Submissions

Author Guidelines

• Introduction – explanation of the reasons for conducting the research and specifying the question to which the answer was sought for;
• Chapters/sections;
• Conclusions – key results and findings;
• References – up to 25 scientific positions;

Abstract: up to 1,000 characters, containing justification for the purposefulness of research or discussion; presentation of the research problem and goal definition of  the prepared work; description of the research methodology or a solution to the theoretical problem; synthetic presentation of results;

• Keywords – up to 5 words;
• JEL classification codes;

• J.B. McGuire believes that enterprises have both economic and legal responsibilities as well as obligations towards society [Wachowiak, 2013: 78];
• “Niewątpliwie wiedza jest kluczowym zasobem współczesnej organizacji” [Wachowiak, Gregorczyk, 2018];
• Urbaniak M. [2018a; 2018b];
• “How top managers construct the meaning of sustainable human resource management (HRM)” [Järlström et al., 2018].

• Dworzecki Z., Jarosiński M. (eds.) [2014], Within and beyond boundaries of management, SGH Publishing House, Warsaw.
• Gregorczyk S. [2014], Business models of Polish enterprises during the economic crisis, Journal of Management and Financial Sciences 18(4): 63–89.
• Järlström M., Saru E., Vanhala S. [2018], Sustainable human resource management with salience of stakeholders: A top management perspective, Journal of Business Ethics 152: 703–724.
• Skowronek-Mielczarek A. [2013], Innovations in resources management of enterprises, SGH Publishing House, Warsaw.
• Sopińska A., Wachowiak P. [2016], Innowacyjność przedsiębiorstw działających w Polsce, Przegląd Organizacji 5: 17–23.
• Trocki M. [2016], Designing project organization, in: Trocki M., Bukłaha E. (eds.), Project management – challenges and research results, SGH Publishing House, Warsaw.
• Urbaniak M. [2018a], The role of process improvements tools in building relationship between suppliers and industrial clients, in: Studzieniecki T., Kozina M., Alilovic D.S. (eds.), Economic and social development. 33rd International scientific conference on economic and social development – "Managerial Issues in Modern Business", Warsaw, 26-27 September: 127–134.
• Urbaniak M. [2018b], The role of the requirements of quality, environmental and safety management systems in the relationship with suppliers, in: Urbaniak M. (ed.), Book of proceedings ICoM 2018 8th International conference on management "Leadership, Innovativeness and Entrepreneurship in a Sustainable Economy”, Wydawnictwo Wydziału Zarządzania Politechniki Częstochowskiej, Częstochowa.
• Wachowiak P. [2013], Wrażliwość społeczna przedsiębiorstwa: Analiza i pomiar, SGH Publishing House, Warsaw.

The Journal is printed in black and white (with the shades of gray) – it is not allowed to use other colors in the charts.

Figures and tables should be prepared in graphic programs such as CorelDraw, Illustrator, Excel or Word, in a vector form with the possibility of applying corrections, preserving the shades of gray.

Mathematical formulas, tables, figures and graphs should have continuous numbering throughout the entire text.

Table formatting should be limited to the minimum necessary.

The Editorial Board reserves the right to shorten and adjust the text, change the title and to editorial corrections, in accordance with the requirements of the journal.

Preparation of the article in accordance with the above requirements is a condition for submitting it for review.

The Editorial Board does not return submitted papers and electronic media.

The Editorial Board does not return submitted papers and electronic media. The papers published in the Organization and Management are protected by copyright. The text may be reprinted only with consent of Editorial Board.

PEER REVIEW PROCEDURE

The journal Organizacja i Kierowanie follows an external scholarly peer review procedure based on the double-blind peer review model. The purpose of the review process is to ensure the high scholarly quality of published articles, the integrity of their evaluation, and the impartiality of editorial decisions.

Stage I. Initial Assessment

Upon receipt of a manuscript, the editorial team conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the subject matter falls within the scope of the journal, whether the manuscript is scholarly in nature and original, its preliminary academic quality, and its compliance with the journal’s formal and editorial requirements.

At this stage, the editorial team may decide to reject the manuscript without sending it for external peer review (desk rejection), return it to the author for completion or correction of formal deficiencies, or refer it to the next stage of the peer review process.

Stage II. Selection of Reviewers and the Principle of Double Anonymity

Manuscripts that qualify for further consideration are sent to at least two independent external reviewers with appropriate scholarly expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. Reviewers must not have any relationships with the authors that could give rise to a conflict of interest.

The review process follows the principle of double anonymity (double-blind peer review), meaning that authors do not know the identities of the reviewers, and reviewers do not know the identities of the authors. The editorial team takes appropriate measures to preserve the anonymity of both parties throughout the review process.

Stage III. Preparation of Reviews and Scholarly Evaluation

Reviewers independently evaluate the manuscript, taking into account, in particular, its scholarly maturity, novelty, and originality. Reviews are prepared using the review form adopted by the editorial team. Each review concludes with a clear recommendation regarding the further consideration of the manuscript:

• acceptance for publication without revisions;
• acceptance for publication subject to the specified revisions;
• major revisions followed by another round of peer review;
• rejection of the manuscript.

Reviewers’ comments and recommendations are communicated to the authors through the editorial team. Where revisions are required, authors are expected to respond to the reviewers’ comments and submit a revised version of the manuscript. Depending on the scope of the revisions, the editorial team may send the revised manuscript for further evaluation.

Stage IV. Final Decision and Resolution of Disagreements

The editorial team makes the final decision on whether to accept the manuscript for publication, require further revisions, or reject it, taking into account the reviewers’ reports, the authors’ responses, and the manuscript’s compliance with the journal’s scope and scholarly standards.

In cases of substantial disagreement between reviewers, the editorial team may seek the opinion of an additional reviewer or take other appropriate steps to ensure a fair and well-founded decision.

Confidentiality and Impartiality

The peer review process is conducted in accordance with the principles of confidentiality and publication ethics. Reviewers are required to provide impartial, objective, and scholarly assessments of manuscripts, maintain the confidentiality of the materials they receive, and promptly inform the editorial team of any circumstances that may give rise to a conflict of interest. Information obtained during the review process must not be used for purposes unrelated to the evaluation of the manuscript.