Reviewer Board Members

• Dr. Jonathan Pierce – MIT, USA – Engineering Systems
• Dr. Alicia Fernandez – University of Texas, USA – Technology Management
• Dr. William Carter – University of Toronto, Canada – Industrial Engineering
• Dr. Heather Mason – University of British Columbia, Canada – Information Technology
• Dr. Robert Greene – Stanford University, USA – Engineering Innovation
• Dr. Camila Alvarez – University of São Paulo, Brazil – Engineering Design
• Dr. Diego Herrera – Pontifical Catholic University of Peru – Management Science
• Dr. Natalia Castillo – University of Santiago, Chile – Tech Entrepreneurship
• Dr. Leonardo Vargas – National University of Colombia – Engineering Systems
• Dr. Mariana Duarte – Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil – IT Management
• Dr. Elena Kovac – University of Zagreb, Croatia – Production Engineering
• Dr. Andreas Müller – RWTH Aachen University, Germany – Engineering Optimization
• Dr. Sofia Romano – Politecnico di Torino, Italy – Technology Strategy
• Dr. Viktor Petrov – University of Sofia, Bulgaria – Engineering Computing
• Dr. Claudia Braun – TU Dresden, Germany – Management Engineering
• Dr. Hugo Martins – University of Porto, Portugal – Information Systems
• Dr. Hanna Eriksson – KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden – Systems Engineering
• Dr. Patrick Collins – Trinity College Dublin, Ireland – Tech Policy
• Dr. Anastasia Dimitriou – University of Athens, Greece – Operations Management
• Dr. Feliks Novak – Warsaw University of Technology, Poland – Industrial Technology
• Dr. Samuel K. Adebayo – University of Lagos, Nigeria – Engineering Management
• Dr. Laila Nasser – Cairo University, Egypt – Technology Systems
• Dr. Joseph T. Mbele – University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania – Project Management
• Dr. Amina Diallo – University of Dakar, Senegal – Information Technology
• Dr. Thembi Khumalo – University of Pretoria, South Africa – Engineering Design
• Dr. Youssef Al-Farouqi – King Fahd University, Saudi Arabia – Technology Systems
• Dr. Farah Al-Ameen – University of Bahrain – Systems Engineering
• Dr. Omar Al-Sabri – United Arab Emirates University – Engineering Innovation
• Dr. Sara El-Khoury – American University of Beirut, Lebanon – Operations Technology
• Dr. Mahir Ibrahim – Qatar University – Management Engineering
• Dr. Rohan Mehta – IIT Bombay, India – Engineering & Technology
• Dr. Kavita Nair – Anna University, India – Management Engineering
• Dr. Faisal Ahmed – BUET, Bangladesh – Industrial Systems
• Dr. Dilmini Perera – University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka – Technology Integration
• Dr. Namal Wickramasinghe – University of Colombo, Sri Lanka – Engineering Analytics
• Dr. Hiroshi Tanaka – University of Tokyo, Japan – Smart Technology
• Dr. Mei Ling Chen – National Taiwan University – Engineering Design
• Dr. Daniel Wong – National University of Singapore – Tech Innovation
• Dr. Noor Aisyah Rahim – Universiti Malaya, Malaysia – IT Engineering
• Dr. Trung Le – Vietnam National University – Engineering Systems
• Dr. Bakyt Alimov – Nazarbayev University, Kazakhstan – Engineering Systems
• Dr. Aygul Serikova – Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Kazakhstan – Technology Management
• Dr. Emily Hart – University of Melbourne, Australia – Engineering Management
• Dr. Lucas Reid – University of Sydney, Australia – Information Systems
• Dr. Sophie Mitchell – University of Queensland, Australia – Technology Development
• Dr. Nathan Cooper – University of Auckland, New Zealand – Technology Engineering
• Dr. Ingrid Holstad – Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway – Engineering Design
• Dr. Marek Stepanek – Charles University, Czech Republic – Systems Optimization
• Dr. Felicia Montoya – University of Manila, Philippines – Technology Management
• Dr. Rashid Karimov – Baku State University, Azerbaijan – Engineering Technology

Guidelines for Reviewers

1. Role of Reviewers

Reviewers play a critical part in ensuring the integrity, quality, and academic contribution of the journal. Their responsibilities include:

• Evaluating the manuscript’s originality, quality, and relevance.
• Providing constructive feedback that helps authors improve their work.
• Assisting editors in making informed publication decisions.

2. Confidentiality

• All manuscripts and related documents must be treated as strictly confidential.
• Reviewers must not share, distribute, or discuss the manuscript with others without permission from the editor.
• Unpublished material must not be used for personal research or advantage.

3. Objectivity and Fairness

• Reviews must be conducted objectively and impartially.
• Criticism should be focused on the manuscript and not the author(s).
• Personal, cultural, gender, institutional, or ideological biases must be avoided.
• Provide evidence-based comments and avoid subjective or emotional language.

4. Timeliness

• Reviewers should complete the review within the assigned timeframe (usually 2–4 weeks).
• If more time is required or the reviewer is unable to complete the review, the editor should be informed immediately.

5. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest, including:

• Personal, financial, or professional connections with the authors.
• Competitors or collaborators in the same active research project.
• Any situation that could affect objectivity.

If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the review.

6. Quality of Review Comments

Reviewers should include the following components:

a. Summary of the Manuscript

A brief overview showing understanding of:

• Topic
• Objectives
• Methodology
• Major findings

b. Major Comments

These should address:

• Originality and contribution to the field
• Validity and reliability of methods
• Quality of data and analyses
• Logical consistency and structure
• Significance and clarity of results
• Strength of discussion and conclusions

c. Minor Comments

These may include:

• Grammar and spelling errors
• Formatting issues
• Clarity of figures/tables
• Referencing inconsistencies

d. Recommendation

Reviewers should select one of the following:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

7. Ethical Considerations

• Reviewers must ensure that:
• The manuscript follows ethical research standards.
• There is no evidence of plagiarism, duplication, data manipulation, or unethical methods.

If misconduct is suspected, inform the editor confidentially.

8. Reviewing Style

• Use clear, professional language.
• Provide actionable suggestions.
• Support every critical comment with justification.
• Balance criticism with acknowledgement of strengths.

9. Anonymity (Double-Blind Review)

• The identity of reviewers and authors must remain confidential throughout the process.
• Do not include self-identifying information in comments intended for authors.

10. Commitment to Academic Quality

• Reviewers should ensure that the manuscript:
• Aligns with the journal’s scope in technology, engineering, and management.
• Contributes to global research and practical advancement.
• Meets academic and methodological standards expected in international publications.