SAJGIBE welcomes scholarly comments, critiques, and responses concerning published articles from readers, authors, and the academic community. Post-publication discussion aims to deepen understanding, examine ethical and managerial arguments, and help maintain an accurate scholarly record. This policy forms part of the journal’s commitment to publication ethics and is implemented with reference to the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. Scope of Discussion

Discussion may address research approaches, business research methodologies, analytical models, empirical methods, the use of corporate sources or empirical data, interpretations of ethical frameworks, business policies, corporate governance practices, or socio-economic phenomena, as well as scholarly arguments, conclusions, or the practical/managerial implications of an article. Comments may also identify factual errors, statistical inaccuracies, or information requiring clarification.

Within business ethics, global management, corporate governance, sustainable practices, and interdisciplinary fields (such as business sociology, behavioral economics, and organizational anthropology), differences in interpretation, theoretical frameworks, paradigms, and analytical perspectives are an integral part of academic discourse. Responses must engage with the substance of the work through reasoned arguments, theoretical models, regulatory references, or empirical evidence while respecting diverse scholarly perspectives.

2. Submission of Comments

Comments should be submitted through SAJGIBE’s official contact details provided on the journal's contact portal. Contributors should provide their full identity, institutional affiliation, contact information, the title or DOI of the article under discussion, the specific passages or issues being addressed, and supporting evidence, citations, or data where appropriate. Relevant interests or commercial/institutional relationships concerning the article or its authors must be disclosed upon submission.

Comments must be clear, proportionate, and focused on scholarly or professional issues. Personal attacks, discriminatory language, unsupported accusations, and promotional material are strictly unacceptable. Anonymous reports concerning article integrity may be assessed under the journal’s Policy on Handling Allegations of Misconduct when the information provided is sufficiently specific and verifiable.

3. Editorial Assessment

Editors assess submitted comments for relevance, clarity, supporting arguments, and their contribution to understanding the article and its broader business, management, or ethical context. Where necessary, editors may request revisions, further clarification, or an independent assessment by an appropriately qualified expert in the relevant subdiscipline of business ethics, corporate governance, or integrated management. Editors with a conflict of interest must not participate in the decision-making process.

Not all comments will be published. Decisions are based on scholarly value, originality, and relevance to readers and practitioners, rather than agreement with the views of the authors or editors. Substantiated criticism will not be rejected merely because it challenges a published article.

4. Opportunity for Authors to Respond

Where a comment raises substantive points or requires clarification from the article’s authors, the editor will forward it to them and provide an opportunity to respond within a specified timeframe. Responses should address the substantive issues directly and provide relevant theoretical grounds, empirical evidence, or references.

Comments and responses may be edited for length and clarity without altering their substantive arguments. An author’s failure or decision not to respond does not, in itself, prevent the publication of a comment that has been assessed as suitable.

5. Publication and Traceability

Accepted comments may be published as Scholarly Correspondence, a Letter to the Editor, or another publication format determined by the editor, accompanied by the authors’ response where available. Comments and responses will be formally linked via DOI to the article under discussion so that readers can follow the exchange in context.

Publication of a comment does not imply SAJGIBE’s endorsement of every view expressed. Contributors remain solely responsible for the accuracy of their information and arguments. The original article will not be amended solely because alternative scholarly, managerial, or ethical interpretations have been presented.

6. Follow-Up on Errors and Allegations of Misconduct

If a post-publication discussion identifies a factual, statistical, or analytical error that requires an amendment to the article, the editor will assess whether a formal Correction or another editorial action is warranted under the journal’s provisions for maintaining the publication record. Substantive changes will not be made silently; they will be formally documented, published, and linked to the affected article.

Comments containing allegations of research or publication misconduct (such as data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or breach of double-blind review integrity) will be handled under SAJGIBE’s Policy on Handling Allegations of Misconduct. Scholarly discussion does not replace the assessment of suspected misconduct, and criticism of an article does not, in itself, establish an ethical violation.