PIBJ Editorial Board Members, Roles & Responsibilities

*The meeting notes for the Professionals in Business Journal (PIBJ) Editorial Board are not publicly available for review. However, they may be furnished upon specific request and necessity, subject to approval. Requests for access will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to ensure the confidentiality and integrity of the discussions held by the editorial board.

Editorial Board  Purpose and Scope

 

2023- 24 Meeting Dates

March 29, 2024 - Q1

June 28, 2024 -Q2

September 27, 2024- Q3

December 27, 2024 - Q4

________________________________________________________________

The Editorial Board of the Professionals in Business Journal (PIBJ) is responsible for overseeing the journal’s editorial policies, ensuring the quality of published content, and guiding the strategic direction of the journal. The board will evaluate manuscripts, provide expert feedback, and assist in maintaining the journal’s academic integrity.

 

A. Composition

The editorial board will consist of diverse experts in business and related fields, including academia and industry practitioners. Members will be selected based on their expertise, research contributions, and professional standing.

 

B. Responsibilities

  • Review and approve submission guidelines and editorial policies.
  • Evaluate submitted manuscripts and oversee the peer-review process.
  • Provide expert opinions on research topics relevant to the journal's scope.
  • Engage with the academic community to promote the journal.
  • Offer guidance on strategic initiatives for the journal's development.

C. Terms of Appointment

  • Board members will serve for a term of 3 years, with the possibility of renewal.
  • Members are expected to commit to reviewing a specified number of manuscripts each year.

D. Meetings

  • The board will meet quarterly to discuss journal progress, review policies, and evaluate ongoing initiatives. Meetings may be held virtually.

E. Contact Information

*Board members contact information available upon request

 

 

2023-24  Editorial Board Members

 

Ms. Raquel Ramos
    Drexel University
   Expertise: Medical Economics, Policy Analysis

 

Mr. Michael X. Markowycz
Southern New Hampshire University, Southerland Packaging
Expertise: Digital Media Management, Corporate Strategy

 

Dr. Nicholas J. Pirro
DBA  - Provident University, Trident University International - AIU
Expertise: Organizational Leadership, BRM, Business Theory and Authorship

 

Mr. Xavier Lopez
Brookdale University, Business Innovation
Expertise: Entrepreneurship, Innovation Management

 

Mrs. Enid Alvarez
Head of Operations, United Healthcare, UPR
Expertise: Sustainability Practices, Operational Efficiency in Healthcare

 

Ms. Samantha E. Vasquez
Chair of Business Studies, VTHS
Expertise: International Business, Trade Relations

 

Ms. Jaide F. Cockrell

International Business Studies, University of Texas at Houston
Expertise: Branding, Marketing and Sales

 

Mr. Elijah Nicholas P.

Director of Sales, HTHS

Expertise: Sales Strategy  Training and Implementation

 

Mrs. Lissette Negron

Clinical and School Counseling, Centenary University

Expertise: Diagnosis, Behavioral Plan Creation, Behavioral Health 

 

Mrs. Jennifer Pitoniak

Corporate Accounting, Kean University, NCU

Senior Accounting, Aramark

 

 

Role of the Editorial Board in the Peer Review Process

The editorial board of Pyrrhic Press plays a pivotal role in maintaining the integrity and quality of the peer review process. Their responsibilities include:

  1. Initial Manuscript Screening:

    • The editorial board assists in the preliminary evaluation of manuscripts to determine whether they fit within the journal's scope and adhere to submission guidelines. This screening helps ensure that only relevant and high-quality manuscripts proceed to the peer review stage.

  2. Reviewer Assignment:

    • The Editor-in-Chief, along with relevant members of the editorial board, is responsible for selecting suitable peer reviewers based on the manuscript's subject matter and the reviewers’ expertise.
    • The editorial board ensures that the selected reviewers are qualified, unbiased, and free from conflicts of interest, maintaining the integrity of the review process.

  3. Oversight of the Review Process:

    • The editorial board monitors the progress of the peer review process, ensuring that reviews are completed within the agreed timeline.
    • They intervene in cases of delays or conflicts, ensuring that the process is fair and transparent.

  4. Assessment of Reviewer Reports:

    • After receiving reviewer reports, the editorial board evaluates the feedback, ensuring it is balanced, constructive, and aligns with Pyrrhic Press’s standards for academic quality.
    • They may request additional reviews if feedback is conflicting or unclear.

  5. Final Decision-Making:

    • The editorial board makes the final decision on whether a manuscript is accepted, requires revisions, or is rejected. This decision is based on reviewer recommendations, the manuscript’s quality, and its potential contribution to the field.
    • In cases of conflicting reviews, the editorial board may consult additional experts or make an independent judgment based on their expertise.

  6. Ethical Standards Enforcement:

    • The editorial board ensures that all parties involved in the peer review process adhere to ethical standards, including confidentiality, conflict of interest disclosure, and fair treatment of all submissions.
    • They also ensure that reviewers’ identities remain anonymous to maintain the integrity of the double-blind peer review process.

  7. Feedback to Reviewers:

    • The editorial board may provide feedback to reviewers regarding the quality and helpfulness of their reviews, fostering a culture of constructive peer evaluation.

Final Decision on Manuscripts

The Editor-in-Chief of Pyrrhic Press holds the final responsibility for deciding whether a manuscript is accepted, requires further revisions, or is rejected. This decision is made based on:

  1. Peer Reviewer Feedback: The detailed evaluations and recommendations provided by the peer reviewers.
  2. Editorial Assessment: The evaluation of the assigned editor, who reviews the feedback and ensures the manuscript aligns with the journal's standards.
  3. Journal Scope and Standards: Consideration of how well the manuscript fits within the scope of the journal and adheres to its quality and ethical guidelines.

In cases of conflicting or unclear peer reviews, the Editor-in-Chief may seek additional expert opinions or consult with other members of the editorial board to ensure a fair and informed decision.