International publishing best practices (e.g., COPE, WAME, DOAJ)

 

This process ensures that every manuscript is treated fairly, ethically, and rigorously to maintain the journal’s scholarly reputation.

 

 

9. Procedures for Handling Misconduct

The International Journal of Case Studies in Management (IJCSM) upholds the highest standards of academic integrity and strictly follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines to identify, investigate, and resolve allegations of publication misconduct. Misconduct includes, but is not limited to, plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, redundant publication, authorship manipulation, and unethical research conduct.

 

1. Identification

Misconduct may be identified at any stage of the publication process, including:

 

During peer review: Through similarity checks (e.g., Turnitin, iThenticate) or peer feedback.

 

Post-publication: Through whistleblowing, reader alerts, or author retractions.

 

1. Preliminary Assessment

Once a potential misconduct case is reported or detected:

 

The Editor-in-Chief will perform an initial confidential assessment.

 

The aim is to verify whether the complaint has sufficient merit to proceed.

 

If the claim appears unsubstantiated or due to a misunderstanding, clarification may be sought informally with the authors.

 

1. Formal Investigation

If preliminary findings support further inquiry:

 

The Editor-in-Chief notifies the corresponding author and requests a formal written response to the allegations.

 

Co-authors, where appropriate, may also be contacted.

 

If required, an independent ethics committee or external expert may assist in the investigation.

 

1. Decision and Corrective Actions

After reviewing all evidence:

 

If misconduct is confirmed, IJCSM may take any of the following actions:

 

Reject the manuscript at any stage of review.

 

Retract the article if already published, with a formal retraction notice citing reasons.

 

Notify the authors’ institutions or funding bodies of the findings.

 

Issue a public statement of concern if an article's integrity is questionable but cannot be definitively resolved.

 

Temporarily or permanently ban the author(s) from future submissions.

 

1. Transparency and Confidentiality

A retraction or correction notice will be publicly issued with a clear explanation.

 

All investigations will be handled confidentially, impartially, and fairly.

 

The names of individuals involved will not be disclosed publicly unless necessary for accountability or required by law.

 

10. Author Responsibilities in Case Studies

Authors submitting case studies to IJCSM carry unique ethical obligations due to the real-world nature of such contributions. The journal expects all authors to:

 

1. Ensure Factual Accuracy and Authenticity

Authors must present case facts truthfully without fabrication, falsification, or distortion.

 

Data, events, and stakeholder roles must reflect actual occurrences, unless explicitly fictionalized for educational purposes.

 

1. Obtain Informed Consent

Permission must be secured from all organizations, companies, individuals, or clients involved.

 

When working with sensitive cases or vulnerable populations, informed consent must be obtained in writing and documented.

 

1. Anonymization and Confidentiality

Unless prior consent is granted for disclosure, sensitive names, logos, or identifiers should be anonymized to protect privacy.

 

Exceptions must be justified and accompanied by documented approval.

 

1. Ethical Conduct and Fair Representation

Authors must avoid any form of exploitation, misrepresentation, or power imbalance in presenting or collecting case data.

 

All contributors (including research assistants, interviewers, data providers) must be acknowledged appropriately.

 

1. Clarity Between Facts and Interpretation

A clear distinction must be maintained between factual case details, the authors’ analysis, and any associated teaching notes or pedagogical interpretations.

 

1. Declaration of Interests

Any conflicts of interest, whether financial or relational, must be disclosed to maintain transparency and avoid bias.

 

11. Conflict Resolution Protocols

IJCSM is committed to resolving all disputes fairly, professionally, and in accordance with academic ethics. Conflict resolution protocols are available for the following scenarios:

 

1. Author vs. Reviewer Disagreements

If an author disagrees with a reviewer’s decision, they may submit a formal rebuttal letter detailing their justification.

The Editor-in-Chief may:

Reassess the manuscript personally.

Consult an additional independent reviewer not previously involved in the review process.

Make a final editorial decision based on merit and evidence.

 

1. Reviewer vs. Editor Concerns

Reviewers who believe their recommendations were disregarded without justification may raise their concerns to the Associate Editor or Editorial Board.

 

The board may review editorial practices and recommend training or adjustments if warranted.

 

1. Allegations of Misconduct (Cross-Party)

In any case involving allegations of ethical violations (see Section 9), the same rigorous procedure applies.

 

All parties will be informed of the process and given an opportunity to respond.

 

1. Editorial Conflicts

If conflicts arise within the editorial team (e.g., editor-author conflicts, co-editor disputes), the matter will be:

Escalated to the Senior Editorial Board or Editorial Advisory Board.

Mediated by a neutral party not involved in the dispute.

Resolved in line with the journal’s commitment to fairness and COPE’s ethical guidelines.

 

1. Fairness and Final Resolution

All individuals involved in a conflict are entitled to:

Present their case and evidence.

Receive a response or explanation in a timely and respectful manner.

IJCSM strives to ensure that all resolutions uphold the principles of academic freedom, ethical integrity, and publication transparency.