Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Southeast Asian Journal of Service Management (SEAJSM) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. This statement is based on the principles and best-practice guidelines developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, and applies to authors, reviewers, and editors involved in the journal.

Types of Manuscripts

SEAJSM publishes the following types of manuscripts, all of which are subject to the same double-anonymous peer review process:

  • Original Research Articles: empirical studies presenting new data and findings on service management topics (quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods). Each issue consists of at least 60% original research articles.
  • Literature Reviews and Systematic Reviews: comprehensive syntheses of existing research that critically evaluate the state of knowledge on a service management topic.
  • Conceptual Papers: theory-building contributions that advance service management concepts or frameworks.
  • Case Studies: in-depth analyses of service management practice in specific organizational or regional contexts.
  • Research Notes and Short Communications: concise reports on emerging findings or methodological advances.

Editorial decisions on whether a manuscript type is suitable for the journal are made at desk screening, guided by the Focus and Scope.

Ownership and Management

The Southeast Asian Journal of Service Management (SEAJSM) is owned and operated by the Faculty of Business and Economics, Universitas Surabaya (e-ISSN 3089-1469). The journal is governed by an Editor-in-Chief with support from an editorial team, and is managed through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform. Editorial policy decisions, including scope, review standards, and ethics, are made by the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with the editorial board and the publisher.

Authorship Criteria

Authorship must be based on a substantial contribution to the work, in line with the ICMJE authorship criteria: (1) substantial contribution to conception, design, data acquisition, or analysis and interpretation; (2) drafting or critically revising the manuscript for important intellectual content; (3) final approval of the version to be published; and (4) agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. All individuals who meet these criteria should be listed as authors; contributors who do not meet them should be acknowledged. The corresponding author manages the submission and correspondence. No author may be added to or removed from a manuscript after acceptance without documented justification and the approval of the Editor-in-Chief.

Duties of Editors

  • Editors evaluate manuscripts solely on their intellectual merit, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal's scope, without regard to the authors' race, gender, religion, nationality, or institutional affiliation.
  • Editors and editorial staff must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  • Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by editors or editorial board members in their own research without the express written consent of the author.
  • Editors are responsible for deciding which submitted articles are published, guided by the journal's editorial policies and constrained by legal requirements on libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
  • Editors will act on any reported cases of suspected misconduct, whether the manuscript is published or unpublished, and take reasonable responsive measures, following COPE flowcharts where applicable.

Duties of Reviewers

  • Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with authors, may also assist authors in improving their manuscript.
  • Reviewers who feel unqualified to review a manuscript, or who cannot complete the review in a timely manner, should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the process.
  • Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document and must not be shared with or discussed with others without editorial authorization.
  • Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
  • Reviewers must identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and alert the editor to any substantial similarity between the manuscript and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.
  • Reviewers must disclose to the editor any conflicts of interest, whether financial, institutional, collaborative, or otherwise, that could influence their judgment of the manuscript, and decline to review where appropriate.
  • Reviewers are prohibited from using artificial intelligence (AI) tools to analyze or assess manuscripts or to draft review reports, in accordance with the Artificial Intelligence Policy.

Duties of Authors

  • Authors of original research must 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 manuscript. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
  • Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must be appropriately cited or quoted. All submissions are screened for plagiarism using Turnitin prior to acceptance.
  • An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior.
  • 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.
  • Authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript, and disclose all sources of financial support for the project.
  • When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate to retract or correct the paper.
  • Authors must disclose any use of generative AI in the manuscript, in accordance with the Artificial Intelligence Policy.

Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when financial, personal, institutional, or professional interests may be perceived to influence the evaluation, review, or publication of a manuscript. Authors must disclose all potential conflicts of interest and sources of funding at submission. Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest that could affect their judgment of a manuscript and decline to review where appropriate. Editors must disclose any conflict of interest related to a manuscript and recuse themselves from handling manuscripts with which they have a personal, institutional, or financial relationship; such manuscripts are reassigned to another editor.

Post-publication Discussion and Corrections

SEAJSM welcomes post-publication discussion. Readers may submit comments or letters to the editor regarding published articles by contacting the editorial office at admin@seajsm.org; substantive comments of general scholarly interest may be published as correspondence. Corrections to published articles are issued when errors are found that do not invalidate the article, and are linked to the original publication. More significant problems are handled through expressions of concern or retraction as described below.

Handling of Research and Publication Misconduct

SEAJSM takes allegations of misconduct, including but not limited to plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, duplicate publication, and undisclosed conflicts of interest, seriously. Reports of suspected misconduct are investigated by the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the editorial board and, where appropriate, the authors' institutions, following COPE's guidelines and flowcharts. Depending on the outcome of an investigation, actions may include requesting a correction, issuing an expression of concern, retracting the article, or, in serious cases, banning the author from future submissions to the journal.

Retraction Policy

Articles may be retracted if there is clear evidence of unreliable findings due to misconduct or honest error, if the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing or justification, if it constitutes plagiarism, or if it reports unethical research. Retracted articles remain accessible online, clearly marked as retracted, together with the reason for retraction.

For questions regarding this policy, or to report a suspected case of publication misconduct, please contact the editorial office at admin@seajsm.org.