Announcements

  • Responsible AI Use Policy

    2026-04-01

    Preamble

    JOTMI publishes research on technology, management and innovation at a time when research itself is undergoing an unprecedented technological transformation. The arrival of large language models (LLMs) and generative artificial intelligence tools has irreversibly altered the practices of scholarly writing, analysis, peer review and scientific communication. To ignore this shift would be a disservice to our readers; to react with blanket prohibitions would be naïve and counterproductive.

    This policy takes a deliberate middle position: artificial intelligence is a legitimate, useful technology that, when properly employed, benefits the academic ecosystem. Its use is not, in itself, an editorial breach. What this journal requires —and verifies— is transparency, substantive human oversight, bibliographic integrity and empirical truthfulness. Authorship, together with the scientific and ethical responsibility for every manuscript, remain entirely within the human domain.

    This document complements and is to be read jointly with the JOTMI Publication Integrity Protocol and Extended Retraction Policy, of which it constitutes the preventive and orientative counterpart.

    1. Purpose and scope

    This policy establishes the principles, definitions, obligations and recommendations governing the use of artificial intelligence at every stage of JOTMI's editorial cycle. It applies to authors, co-authors, peer reviewers, associate editors, members of the Editorial Board and the journal's technical staff. It covers manuscript preparation, submission, peer review, copy-editing, publication and post-publication oversight.

    The policy applies regardless of the AI model used, whether open-source or proprietary, locally hosted or cloud-based, and regardless of its specific version. It also applies to tools that incorporate AI as a secondary layer (writing assistants, neural translators, reference managers with automated suggestions, peer-review assistants, image and figure generators, statistical-programming assistants, and so on).

    2. Operational definitions

    For the purposes of this policy:

    Generative artificial intelligence: any computational system capable of producing original text, code, numerical data, images, audio or video from instructions (prompts) or input data. This includes, but is not limited to, general-purpose large language models (LLMs) and multimodal systems.

    Workslop: textual or tabular content that is technically coherent but substantively empty, repetitive, evasive or disconnected from the actual contribution of the study, characteristic of automated generation without human curation.

    Hallucination: a claim, reference, datum or citation produced by an AI system that has no correspondence with reality or with any verifiable source.

    Ghost citation (V2): a bibliographic reference whose formal identifier (DOI, URL, ISBN) does exist but resolves to a document different from the one the author claims to be citing.

    3. Guiding principles

    Six irreducible principles articulate the entire policy:

    Transparency. Any non-trivial use of AI in preparing a manuscript must be disclosed in a specific and verifiable manner. Deliberate omission is treated as a serious editorial breach.

    Non-delegable human responsibility. Authorship is exclusively human. AI systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors, cannot sign conflict-of-interest statements, cannot assume ethical commitments and therefore cannot be held accountable for content. Every signing party assumes full responsibility for every claim, figure, reference and visual in the manuscript, without exception and regardless of the tool used to produce them.

    Truthfulness and empirical rigour. The use of AI does not, in any degree, attenuate the standard requirements of honesty, replicability and data traceability. Data fabricated by a model, non-existent references and hallucinated results are scientific fraud.

    Substantive oversight. Any AI output incorporated into a manuscript must be read, understood, verified and, where appropriate, rewritten by the human author or authors. Nominal oversight —signing without reading— is equivalent to no oversight at all.

    Equity and accessibility. JOTMI recognises that access to AI tools improves linguistic equity for authors whose first language is not English and for researchers with fewer institutional resources. This policy protects that access and rejects punitive interpretations that would, in practice, penalise the academic communities that benefit most from these tools.

    Confidentiality. Any observation, finding, score or signal generated during the editorial process —including outputs from the automated audit infrastructure— is treated as strictly reserved information shared only among the editorial team, the authors and, where applicable, the assigned reviewers. The audit is a tool for editorial improvement that serves the author and the integrity of the scientific record; it is not a mechanism for public exposure. This confidentiality is unconditional: it does not depend on the author's compliance with this policy nor on the final decision regarding the manuscript.

    4. Policy for authors

    4.1 General stance

    JOTMI does not reject or penalise manuscripts merely on the grounds of having been supported by artificial intelligence. The editorial question is not "did you use AI?", but "is what you assert true, original, rigorous and useful?"

    4.2 Compatible uses without detailed disclosure

    Purely instrumental uses with low influence on substantive content do not require detailed disclosure. These include: spelling and grammar correction, translation of the manuscript from the author's native language, lexical and stylistic suggestions, automated bibliographic formatting in reference managers, file-format conversion and audio transcription. A brief mention in the AI Use Declaration section (see 4.5) is sufficient when the author considers it appropriate.

    4.3 Uses requiring explicit disclosure

    The following uses must be specifically declared in the corresponding section of the manuscript (see 4.5):

    • Substantive generation or rewriting of fragments of the manuscript text, beyond linguistic correction.
    • Generation of abstracts by AI, in whole or in part.
    • Assistance in formulating hypotheses, methodological design or interpretation of results.
    • Generation of, or assistance with, statistical-analysis code, data-processing scripts or database queries.
    • Primary-data analysis using AI tools (automated classification, AI-assisted qualitative coding, topic modelling, etc.).
    • Bibliographic search delegated to generative AI systems, particularly when these have suggested references that the author then incorporated into the manuscript.
    • Generation of figures, schematics, diagrams or images by generative AI.
    • Substantial reformulation or restructuring of the manuscript.

    The declaration must specify: which tool or model was used (with version, where available), in which sections, for what purpose and under what level of subsequent human oversight. This information is added to the editorial file; it does not, by itself, determine the outcome of the evaluation, except where it reveals breach of the prohibited uses listed in 4.4.

    4.4 Prohibited uses

    The following constitute serious editorial breach, subject to immediate rejection or, where applicable, subsequent retraction in accordance with the Extended Retraction Policy:

    • Presenting as original any content generated entirely by AI without verification or substantive human rewriting.
    • Attributing authorship —in whole or in part— to an AI system.
    • Including hallucinated or non-existent bibliographic references, or references whose DOI resolves to a work different from the one cited (ghost citations V2).
    • Fabricating numerical data, observations, interview transcripts, experimental results or any other empirical material by means of AI.
    • Inserting hidden text, microtext, embedded comments or residual instructions (chat prompts) intended to manipulate the editorial process or subsequent indexing.
    • Substituting Latin characters with homoglyphs from other alphabets (Cyrillic, Greek, etc.) in order to evade similarity-detection systems or manipulate searches.
    • Artificially inflating the reference list with citations bearing no substantive relation to the text, including excessive self-citation or AI-suggested courtesy citations.
    • Any practice consistent with paper mills, sale or purchase of authorship, hyper-prolific publishing without verifiable contribution under CRediT, or impersonation of academic identity.

    4.5 Form and placement of the declaration

    The AI use declaration must appear in a dedicated section titled "Declaration on the Use of Artificial Intelligence", placed immediately after the Acknowledgements and before the References. In manuscripts undergoing double-blind review, where Acknowledgements are removed in the anonymous version, the Declaration section is placed directly after the Conclusions. In manuscripts whose AI use does not exceed the compatible uses listed in 4.2, the following sentence suffices: "The authors did not use generative artificial intelligence tools in the substantive preparation of this manuscript."

    4.6 Final responsibility

    In application of the principle of non-delegable human responsibility (section 3), signature of the manuscript constitutes express declaration that each co-author has read the complete content and personally verified every cited bibliographic reference prior to submission. This verification is not transferred to, nor diminished by, the use of any automated tool.

    5. Policy for peer reviewers

    JOTMI peer reviewers perform an intellectual function whose delegation to AI systems, without disclosure or oversight, contravenes editorial trust and compromises the confidentiality of manuscripts.

    Reviewers may use AI tools for ancillary tasks —verifying references, translating the manuscript into their working language, formatting comments— provided that: (a) they declare such use to the handling editor in the confidential-comments section of the report; (b) they do not upload the complete manuscript or substantial parts of it to AI services whose data-retention policies do not guarantee confidentiality; (c) the substantive opinion on contribution, methodology and relevance comes from the reviewer's human judgement, not from the model.

    JOTMI considers, among other signals, the following as indicators of inappropriate delegation of review: response times systematically close to zero between assignment and report submission, reports exhibiting lexical patterns typical of AI-generated content, the absence of specific observations tied to the empirical content of the manuscript, and recurring patterns across reports produced by the same reviewer. Such signals will prompt private editorial enquiry to the reviewer, with no automatic sanction, but may result in removal from the panel if a systematic practice is confirmed.

    JOTMI also reserves the right to incorporate internal AI-based editorial-assistance tools —including tools for reviewer suggestion, technical pre-evaluation of submissions and bibliographic verification— under the same principle of transparency that this policy demands of authors. Any substantive editorial use of AI will be reported in the institutional section of the journal's website.

    6. Policy for editors and editorial staff

    Associate editors, guest editors and the technical staff of JOTMI are bound by the same requirements of transparency and human oversight defined for authors and reviewers. Substantive editorial decisions —to accept, request revisions, reject or retract— are non-delegable human responsibilities. The audit tools described in section 7 generate technical evidence; they never, by themselves, issue editorial decisions.

    The editorial team will keep an internal record of consultations to AI systems made in the course of the editorial process, particularly where these have influenced the final decision. This record will be available to the Editorial Board and, in the event of a documented author appeal, to the corresponding review procedure.

    7. Automated editorial-audit infrastructure

    In line with the standard practice of indexed academic journals, JOTMI uses commercial similarity- and plagiarism-detection tools recognised by the publishing industry (Crossref Similarity Check / iThenticate and equivalents). On that basis —and in a complementary, not substitutive manner— it operates its own audit infrastructure consisting of four interoperable modules covering dimensions that similarity detection alone does not address: authorship integrity, bibliographic truthfulness with DOI verification, patterns of automated text generation, and internal coherence between the data described, the methods declared and the results reported.

    AAM (Authorship and Affiliation Module), currently at v2.2, performs verification of authorial identity, consistency of affiliations, ORCID traceability and detection of patterns consistent with paper mills. It includes a Document Integrity Scan phase (Phase 0.5) with safety toggles for the detection of homoglyphs, hidden text and structural file manipulation. It also applies the Source Recovery Protocol for cases of similarity-detection evasion.

    BIM (Bibliographic Integrity Module), currently at v3.2, evaluates the integrity of the reference section through a composite index (BIX), the typological classification of each reference (10 categories), the detection of invalid DOIs, ghost citations, hijacked journals and hallucinated references, and verification of bibliographic currency relative to the field.

    WAM (Workslop and AI-text Module), currently at v3.0 adapted to JOTMI, analyses the manuscript's lexical signature, characteristic patterns of automated generation without curation, the quality of academic English (AEQ) and the management-specific codes MG1 to MG3 proper to the journal's editorial line.

    DSRM (Data and Statistical Reporting Module), currently at v2.0, operates on a verbatim extraction phase (Extraction Dossier) intended to prevent hallucinated evaluations, and verifies internal coherence between described data, declared methods and reported results.

    These modules may be applied at any stage of the editorial process, including post-publication. Their results constitute technical evidence and are one —not the only— input to human editorial decision-making.

    8. Consequences regime

    Breaches of this policy are graded according to their severity and their wilful or negligent character, and are linked directly to the JOTMI Publication Integrity Protocol and Extended Retraction Policy.

    Minor breaches —omission of disclosure where it was due, and template declarations that provide no real information— are typically resolved through a request for correction during the editorial process, without affecting the final decision.

    Moderate breaches —invalid references not detected by the author, AI-generated sections without disclosure but verifiable as substantive, generic declarations that conceal intensive use— are resolved through a request for major revision or rejection, at the discretion of the handling editor.

    Serious breaches —data fabrication, hallucinated bibliography, ghost citations V2, evasion techniques (homoglyphs, microtext, embedded prompts), attribution of authorship to AI, practices consistent with paper mills— activate the procedures of the Extended Retraction Policy, including definitive rejection at the pre-publication stage or formal retraction at the post-publication stage, in accordance with the Retraction Notice protocol and the permanent mark on the document.

    9. Confidentiality of the editorial audit and official communications

    JOTMI operates under a policy of strict confidentiality covering the entire editorial process. Manuscripts under evaluation, internal observations, scores produced by the audit infrastructure described in section 7, and correspondence between authors, reviewers and editors all constitute reserved information. This information is not disclosed to third parties, is not published, is not commented on social media, is not used for purposes of public exposure and does not constitute a basis for decisions outside the journal itself. The audit is an editorial tool serving the author and the scientific record; it is not a denunciation mechanism.

    The formal consequences described in section 8 —when applicable— are executed only through the standard public mechanisms of the academic community, principally the Retraction Notice and the corresponding marks on the published document, with their traceability in bibliographic databases. JOTMI does not disseminate evaluation findings through informal channels, not even regarding rejected or withdrawn manuscripts, which retain the same level of information protection as an accepted manuscript.

    Official communications. The only official communication of JOTMI with authors, reviewers and institutions takes place from the @jotmi.org domain. Any message received from other domains —including personal email accounts, visually similar but non-identical domains, social networks, instant messaging or alleged representatives contacting via informal channels— must not be regarded as official and must be reported to the editorial office through the official domain.

    JOTMI does not request payments for processing manuscripts, does not require deposits, transfers or fees to expedite review, does not work through intermediaries, and does not condition any editorial decision on payment of any charge whatsoever. Any communication containing such a request must be treated as an attempted fraud and reported to the editorial office. This warning is particularly relevant for authors in regions where paper mills and extortion schemes posing as legitimate journals are widespread.

    Calls for papers and special issues. JOTMI special issues originate exclusively from the initiative of the Editorial Board and are announced through the official site jotmi.org. JOTMI does not accept unsolicited proposals to coordinate special issues, nor external invitations to act as a guest editor received via personal accounts or any channel other than the institutional one. Authors who receive invitations to submit manuscripts to "JOTMI special issues" through unofficial channels must verify the call against the announcements published on the official site; any call not appearing there must be treated as spurious, with no need to reply to the sender. This directive responds to an international pattern of editorial fraud (the guest-edited special issue scam) extensively documented by COPE, Retraction Watch and the specialised science press since 2019.

    10. Use of JOTMI content by external AI systems

    JOTMI publishes its material under open licences that permit reading, distribution and reuse subject to attribution. The use of the journal's content for training artificial intelligence systems is a matter distinct from the free circulation of science, and JOTMI reserves the right to implement reasonable technical measures —including robots.txt configuration, server headers and other traffic-management tools— to regulate massive automated scraping of its site. These measures do not affect human accessibility of the content nor the legitimate rights of readers and authors.

    11. Governance, validity and review

    This policy enters into force on its date of publication and applies to all manuscripts submitted from that moment onward. Manuscripts already in the editorial process at the time of publication remain governed by the version in force at the time of their submission, except with regard to the consequences regime for serious breaches in section 8, which applies retroactively to the entire historical archive of the journal as part of post-publication audit.

    The policy will be reviewed at least once per academic year by the Editorial Board, taking into account technological developments, the evolution of international standards (COPE, ICMJE, WAME) and the evidence gathered by JOTMI's own audit infrastructure. Substantive amendments will be versioned and archived; the version archive will remain publicly available.

    Queries from authors, reviewers and institutions concerning the interpretation of this policy should be directed to the JOTMI editorial office. The journal commits to responding with consistent, public and traceable criteria.

    Institutional document v1.0. Complementary to the JOTMI Publication Integrity Protocol and Extended Retraction Policy.

    Read more about Responsible AI Use Policy

  • Author Guidelines

    2026-03-01

    1. Language and submission channel

    Since December 2024, JOTMI accepts manuscripts written exclusively in English. Either American or British English spelling is acceptable, provided it is used consistently throughout the manuscript.

    All submissions must be made through the JOTMI Submissions platform. Manuscripts sent by email will not be considered. The entire process — submission, tracking, editorial communication, peer review — is conducted exclusively through the online platform. Registration and login are required.

    2. Manuscript types

    JOTMI publishes three types of manuscripts. Select the type before writing and follow the length and reference limits for that category. Word counts exclude abstract, tables, figures, captions, and references.

    • Research Article — 5,000 to 8,000 words; 10 to 40 references (typical around 30). Original empirical, theoretical or methodological study.
    • Case Study — 4,000 to 6,000 words; up to 30 references. In-depth analysis of a real-world innovation context, linking theory and practice.
    • Review Paper — up to 9,000 words; up to 50 references. Critical synthesis: narrative, systematic or meta-analytic.

    3. Required submission documents

    Each submission comprises two separate Word documents:

    3.1 Title Page

    All author-identifying information goes here. Download: JOTMI Title Page Template (.docx)

    Must include:

    • Full title of the article (≤ 15 words)
    • Author details: full names, institutional affiliations, postal addresses, institutional emails, ORCID IDs
    • Designation of the corresponding author
    • Abstract (150 to 250 words)
    • Keywords (4 to 6, separated by semicolons)
    • Brief biographical notes per author (~50 to 75 words, optional)
    • CRediT contribution table (see section 8)
    • Declaration on the use of Artificial Intelligence (see section 9)

    3.2 Document for Blind Peer Review

    Fully anonymized manuscript body. Download: JOTMI Anonymous Manuscript Template (.docx)

    Must not contain any author-identifying information in text, references, acknowledgements, or file metadata.

    Anonymization checklist — remove or neutralize:

    • Author names, affiliations and ORCIDs (these go only in the Title Page)
    • Acknowledgements, funding statements naming specific grants, and dedication notes
    • Self-citations written in a way that reveals authorship (for example, "in our previous work, Smith & Lee (2022)…") — replace with neutral phrasing ("prior work (Smith & Lee, 2022)")
    • Institutional logos, watermarks, IRB approval numbers that reveal institution, internal document codes
    • Document metadata: File → Info → Inspect Document → Remove all personal information and hidden properties

    Failure to anonymize may result in desk rejection or delay in the review process.

    4. General formatting

    • File format: Microsoft Word (.doc or .docx)
    • Font: STIX Two Text 11 pt recommended — available free at stixfonts.org; Word falls back to Cambria if not installed. Times New Roman 12 pt is also acceptable.
    • Spacing: double-spaced throughout, including references
    • Margins: 1 inch (2.54 cm) on all four sides
    • Page numbers: bottom-center, consecutive, from page 1
    • Line numbering: continuous, left margin — strongly recommended to enable reviewers to reference specific lines

    5. Manuscript structure

    Structure the blinded manuscript as follows.

    Abstract (150 to 250 words). Unstructured single paragraph. No citations, no abbreviations. Must state: (a) objective and research question; (b) methods; (c) key findings; (d) conclusions and implications.

    Keywords. 4 to 6 keywords, separated by semicolons.

    1. Introduction. Background and justification; research gap; objectives and research questions. Expected length: 500 to 800 words.

    2. Literature Review. Review of prior work; identification of gaps the present study addresses. Expected length: 800 to 1,500 words.

    3. Methodology. Research design; sample and selection criteria; data collection procedures; analytical methods; validity, reliability, and ethical approval. Expected length: 800 to 1,200 words.

    4. Results. Findings presented logically, following the research questions. Tables and figures embedded inline and referenced in the text. Expected length: 800 to 1,500 words.

    5. Discussion. Interpretation relative to the literature; theoretical and practical implications; limitations; future research directions. Expected length: 800 to 1,500 words.

    6. Conclusions. Summary of main findings; contribution to the field. Expected length: 300 to 500 words.

    Acknowledgements (optional). Added only in the final accepted version. The anonymized submission must not contain this section.

    References. APA 7 format. See section 7.

    Appendices. Use only if essential. Label clearly (Appendix A, Appendix B, …).

    6. Tables and figures

    • Placement: embed inline at the appropriate point in the text — not bundled at the end, not submitted as separate files.
    • Numbering: number consecutively (Table 1, Table 2, Figure 1, Figure 2…).
    • Captions: table titles go above the table ("Table 1. Descriptive statistics…"); figure captions go below the figure ("Figure 1. Conceptual framework…"). Every table and figure must be referenced in the text before it appears ("as shown in Table 1", "see Figure 1").
    • Table formatting (APA 7): horizontal rules only — a thick top rule, a thin rule under the header row, and a thick bottom rule. No vertical lines and no side borders. Numerical columns right-aligned.
    • Figure quality: minimum 300 DPI for raster images (PNG, JPEG, TIFF). Vector formats (SVG, EPS, PDF) strongly preferred for diagrams and charts.
    • Reproduction rights: for figures or tables reused from prior publications, the corresponding author must obtain and document the necessary permissions, and include the credit line in the caption.

    7. References and bibliographic management

    7.1 Citation style. Use APA 7th edition for in-text citations and the reference list. Do not mix styles within a single manuscript. The authoritative reference is the APA Style website.

    7.2 DOIs and persistent identifiers. Every reference that has a DOI must include it, formatted as a full URL (https://doi.org/10.xxxx/xxxxx). For sources without a DOI (older books, grey literature), include a persistent URL or archival identifier: Handle, arXiv ID, ISBN.

    7.3 Number of references.

    • Research Articles: 10 to 40 (typical around 30)
    • Case Studies: up to 30
    • Review Papers: up to 50

    Principle of parsimony. Include only references that are strictly necessary. Every entry in the reference list must be cited in the body, and every citation in the body must map to one entry (1-to-1 correspondence). Inflated bibliographies are disfavored by reviewers; parsimony is an indicator of scholarly rigour, not laziness.

    7.4 Bibliographic management (recommended). JOTMI strongly recommends using a reference management tool to build and format the bibliography. Manual reference lists are prone to formatting errors, broken DOIs, and citation–reference mismatches — all of which slow review and increase desk-reject risk.

    • Zotero — free, open source, multi-platform. Native APA 7 styles, browser capture, Word/LibreOffice plug-ins. Best default for most authors.
    • Mendeley Reference Manager — free, cloud-synced, strong PDF annotation, Word integration.
    • EndNote (Clarivate) — commercial, institutional license common in universities. Large style library, deep Word integration, advanced searching.
    • JabRef — free, open source, BibTeX/BibLaTeX native. Preferred for LaTeX workflows; exports to Word-compatible formats.
    • Paperpile — commercial, cloud-native, tightly integrated with Google Docs and Google Scholar. Good for collaborative writing.
    • Additional options: Citavi, RefWorks, Papers.

    7.5 Integrity rules.

    • Verify every citation at source. Do not rely on second-hand citations, AI-generated reference suggestions, or auto-populated metadata without validation. Open the DOI and confirm authors, year, title, journal, and pages.
    • No predatory or retracted sources. Do not cite journals listed in Cabells' Predatory Reports or publishers on Beall's list successors. Do not cite papers flagged on Retraction Watch. Citations of retracted work without explicit discussion of the retraction will be treated as an integrity concern.

    7.6 Reference examples (APA 7).

    Journal article. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553

    Book. Anthony, S. D. (2017). The little black book of innovation with a new preface: How it works, how to do it. Harvard Business Review Press.

    Book chapter. Teece, D. J. (2018). Dynamic capabilities. In M. Augier & D. J. Teece (Eds.), The Palgrave encyclopedia of strategic management (pp. 415–421). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-00772-8_689

    Conference proceedings. Wang, J., Wang, Z., Yu, J., Kahkoska, A. R., Buse, J. B., & Gu, Z. (2020). Glucose-responsive insulin and delivery systems: Innovation and translation. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Advanced Materials (pp. 100–110). Advanced Materials Society.

    8. Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT)

    Specify each author's contribution using the 14 official CRediT roles: Conceptualization; Methodology; Software; Validation; Formal analysis; Investigation; Resources; Data curation; Writing – Original Draft; Writing – Review & Editing; Visualization; Supervision; Project administration; Funding acquisition.

    The CRediT table is completed on the Title Page, not in the blinded manuscript.

    9. Declaration on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

    JOTMI recognizes AI as a legitimate catalyst for scientific excellence and actively encourages its responsible use in the preparation of manuscripts. The use of Generative AI or Large Language Models (LLMs) is not grounds for rejection or penalization.

    The only non-negotiable requirement is transparency: authors must declare how and for what purposes AI was used, and retain full and exclusive responsibility for the scientific accuracy, empirical rigour, and parsimony of the final manuscript.

    The AI Declaration is completed on the Title Page template. It includes:

    • Disclosure (yes/no)
    • Structured disclosure of tool(s), version(s), purpose, tasks performed, sections affected, and human oversight
    • A narrative statement of approximately 75 to 150 words
    • The authors' responsibility acknowledgment

    AI systems cannot be listed as authors. Undisclosed AI use, fabricated content, hallucinated citations, ghost references, or any attempt at technical obfuscation will trigger the JOTMI Publication Integrity Protocol and Extended Retraction Policy.

    10. Anonymization for blind peer review

    The manuscript must contain no identifying information about the authors — in the text, references, acknowledgements, or file properties. Use the Anonymous Manuscript Template (see section 3.2) and its anonymization checklist to ensure compliance.

    11. Submission checklist

    Before submitting, verify:

    • Manuscript written in English, consistently American or British
    • Two Word files prepared: Title Page + Anonymous Manuscript
    • Manuscript type selected (Research Article / Case Study / Review Paper) and length and reference limits respected
    • Double-spaced, 1-inch margins, page numbers, line numbering
    • Abstract 150 to 250 words; 4 to 6 keywords
    • All tables and figures embedded inline with proper captions; figures at 300 DPI or higher
    • APA 7 references; DOIs included for every source that has one; parsimonious list
    • CRediT table completed on the Title Page
    • AI Declaration completed on the Title Page
    • Blind manuscript fully anonymized (text, references, metadata)
    • Submission made via the JOTMI online platform (not by email)
    Read more about Author Guidelines

  • Peer Review Process

    2026-03-01

    All manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Technology Management & Innovation undergo peer review. The editors may also participate as qualified reviewers. Upon submission, the editors review the manuscript to determine its alignment with the journal's 'focus and scope', 'thematic coverage', 'selection criteria', and 'submission requirements'. If deemed appropriate, the article proceeds to peer review, which takes 2 to 3 months, to recommend acceptance, acceptance with modifications, or rejection of the article to the editor. If the manuscript is accepted with revisions, the editors return the manuscript to the corresponding author. The authors must incorporate the suggested changes to the article and resubmit it to the editors using the online management platform, along with a letter indicating the changes made.

    The editorial team reserves the right to utilize artificial intelligence tools, anti-plagiarism software, reference analysis tools, and written language analysis tools to make more informed and accurate decisions. These technologies enable us to comprehensively evaluate the originality, quality, and soundness of the received manuscripts, thereby ensuring the integrity and scientific rigor of the publications. Our objective is to select and publish high-quality works that significantly contribute to the advancement of knowledge in their respective research areas.

    Finally, the editors return the revised and corrected article to the executive editorial team, which coordinates the editorial procedure and distributes the articles submitted to the journal.

    Read more about Peer Review Process

  • Section Policies

    2026-03-01
    Research Papers

    The Research Papers section is dedicated to publishing original, high-quality research articles that contribute new and significant knowledge to the field of technology management and innovation (see subject coverage). This section aims to promote the advancement of knowledge through rigorous empirical, theoretical, and methodological studies.

    Objectives and Scope

    The primary objective of this section is to provide a forum for the dissemination of innovative and high-quality research in the field of technology management and innovation (See subject coverage). Articles should address a wide range of topics related to innovation, including but not limited to innovation theories, innovation management practices and strategies, and the impact of innovation on organizational performance.

    Acceptance Criteria

    To be considered for publication, manuscripts must meet the following criteria:

    1. Originality: The work must be original and unpublished, not having been previously published or under consideration in other journals.
    2. Relevance: The topic addressed must be relevant and of interest to the academic and professional community of technology management and innovation.
    3. Methodological Rigor: A high level of methodological rigor and critical analysis is expected in the presented research.
    4. Contribution: The article must make a significant contribution to existing knowledge, either through the development of new theories, innovative practices, or novel methodologies.
    5. Clarity and Coherence: The manuscript should be well-structured, clearly written, and follow the journal's format and style guidelines.
    Manuscript Structure and Guidelines

    Manuscripts should adhere to the general structure of academic research articles, including the following sections:

    1. Title: Clear and concise, reflecting the main content and contribution of the article.
    2. Abstract: A summary of up to 250 words briefly describing the objective, methodology, main results, and conclusions.
    3. Keywords: 4-6 keywords representing the main topics of the article.
    4. Introduction: Context of the study, research problem, objectives, and relevance of the work.
    5. Literature Review: Critical analysis of existing literature, identifying gaps and justifying the need for the study.
    6. Methodology: Detailed description of the research design, data collection and analysis methods, and justification of methodological choices.
    7. Results: Clear and concise presentation of findings, supported by tables and figures when necessary.
    8. Discussion: Interpretation of results in the context of existing literature, theoretical and practical implications, and study limitations.
    9. Conclusions: Summary of main findings, study contributions, and suggestions for future research.
    10. References: Complete list of all sources cited in the article, following the APA citation style.
    Word Count and References

    Research Papers should be concrete, concise, and not exceed 8,000 words, with approximately 30 references (suggestion).

    Read more about Section Policies

  • Focus and Scope

    2026-03-01

    JOTMI is a quarterly, peer-reviewed, and indexed electronic journal published by the Faculty of Business and Economics at Alberto Hurtado University. Its mission is to disseminate original and pioneering research on technology management and innovation, with a global outlook and particular attention to Latin America and the Caribbean. The journal examines the societal impact of technological change and highlights effective management practices in companies and organizations.

    Readership
    JOTMI’s readership includes academic scholars, government representatives, policymakers, business leaders, and professionals interested in the latest developments and insights in technology management and innovation.

    Subject Coverage

    The Journal of Technology Management & Innovation accepts articles in the following categories:

    • Management of Technology and Innovation
    • Business and International Management
    • Strategy and Management

    The journal seeks clear, academically rigorous contributions that enhance the understanding of current challenges in technology management and innovation. The following nine thematic areas guide our editorial focus:

    1. Science, Technology, and Innovation Policies for the Digital and Sustainable Era
      Research examining how policies, regulations, and institutional frameworks influence the development, dissemination, and governance of digital and green innovations, considering the roles of public institutions, the private sector, and society at large.

    2. Responsible and Ethical Innovation in Emerging Technologies
      Studies exploring the social, regulatory, and trust-related aspects of emerging technologies (e.g., AI, biotechnology, large-scale data analysis), as well as approaches that promote transparency, integrity, and responsible applications.

    3. Innovation Economy and the Reconfiguration of Global Value Chains
      Analyses of how digitalization, platform-based models, and changes in value chain structures affect competitiveness, productivity, R&D investment, and sustainable economic growth on both global and regional scales.

    4. Technology Access, Literacy, and Participation in Innovation
      Research on building digital capabilities, disseminating technological knowledge, and improving skills that enable various actors—individuals, organizations, and regions—to engage effectively in innovation processes.

    5. Innovation in the Public Sector and Digital Governance
      Investigations into how public sector modernization, supported by digital technologies, government innovation labs, and governance models, can strengthen efficiency, transparency, and public engagement.

    6. Technological Strategy, Open Innovation, and Collaborative Ecosystems
      Studies on how organizations develop technological strategies, adopt open innovation practices, establish inter-organizational alliances, and integrate into ecosystems (clusters, hubs, technology parks) to accelerate learning and innovation performance.

    7. Entrepreneurship, Emerging Markets, and Sustainable Business Models
      Analyses of entrepreneurial ecosystems—particularly in Latin America and other emerging contexts—that address the rise of technology-based, socially oriented, or environmentally focused ventures, along with their financing mechanisms, capacity-building efforts, and strategies to adapt to evolving environments.

    8. Management of Creativity, Talent, and Organizational Adaptation
      Research on how firms foster creativity, develop digital competencies, encourage continuous learning, and build capabilities to adapt and thrive amid uncertainty and rapid change.

    9. Geopolitics, Token-Based Economies, and Community-Driven Innovation
      Studies on how geopolitical dynamics influence technological sovereignty, the emergence of token-based economies, value creation centered on communities, and the development of new indicators to assess corporate and institutional performance in transforming technological landscapes.

    Selection Criteria Policy

    1. Submission Priority:

      • Research papers with original, rigorous studies receive top priority.
      • Case studies providing real-world applications and insights receive second priority.
      • Review papers summarizing existing knowledge and trends receive third priority.

    2. Quality and Relevance:
      Submissions should be novel, relevant, concise, practical, and informative. They must engage with current issues in technology management and innovation.

    3. Clarity and Rigor:
      Manuscripts must demonstrate methodological rigor, coherent argumentation, and clear presentation.

    4. Practical Implications:
      Preference is given to work offering actionable guidance for practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders in the field.

    Read more about Focus and Scope