1.The minimum size of each submission is 2000 words, the maximum size is 3000 words. In exceptional cases, the Committee keeps the right to make a reasoned decision on the admission to publishing papers of smaller or bigger size than indicated above.
2. Author’s data should be presented as follows: full passport name; full academic title and full job title; full affiliation data (no acronyms in the names of department or university); contact email address (preferably with the university domain).
3. If the authors’ order and the indication of the corresponding author is important for you - please, indicate this explicitly on the first page.
4. The title of the paper must be no more than 12-14 words.
5. The size of the abstract should be up to 150-200 words. The abstract should be focused on your own research results, not providing research context.
6. Keywords - from 3 to 7 words of phrases, directly related to the key topic of your text. Please, avoid general terms, like “management” or “economy”.
7. Introduction and Literature reviews are obligatory parts of each submission. Apart from general context, the introductory part must contain the clearly stated research goal/objective.
8. The text overall should be divided into meaningful blocks, each clearly titled. The preferable number of such blocks is from 3 to 6. Do not split the submission into tiny blocks, this might get confusing in the course of the review.
9. All tables and all graphical materials must be numbered and titled. If table data or other visuals have been borrowed and do not belong to the author(s) - the source must be indicated under the table/figure.
10. Conclusions are mandatory for each submission. Limitations, recommendations or directions for further research are optional but recommended blocks.
11. References should be presented in the alphabetical order. Ideally, references must be from more than two countries. There must be at least two recent sources (of the year of submission or a previous year). The minimum number of references is 5.
12. Footnotes are not allowed.
13. Acknowledgments are allowed but should be limited to 2-3 lines of text.
14. Citations within the text must be formatted according to APA in-text citations rules ( for example, (Smith, 2020), (Smith & Jones, 2020), (Smith et al, 2020) for parenthical citation, or Smith (2020), Smith & Jones (2020), Smith et al. (2020) for narrative citations). All referenced sources must be at least once mentioned within the text. Self-citations are allowed but no more than two per one text.
15. Only manuscripts in English will be considered. The text should be carefully proofread before the submission. The editorial team reserves the right to reject publication on the grounds of low language quality.
16. Other reasons for rejecting publication may include
- Lack of originality or it is not immediately obvious;
- Self-plagiarism or the so-called “research salami”;
- Paper has been previously published at other venues (including publications in languages other than English);
- Paper contains a high number of controversial citations which are not well grounded;
- The text contains anti-scientific or pseudo-scientific elements;
- The text contains immoral or unethical statements (racism, instigation of violence etc.);
- The text got a negative review, and the reviewer did not manage to provide any recommendations on its correction/revision
17. The author has the right to appeal/question the decision of the reviewing team, however, this should be limited to only one appeal which must be thoroughly explained and grounded on the author’s side.
18. The authors can be blacklisted from further communication with Committee for the following reasons:
- Repeated violation of the guidelines above;
- Violation of generally accepted intellectual property rights;
- Plagiarism, including self-plagiarism;
- Improper reaction to the review results;
- Spreading rumors and misinformation with the aim to damage the reputation of the Conference among potential or current authors;
- Falsifying own information about current job position, academic status etc.;
- Engagement in the cases of the so-called “research salami”;
- Rude email communication with the editorial team;
- Bribery attempt;
- Spamming the Committee with unnecessary/irrelevant emails.
19. All submissions are subject to double-blind peer-review. For more details on reviewing practices and standards - see here.