ISSN 1645-4464
[printed version]

INSTRUCTIONS TO AUTHORS

• Scope and policy
• Form and preparation of manuscripts

Revista de Gestão dos Países de Língua Portuguesa (RGPLP), published by INDEG-ISCTE Executive Education in Lisbon, Portugal, in partnership with Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Faculdade de Economia, Universidade Agostinho Neto, Angola, and Escola de Administração de Negócios do ISUTC, Moçambique, every four months provides a scientific approach and dissemination of different areas of management, including Strategy, Marketing, Human Resources, Tourism, Logistics, Finance, Accounting, Information Systems, among others.

With the participation of renowned national authors from the Community of Portuguese Language Countries and foreign authors, RGPLP includes articles, case-studies and studies. The growing number of authors has contributed to this Review becoming increasingly a world reference in the Portuguese language, and an open space where the various universities and companies have the opportunity to publish their research or reflect their practices, either in their native language or in English or Spanish.

The acceptance of the articles submitted will depend on the blind referee (anonymous evaluation) of at least two (double) specialists in their area, members of the Referees Board of RGPLP. The Editors-in-chief and Managing Editors hold the right not to publish the articles that the Referees Board does not grant adequate level or that do not meet the standards mentioned here.

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

1. All readers with academic research in the area of management may submit original work in the form of articles, studies, cases or summaries of masters or doctorates theses.

2. Articles must be written using Word format, in Times New Roman, font size 12 and 1.5 line spacing with a maximum of 40.000 characters (including spaces, abstract, key words, CV's, figures, tables and graphs, notes and bibliographic references). Texts written in Portuguese, Spanish, and Galician will be also accepted.

3. All proposals must include a short CV (no more than four lines) of the authors, i.e., institutional position, academic qualification (area and university), current responsibilities, e-mail, telephone and address to which correspondence should be sent.

4. In order to encourage and intensify exchanges in the scientific community, articles must include not only the title, but also the abstract, each with no more than 1.000 characters. The abstract should present the objective of the work, methodology followed, results obtained and conclusions presented.

5. Following the abstract, it is essential that key words, which are representative of the work (maximum of five), are given.

6. The order of the work must be as follows: page with the title, name, e-mail and short CV of the authors, key words, date of the conclusion of the work, text, notes, bibliographic references and annexes.

7. The bibliographic references must be put in the text according to the “name, date” system (i.e., Hughes, 2000). When citing authors, the page number(s) must be added, e.g.:

- “Hence, Shah (1998) classifies it as…”;

- “As referred by Kelly (1995, p. 62)...”;

- “On public expectations, Davidson (1975, pp. 47-50)...”;

- Various authors: (Farr and Moscovici, 1984) or (Lewin et al., 1944).

8. The list of bibliographic references, which is mandatory and found at the end of the text, must be in alphabetical order and comply with the format in the following examples:

- Book: FLOWERS, S. (1996), Software Failure: Management Failure – Amazing Stories and Cautionary Tales. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.

- Translated book: SCHUMPETER, J.A. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development. Trans. R. Opie from the 2nd German ed. (1926). Harvard University Press, Cambridge. [The body of the text should refer to: “Schumpeter (1926/1934)...”.]

 - Chapter from a book: LOVEMAN, G. (1994), “An assessment of the productivity impact on information technologies”. In T. Allen and M. Scott-Morton (Eds.), Information Technology and the Corporation of the 1990s: Research Studies. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 84-110.

 - Published article: BAILEY, J.E. & PEARSONS, S. (1983), “Development of a tool for measuring and analysing computer user satisfaction”. Management Science, vol. 29(5), pp. 530-545.

 - Communication at a scientific meeting: MOSS, L. (1998), “Dirty data: diffusing the bomb that can destroy your data warehouse”. Chicago Conference on DQ, February.

 - Working Paper: BUCHHERT, L.C. & GULATI, M.G. (2002), “Sovereign Bonds and the Collective Will”. Georgetown University Law Center, Working Paper no. 34, March.

 - Unpublished dissertation: CRAGG, P. (1990), “Information Technology and Small Firm Performance”. Unpublished PhD thesis, Loughborough University of Technology.

 - Web site: MOSS, L. (1998), “Data cleansing – a dichotomy of data warehousing?”. http://www.dmreview.com/issues.1998/Feb/articles/feb98-46.htm.

9. The acceptance of the articles submitted will depend on the blind referee (anonymous evaluation) of at least two (double) specialists in their area, members of the Referees' Board of RGPLP. The Editors-in-Chief and Managing Editors hold the right not to publish the articles that the Referees' Board does not grant adequate level or that do not meet the standards mentioned here. The authors will be notified within an estimated period of three to six months, if the article has been accepted or rejected. The printed articles will indicate the dates of reception and acceptance.

10. It is essential that all figures, graphs and tables are sent separately from the document in graph format (tif or eps), each on a separate page to simplify paging. Their place in the text should be indicated by a well-marked intercalar line (i.e., “Figure 1 goes approximately here”).

11. The originals accepted for publication remain editorial property of RGPLP. Any partial or full reproduction of the articles may only occur after written permission of the Editors-in-Chief or Managing Editors and require reference to RGPLP. Authors will receive two complimentary copies of the issue of the review in which their article is published.

Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement

Revista de Gestão dos Países de Língua Portuguesa (RGPLP) ethic statements are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics – COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

RGPLP is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: authors, editors, and reviewers.

DUTIES OF EDITORS-IN-CHIEF and EDITORIAL BOARD

Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement

Revista de Gestão dos Países de Língua Portuguesa (RGPLP) ethic statements are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics – COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

RGPLP is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: authors, editors, and reviewers.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Reviewers should conduct the reviews objectively, and the observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. The reviewers advise the editors-in-chief in making the editorial decision.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editors and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

The RGPLP journal uses double-blind review process. Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others.

The reviewers are required to evaluate papers based on the content. The review comment must be respectful of authors expressing their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editors' attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Regardless of the screening conducted by reviewers, the editors-in-chief will submit the texts to plagiarism detection software.

DUTIES OF AUTHORS

Authors should present an accurate account of the work performed, an objective discussion of the significance of research work, as well as, sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments.  Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a manuscript for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data within reasonable time.

The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original and has not been published elsewhere in any language, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and provide accurate accounts of the state of the art. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the research reported in the manuscript. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author has a responsibility to keep co-authors posted with the review process. If accepted, all authors are required to give a signed statement that the research work is their original research work.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify RGPLP and cooperate to retract or correct the paper. If the editors-in-chief learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence of the correctness of the original paper.

RGPLP considers as unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior the following:

·       Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements (like non conducted empirical research);

·       Plagiarism in all its forms;

·       Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.

Editor-in-chief: luis.reto@iscte.pt

Executive Managing Editor: jnr@mail.telepac.pt

Submissions: revistas.indeg@iscte.pt