12. Complaints Policy

12.1 Preface

The International Journal of Business and Social Dynamics (IJBSD) is committed to the highest standards of editorial integrity, transparency, accountability, and ethical publishing. IJBSD values constructive feedback and treats all complaints seriously, whether raised by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, or third parties.  This Complaints Policy establishes a transparent framework for receiving, investigating, and resolving complaints related to the journal’s editorial processes and ethical standards. All complaints are handled fairly, confidentially, and without retaliation, in accordance with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidance.

12.2 Scope of the Policy

This policy applies to complaints concerning, but not limited to:

  • Editorial or desk rejection decisions
  • Peer review quality, fairness, or delays
  • Conflicts of interest not disclosed
  • Allegations of plagiarism, duplication, or misconduct
  • Author, reviewer, or editor behaviour
  • Authorship disputes
  • Errors in published articles
  • Breaches of confidentiality
  • Violations of IJBSD journal policies

12.3 Who May Submit a Complaint

Complaints may be submitted by:

  • Authors (current or past contributors)
  • Peer reviewers
  • Editorial board members
  • Readers and researchers
  • Librarians, institutions, or funding bodies
  • Third-party observers or whistle-blowers

Anonymous complaints are accepted, provided sufficient evidence is supplied to allow investigation.

12.4 Submitting a Complaint

12.4.1 Method of Submission

Complaints must be submitted in writing through one of the following channels:

  • Email:
  • Journal website:

12.4.2 Required Information

To facilitate a timely and fair investigation, the complaint should include:

  • Complainant’s name and contact details (unless anonymous)
  • Clear description of the complaint
  • Names of individuals involved (if applicable)
  • Manuscript ID, article title, and DOI (if relevant)
  • Supporting documentation (emails, screenshots, reports, or links)

Incomplete complaints may delay or limit investigation.

12.5 Complaint Investigation Process

12.5.1 Initial Assessment

Upon receipt:

  • The complaint is logged by the Managing Editor
  • Acknowledgment is sent to the complainant
  • The issue is reviewed for relevance, credibility, and scope

12.5.2 Investigation

If the complaint is actionable:

  • It is assigned to a senior editor, ethics committee, or independent advisor
  • Relevant parties may be contacted for clarification or response
  • Editorial records, peer review files, and correspondence are examined
  • Confidentiality is strictly maintained throughout the process

12.5.3 Resolution

Based on findings, possible outcomes include:

  • Clarification or formal explanation
  • Apology or procedural correction
  • Editorial action (re-review, correction, or retraction)
  • Removal of a reviewer or editor from duties
  • Notification to affiliated institutions or funders (if misconduct is confirmed)

All parties are informed in writing of the final decision.

12.6 Appeals Process

If a complainant is dissatisfied with the resolution:

  • An appeal may be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days
  • Appeals must present new evidence or substantive justification
  • An independent editor or external ethics advisor may be consulted
  • The final decision is communicated within 3–4 weeks and is binding

12.7 Complaints Related to Editorial Decisions

Authors who believe a decision was:

  • Biased
  • Procedurally flawed
  • Based on reviewer misconduct

may submit a formal complaint. IJBSD may:

  • Re-evaluate editorial procedures
  • Seek independent editorial input
  • Allow resubmission or reconsideration (where justified)

 Editorial judgment on academic merit remains final unless procedural error is proven.

12.8 Complaints Related to Peer Review Delays

Authors experiencing unusually long review timelines may:

  • Request a manuscript status update
  • Submit a complaint if repeated inquiries go unanswered

The editorial office will respond within 5–7 working days, explaining delays and outlining corrective steps.

12.9 Confidentiality and Whistle-Blower Protection

IJBSD ensures that:

  • All complaints are handled confidentially
  • Whistle-blowers are protected from retaliation
  • Investigations are impartial and evidence-based
  • Records are stored securely

Anonymous complaints are respected but may limit investigatory scope if evidence is insufficient.

12.10 Misuse of the Complaints Process

IJBSD does not tolerate:

  • Abusive, threatening, or defamatory language
  • Knowingly false allegations
  • Attempts to pressure or manipulate editorial decisions

Such misuse may result in:

  • Dismissal of the complaint
  • Restrictions on future submissions
  • Institutional notification in severe cases

12.11 Institutional Cooperation

In complex or serious misconduct cases, IJBSD may:

  • Seek cooperation from authors’ institutions or funders
  • Share evidence confidentially with research integrity officers
  • Align actions with institutional investigation outcomes

All cooperation follows COPE ethical guidance.

12.12 Monitoring and Policy Review

  • Complaints are reviewed annually for trends and systemic issues
  • Findings are reported to the Editorial Board
  • Editorial training, policy updates, and procedural improvements may follow