Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

This journal aims to seek quality articles to answer the need to improve the understanding of effective management and business applications within Asia Pacific countries.  APMBA (Asia Pacific Management and Business Application) provides current trends in knowledge and practical applications in management and business practices.

In APMBA (Asia Pacific Management and Business Application) readers will find articles and features providing a comprehensive and pragmatic view of the real management and business practices in this turbulence world particularly in the regions where the journal concentrate on. The journal seeks high quality, quantitative, qualitative or review based articles written by academic professionals and corporate executives who wish to share their ideas and research findings in the Asia Pacific region.

APMBA welcomes articles in the areas of (unlimited to) general management, human resource management, financial management, operation management, marketing, strategic management, entrepreneurship, organizational behavioral, strategic management, practical accounting perspectives, public administration, and others.


Editorial Correspondences


All inquiries including manuscript submission should be sent to Dr. Dodi Irawanto, Chief Editor of APMBA (Asia Pacific Management and Business Application), Management Department, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Brawijaya, Jl. M.T. Haryono No. 165, Malang, Indonesia. Tel. +62 341 551396. Fax +62 341 553834. E-mail : apmba@ub.ac.id.


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Literature Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process


All manuscripts sent to APMBA (Asia Pacific Management and Business Application) will be processed through double-blind peer reviews. The editorial office will determine whether or not a manuscript is suitable for publication and meet the journal's aims and scope before being processed further to the reviewing processes. Normally the editorial office will write a notification letter to the author(s) indicating that the manuscripts are received within 2-3 days after the submission. The author(s) must ensure that an article submitted to APMBA must not have been previously published or currently submitted for publications elsewhere.

All submissions can be made using our online systems or emailed directly to the editorial office. All manuscripts submitted to the journal will be directed to the associated editor. Once they meet the editorial office’s (originality, significance, criteria, and contribution) criteria, they will be sent for reviews at least by two external reviewers. The editor in chief will contact the author(s) once the results are available. Editor in chief has full authority to make one of the following decisions upon received reviewers’ and editorial board’s comments:

  1. To publish
  2. To accept with a minor revision
  3. To accept with a major revision
  4. To reject

A summary of reviewers’ and editor’s comments will be given to the author(s). All of these processes can be varied in time, but APMBA guarantees that all reviewed articles will not take longer than three months from the date of submission.

Important Disclaimer

APMBA (Asia Pacific Management and Business Application) accepts any liabilities for the consequences of any inaccurate, misleading data, opinions, or statements. Every effort is made by the journal and the editorial board to see that there are no inaccurate, misleading data, opinions, or statements appearing in the published article.  It has to be clear that the data, opinions, and statements appearing in the articles are the sole responsibility of the author(s).

Plagiarism Policy

Each submitted manuscript will be checked for plagiarism levels with a turnitin application to prevent plagiarism. the maximum limit for total detected sources is 24% and each detected source is a maximum of 2%.


Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.



This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More.


Publication Ethics

Our Publication Ethics is mainly based on Elsevier policies and Committee on Publication Ethics/ COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. These guidelines should be useful for authors, editorial board, and reviewers. These guidelines are intended to be advisory rather than prescriptive and to evolve over time. We hope that they will be disseminated widely, endorsed by editors and refined by those who use them.

Author’s Responsibilities                                                                  

Reporting standards

Original research reports should 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 paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.


Authors will submit only entirely original work, and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others.

Plagiarism and copyright

Plagiarism range from the unreferenced use of others published and unpublished ideas, including research grant applications to submission under "new" authorship of a complete paper, sometimes in a different language. It may occur at any stage of planning, research, writing, or publication: it applies to print and electronic versions. All sources should be disclosed, and if large amounts of other people’s written or illustrative material are to be used, permission must be sought. This journal requires authors to declare that the work reported is their own and that they are copyright owners (or else have obtained the copyright owners permission).

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should not in general publish manuscript 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 and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in the authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgment of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the paper

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.

The corresponding author ensures all contributing co-authors and no uninvolved person are included in the author list. The corresponding author will also verify that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. 

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the result or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock, ownership and honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflict of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Fundamental error in published works

When author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper in form of an erratum.

Reviewer’s Responsibilities

Contribution to editorial decision

Peer review assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper.


Any selected referee who fells unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and with draw from the review process.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editors.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviews should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers will notify the editor of any substantial similarity on overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscript in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connection with any of the authors, companies, or institution connected to the papers.

 The Editorial Board Responsibilities

Publication Decisions

The editor is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the journal’s scope. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Fair play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or philosophy of the authors.


The editor and any editorial staff  must not disclosed any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recues themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

The editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.


Article Retraction

APMBA (Asia Pacific Management and Business Application) is committed to conducting its part in upholding the credibility of the scholarly record, and it is therefore appropriate, on occasion, to remove the article(s). Article(s) can be removed if:

  1. There is a significant scientific mistake that may invalidate the conclusions of the article, for example, there is strong proof that the findings are not credible, either as a result of fraud (e.g. data manufacturing) or an honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error).
  2. The results have previously been published elsewhere without sufficient cross-reference, permission or justification.
  3. There are ethical problems such as plagiarism (appropriation of the ideas, procedures, findings or words of another person(s) without giving due credit, even those gained by confidential analysis of the manuscripts of others) or unauthorized authorship.

In order to ensure that retractions are treated in compliance with the best practice of publishing and the COPE Retraction Guidelines APMBA (Asia Pacific Management and Business Application) adopts the following retraction process:

  1. An article requiring possible retraction shall be brought to the attention of the editor of the journal.
  2. The editor of the journal should obey the step-by-step instructions according to the COPE flowcharts (including evaluating a response from the author of the article in question).
  3. Before any decision is taken, the reports of the editor should be forwarded to the Ethics Advisory Board which will be a forum to provide an advice and recommendations regarding ethical issues. The goal of this move is to ensure a consistent approach in line with industry best practices.
  4. The final decision on whether to withdraw is then conveyed to the author and, if necessary, to all other relevant bodies, such as the institution of the author on occasion.
  5. The Retraction Statement is then posted online and released in the next available journal issue (see below for more details of this step).

Notice that if the author(s)hold the copyright for an article, this does not mean that they automatically have a right to remove it after publication. The credibility of the published scientific record is of utmost importance and the COPE Retraction Rules still apply in such situations.


Article Withdrawal

The author is not permitted to withdraw the submitted manuscripts because the withdrawal is a waste of valuable resources since editors and referees have spent a great deal of time editing the submitted manuscript and the works invested by the publisher. The author is obliged to approve the checklist provided before sending the manuscript via OJS.

  1. If the author demands the removal of his/her manuscript while the manuscript is still under peer-review, the author will be fined by paying 500000 IDR or equivalent per manuscript.
  2. If the withdrawal of the manuscript is approved for print, the author will be fined by paying 1000000 IDR or equivalent per manuscript.
  3. If the manuscript has been published as "Article in Press" (articles that have been accepted for publication but which has not been formally published and will not have the complete volume/issue/page information) that include errors, or are discovered to be accidental duplicates of other published article(s), or are determined to violate our journal publishing ethics guidelines in the view of the editors (such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like), maybe "Withdrawn" From the APMBA (Asia Pacific Management and Business Application) website. Withdrawing means that the article content (HTML and PDF) is deleted and replaced with an HTML page and PDF simply states that the article has been withdrawn. In this case, the author will be punished by paying 1000000 IDR or equivalent per manuscript.
  4. If the author does not consent to pay the penalty, the author and his/her affiliation will be blacklisted for five (5) years to publish in this journal.
  5. If the author requests removal of the manuscript, an official letter signed by the corresponding author and Head of Department of the affiliated institution should be submitted to the Principal Editor.


Article Correction

APMBA (Asia Pacific Management and Business Application) should consider making a correction if:

  1. A small part of otherwise reliable publication reports incorrect data or proves to be inaccurate, particularly if this is the product of an honest mistake.
  2. The list of author(s)or contributors is wrong (e.g. a deserving Author has been omitted or someone who does not meet authorship criteria has been included).

Corrections to peer-reviewed material fall into one of three categories:

  1. Publisher correction (erratum): inform readers of a significant error made by the publisher/journal staff (usually a production error) which has a negative effect on the publication record or the scientific credibility of the article or on the reputation of the authors or journals.
  2. Author correction (corrigendum): to inform readers of a significant error made by the authors which have a negative effect on the publication record or the scientific reputation of the paper, or on the reputation of the Authors or the journal.
  3. Addendum: an addition to the article by its authors to clarify contradictions, extend existing work, or otherwise explain or update the details in the main work.

The decision whether a correction should be made is made by the editor(s) of a journal, often with recommendations from the members of the Reviewers or the Editorial Board. Handling Editors will approach the Writers of the paper concerned with a request for clarification, but with a final determination as to whether a correction is needed and, if so, which form of correction rests with the Editors.

Article Removal

In a very limited number of instances, it may be appropriate to delete a published article from the website. This can only happen if the article is explicitly defamatory or infringes the legal rights of others, or if the article is, or we have a practical reason to accept it to be, the subject of a court order, or if the article if acted upon, may pose a significant health danger. In such cases, the metadata (i.e. title and author information) of the article will be preserved, the text will be replaced by a screen showing that the article has been deleted for legal purposes.


Article Replacement

In situations where an article can pose a significant health risk, the authors of the original paper may decide to remove the original faulty and substitute it with a corrected edition. In such cases, the procedures for retraction referred to above will be followed with the difference that the notice of retraction of the article will include a link to the revised re-published article along with the history of the text.