Editorial Policy

(i). Editorial Board structure:

The Editorial Board of the Maasai Mara Multidisciplinary Journal Journals comprises of Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board members and Advisory Board members. Editor-in-Chief is the chairperson of the board and hence allowed the final decision in any regard.

The formation of the Editorial Board is done by incorporating global experts with excellent academic track records and expertise in the respective Journal subject. There shall be eleven (11) number of Editorial Board members.

 Editorial board members must qualify as below:

• Must have a PhD degree in the relevant subject.
• Must have a good publication record.
• Must hold some academic position in Universities, Research Institutes or other such organizations.

 

(ii).       Editorial Board responsibilities and Editorial Workflow:

• All Editorial Board members must work under the direction provided by the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal.
• Any submitted manuscript shall be assessed for the suitability of the subject, scope of the Journal and the compliance to the Journal Policies by the Editor-in-Chief. Any submitted manuscripts will be subjected to a rigorous plagiarism check by editorial office. The similarity index report should not exceed more than 10%.
• Once the plagiarism check is completed and approved, the manuscripts will be assigned a manuscript number. If an article is found plagiarized, it will be summarily rejected at this stage.
• Once the manuscript number is assigned, the Editor-in-Chief will invite Editor(s) based on their expertise with the submitted manuscript. If the article is in the area of the Editor's research interest, it is expected that the assigned Editor will take up the assignment at the earliest possible time within a 1 month. If the editor declines the assignment due to some reasons, that should also be communicated to the Editorial Office at the earliest possible time.
• The assigned Editor will initially assess the article for suitability of the subject and originality of the article within the scope of the Journal. At this stage, the editor can decide whether the manuscript is accepted for peer review or may be returned to the author for revision before peer review.
• The assigned Editor will be responsible for further peer review process under the guidance of the Editor-in-Chief.
• For any manuscript assigned, the Editor will be responsible for selecting three potential reviewers based on their expertise in the particular subject areas and thereafter monitor the review process. If required, the Editor may seek support from the Editorial Office.
• Basic grammatical check on the manuscript must be performed by the Editor and inform the authors before sending the article to the reviewers.
• The assigned editor will send the manuscript together with the Peer Review Form to the reviewers for writing their evaluation report.
• Manuscripts submitted to the Journal shall be subjected to a double-blind peer-review process. In this process, the reviewer's names and author names are hidden (i.e. the reviewer will not know who the author is and vice-versa).
• Each Editor must keep in mind that the time required for reviewing the articles along with recommendations is 1 month.
• The Editor must remember the policy of fast and effective peer review. He/she must communicate with the reviewers in case of any delay in the submission of the reviewer's evaluation report.
• For any manuscript to be accepted it should have positive comments from the reviewers. Comments provided by the reviewers should convey their final decision within the following types:

1. Publish as it is
2. Consider after Minor Corrections

• Consider after Major Corrections

1. Reject

• Once the assigned Editor receives reviewers' evaluation reports, he/she will be responsible for providing the decision based on the comments and their relevance and suitability with the manuscript. In such circumstances the Editor's decision is final. The reviewers or authors are not entitled to raise any questions after the final decision.
• If the assigned Editor decides to send the article for revision based on reviewers’ comments, it will be forwarded to the authors for revision.
• The authors are liable to send back the revised manuscript to the Editorial Office within the stipulated time.
• Once the revised manuscript is received, it will be further inspected for the incorporation of the specified corrections.
• The assigned Editor may provide the decision or send it back to the reviewer once more depending on the comparative status and enrichment of the manuscript.
• In every step of processing, the Editor-in-Chief has the right to be involved and make the final decision for any publication oriented issue.
• It is the Editor’s responsibility to inform the selected reviewers that they are not entitled to use any part of the work in any form provided in the article they are reviewing. Reviewers should also be informed about the complete confidentiality of the assignments they are undertaking.
• Editors will be responsible to convey the expectations of the Journal to the reviewers with the review scope, quality and timeliness for an effective, fair and constructive review for the assigned submission.
• Editors must provide appropriate input regarding the targeted readers and their preferences. In other words, creative input from Editors will help in understanding the readers and their choices within the scope of the subject.
• Editors are required to attend Editorial Board meetings scheduled by the Editorial Office for discussions to improve the Journal. 

   

(iii).      Code of Conduct

• The assigned Editor should not have any conflict of interest with any assignment. In case of conflicts, then he or she should decline the assignment, stating the proper reason to the Editorial Office.
• Every Editor must treat each submission objectively and transparently.
• Once the assigned Editor is notified by the Editor-in-Chief regarding any information at any stage of the publication process for an assigned manuscript, the Editor must respond as fast as possible.
• Editors must ensure the smooth functioning of the whole process in coordination with the publishing house.
• Along with the publisher, the Editorial Board members are responsible for the timely publishing of the accepted articles.
• The Editor-in-Chief should ensure that all articles accepted for publication have been assessed by an editor.
• The Editor-in-Chief should not make decisions regarding manuscripts about which he/she may have a conflict of interest. In such instances, a senior member of the Editorial Board will be assigned to assume responsibility for overseeing peer review and making decisions regarding acceptance or rejection.
• The Editor-in-Chief must ensure Editorial Board members are not involved with the peer-review or decision-making process of any manuscript where they have a conflict of interest.
• Although the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board members may publish in their Journal, the number of articles must be restricted to ensure the majority of publications come from other authors.
• The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board members must provide a professional service o authors. Correspondence should be handled in a timely, respectful, efficient and thorough peer-review. Systems must be in place to ensure continuity in the editorial process.
• The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial members who operate a closed peer-review system for the Journal must maintain the anonymity of peer reviewers.