The editorial board of the Journal of Engineering and Management (JEM) is grateful to the reviewers for their assistance in deciding about the acceptance of the manuscripts for publication. Reviewers' assessment is the crucial support to the editorial board in making decision to publish a manuscript. The main task of the reviewers is to evaluate each individual manuscript submitted to them, and thus contribute to the improvement and maintenance of a high scientific research achievement and rank of the journal itself and that of the author of the paper as well.
We kindly ask reviewers to approach the reviewing process in a respectful and constructive manner, in accordance with their areas of expertise, and to help authors through the evaluation to improve their manuscripts.
The review process is double-blind. The identity of the reviewer is normally not revealed and the identity of the author remains unknown until the publication of the paper.
JEM accepts manuscripts from the fields of: mechanical engineering, industrial engineering, energy engineering and industrial management. JEM publishes original research articles, review articles, case studies and short communications. Your review must include the categorization of the manuscript in one of the above categories, which is assigned by selecting the appropriate option in the Review Form. The following are the brief descriptions of the categories of papers.
Original research article contains unpublished results of scientific research in a complete or preliminary form. It must contain: the scientific context of the problem, with reference to the relevant results of previous research and relevant literature, corpus, methods and objectives of the research, and, after analyzing the research problem, clearly present the results in the conclusion. It must be written in such a way that the results, analyses and abstracts can be checked on the basis of the given information. Original research articles follow the IMRAD structure and are 8 to 12 pages long.
Review article provides a comprehensive and critical review of a particular problem and relevant literature, a new synthesis of scientific information; it points out similarities, differences and shortcomings in the existing literature and it should render the author’s theoretically grounded perspective. The role of author's original contribution in this area in relation to already published works must be emphasized, as well as a review of these works. The review article is 10 to 12 pages long, and it should include at least 50 references.
Case study implies an in-depth and holistic approach to the research of a specific and limited phenomenon (case). Data are collected on selected cases in order to gain some preliminary or permanent knowledge, using different methods and data sources that will contribute to a comprehensive and thorough description and understanding of the case. Quantitative and qualitative research methods and techniques can be used to look at, describe and understand a particular case from different perspectives. The emphasis is on observing, analyzing and interpreting a particular phenomenon or scenario. Case study papers can be 8 to 12 pages long.
Short communication is an original scientific work in full format, but on a smaller scale, which contains previously unpublished findings of either completed or ongoing research. Some elements of the IMRAD structure (introduction, methods, results and discussion) can be omitted in this category of paper. Short communication is a concise representation of the results that is 4 to 6 pages long.
JEM strives to disseminate scientific knowledge, and the credibility of the published work depends entirely on an efficient review process. Manuscript review is an important part of the publishing process. Reviewers are requested to make an assessment and give recommendations to ensure that the scientific quality of the manuscript is in line with the requirements. The reviewers should review the manuscripts submitted by the editor within the specified deadline and provide authentic feedback.
- Reviewers are independent in their work. No one can influence the work and evaluation of the reviewer. Reviewers have an obligation to take care of ethical issues.
- Manuscripts are assigned to the reviewers based on their research interests.
- After receiving the manuscript, the reviewer may contact the editor if there is a time problem or conflict of interest, on the basis of which the editor may extend the deadline or cancel the review assignment.
- During the review process, if a reviewer establishes that the manuscript does not fit into his field of expertise, he should notify the editor.
- Reviewers should review the submitted manuscript impartially. Critical assessment should be made objectively, and offensive remarks are not acceptable.
- If the manuscript is a plagiarism or the paper has already been published in another journal / proceedings / monograph, the reviewer has to inform the editor without delay.
- When evaluating the manuscript, the reviewer assesses whether the topic and content of the manuscript fit the profile of the journal, whether it is based on relevant scientific knowledge in the field and whether it contains all necessary elements presented in the Guidelines for authors with citation rules.
- The reviewer may propose to the editorial board: to accept the paper without changes; to accept the paper on the condition that parts of it are shortened, reworked or omitted and the paper returned to the reviewer for final evaluation after the proposed changes; not to accept the manuscript.
- Reviewers are required not to make personal use of the information in the manuscript and to protect it from any misuse.
- Reviewing is done via the OJS platform available at:
If you have any questions regarding the review of the manuscript, please contact the editor. We appreciate that you have accepted to be a reviewer and that you have dedicated your time and expertise to JEM.