SPC Editorial & Publishing Operations Framework

Publisher-Level Operations Framework
Version 1.0 | 2026

 

1. Purpose

The SPC Editorial & Publishing Operations Framework describes how Sami Publishing Company (SPC) organizes and supports the day-to-day editorial and publishing processes of its scholarly journals.

The Framework translates SPC's governance principles and publishing standards into practical operational processes covering manuscript handling, editorial workflow, peer-review coordination, production, publication, metadata management, post-publication activities, and related publishing operations.

Its purpose is to promote reliable, transparent, consistent, and professionally managed publishing processes while allowing individual journals to maintain discipline-appropriate editorial procedures.

This Framework is intended to make SPC's operational practices transparent to authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and other stakeholders.

It should be read together with the:

• SPC Editorial Governance Manual;
• SPC Publishing Policies & Standards — Policy Hub; and
• SPC Quality Assurance & Continuous Improvement Framework.

 

2. Scope

This Framework applies to the editorial and publishing operations conducted or supported by SPC for its scholarly journals and other scholarly publications, where applicable.

It covers the operational stages through which scholarly content moves from submission to publication and, where necessary, through post-publication management.

The principal areas covered are:

• manuscript submission and intake;
• initial administrative and technical checks;
• editorial assessment;
• peer-review coordination;
• revision and editorial decision workflow;
• acceptance and production handover;
• production and pre-publication checks;
• publication and scheduling;
• metadata and persistent identifiers;
• website and publishing-platform operations;
• author and reviewer communication;
• post-publication activities;
• complaints and appeals handling;
• digital preservation and archiving;
• operational records;
• confidentiality and data protection;
• operational continuity; and
• staff and editorial training.

Individual journals may maintain additional procedures where required by their discipline, publication model, or editorial policies.

 

3. Relationship with SPC Governance and Policy Documents

SPC maintains a clear distinction between governance, policy, operations, and quality assurance.

3.1 Editorial Governance

The SPC Editorial Governance Manual establishes the governance structure, responsibilities, authority, and decision-making principles applicable to SPC's publishing activities.

3.2 Publishing Policies and Standards

The SPC Publishing Policies & Standards — Policy Hub establishes the policies, principles, and minimum publishing standards that SPC and its journals are expected to uphold.

3.3 Editorial and Publishing Operations

This Framework describes how applicable requirements are translated into day-to-day publishing workflows and operational practices.

3.4 Quality Assurance

The SPC Quality Assurance & Continuous Improvement Framework provides the broader approach for monitoring, evaluating, and improving publishing processes.

Accordingly:

Governance establishes responsibility.
Policies establish requirements.
Operations establish implementation.
Quality assurance evaluates and improves performance.

This distinction is intended to minimize duplication and maintain a coherent publishing system across SPC.

 

4. Operational Principles

SPC's editorial and publishing operations are guided by the following principles.

4.1 Editorial Independence

Operational processes must support, rather than interfere with, legitimate editorial judgment and scholarly decision-making.

4.2 Transparency

Relevant publishing processes should be clearly defined and appropriately communicated to stakeholders.

4.3 Consistency

Core operational processes should be managed consistently across SPC while allowing legitimate differences between disciplines and journals.

4.4 Accountability

Responsibilities should be appropriately assigned, and significant operational actions should be traceable where necessary.

4.5 Confidentiality

Confidential manuscript, peer-review, author, reviewer, and editorial information must be handled appropriately.

4.6 Timeliness

SPC seeks to manage publishing processes efficiently without allowing speed to compromise scholarly quality or editorial integrity.

4.7 Traceability

Important stages of the publishing process should generate appropriate records that support follow-up, accountability, and quality review.

4.8 Proportionality

Operational requirements should be proportionate to the size, discipline, publication model, and practical circumstances of each journal.

 

5. Operational Responsibilities

SPC provides the organizational and operational framework necessary to support its journals.

Depending on the journal and its operating model, responsibilities may be distributed among:

• the Publisher;
• publishing management;
• Editors-in-Chief;
• editors and editorial boards;
• editorial office personnel;
• peer-review coordinators;
• production personnel; and
• technical or platform personnel.

Responsibilities should be sufficiently clear to ensure that administrative, editorial, production, and technical functions are not unnecessarily confused.

Editorial decisions remain the responsibility of appropriately authorized editorial personnel.

Operational personnel support the editorial process but should not substitute administrative judgment for scholarly editorial judgment.

 

6. Journal-Level Implementation

SPC establishes publisher-level operational standards while recognizing that individual journals require procedures appropriate to their disciplines and publication models.

Each journal should therefore maintain operational procedures that:

• are consistent with applicable SPC policies;
• reflect the journal's declared editorial model;
• define relevant responsibilities;
• provide an appropriate workflow for manuscripts and publications; and
• can be implemented consistently.

A journal may adopt additional or more specific procedures where legitimate disciplinary requirements make them necessary.

The objective is:

Common publishing standards with appropriate journal-level implementation.

 

7. Manuscript Submission and Intake

Where electronic submission is used, submitted manuscripts should be recorded within the journal's designated publishing system.

The submission process should, as appropriate, capture:

• manuscript information;
• author information;
• corresponding-author details;
• article type;
• supporting files;
• declarations and required statements; and
• relevant submission dates.

The submission record should provide sufficient information to support subsequent editorial processing.

Where necessary, authors may be asked to provide additional information or files before editorial assessment can proceed.

 

8. Initial Administrative and Technical Checks

Before or during initial editorial processing, manuscripts may undergo administrative and technical checks appropriate to the journal.

These checks may include:

• journal scope;
• article type;
• completeness of the submission;
• author information;
• required declarations;
• ethical requirements;
• potential conflicts of interest;
• reference or formatting requirements; and
• similarity or research-integrity screening where applicable.

These checks are intended to identify administrative or technical issues and should not be represented as a substitute for scholarly peer review.

Manuscripts requiring correction at this stage may be returned to the authors or referred to the appropriate editorial personnel.

 

9. Editorial Assessment

Following initial processing, manuscripts undergo editorial assessment in accordance with the applicable journal procedures.

The responsible editor may consider:

• suitability for the journal's scope;
• article type;
• scholarly relevance;
• methodological or conceptual suitability;
• originality;
• ethical considerations;
• potential research-integrity concerns; and
• suitability for external peer review.

Where permitted by the journal's policy, an editor may decline a manuscript without external peer review.

Administrative staff may facilitate the workflow but should not make substantive editorial decisions unless specifically authorized within the journal's governance structure.

 

10. Peer-Review Operations

SPC supports peer-review processes that are appropriate to the discipline and clearly stated by each journal.

Operational coordination may include:

• identifying potential reviewers;
• sending invitations;
• recording reviewer responses;
• monitoring review progress;
• communicating deadlines;
• receiving reviewer reports;
• maintaining confidentiality; and
• providing relevant information to the responsible editor.

Reviewer selection and editorial decisions remain subject to the journal's declared peer-review policy and editorial authority.

Operational targets for review time should not take precedence over the need for appropriate scholarly assessment.

 

11. Revision and Editorial Decision Workflow

Where revision is requested, the journal should maintain an appropriate record of:

• the editorial decision;
• relevant reviewer or editor comments;
• the author's revised submission;
• author responses where required; and
• subsequent editorial decisions.

Possible editorial outcomes may include rejection, revision, or acceptance, according to the journal's applicable procedures.

Operational personnel may facilitate communication and workflow but should not determine the scholarly outcome of a manuscript.

 

12. Acceptance and Production Handover

Once a manuscript has received final editorial acceptance, it may be transferred to the production workflow.

The handover should provide production personnel with the information necessary to prepare the article for publication.

Depending on the journal and publication model, this may include:

• final manuscript files;
• figures and tables;
• supplementary materials;
• author information;
• declarations;
• licensing information; and
• publication metadata.

Substantive changes to accepted scholarly content should remain subject to appropriate editorial authorization.

 

13. Production and Pre-Publication Checks

Production processes may include:

• copyediting or language editing where provided;
• typesetting;
• figure and table preparation;
• reference checking;
• formatting;
• proof preparation;
• author proof review where applicable; and
• final publication checks.

Before publication, appropriate checks should confirm the accuracy and completeness of relevant information, including where applicable:

• article title;
• author names;
• affiliations;
• corresponding-author information;
• abstract;
• keywords;
• references;
• figures and tables;
• funding information;
• acknowledgements;
• ethical statements;
• conflict-of-interest statements;
• copyright and licensing information; and
• publication metadata.

Production activities should preserve the integrity of the accepted scholarly content.

 

14. Publication and Scheduling

Each journal should maintain a clearly stated publication schedule appropriate to its publication model.

SPC seeks to support:

• regular publication;
• accurate publication dates;
• timely release of accepted content where applicable;
• continuity of publication; and
• appropriate communication regarding significant delays.

The declared publication schedule should correspond to the journal's actual publishing practice.

Publication frequency should not be manipulated solely to create artificial performance indicators.

 

15. Metadata and Persistent Identifiers

SPC recognizes accurate metadata as an essential part of scholarly publishing operations.

Operational processes should support the accuracy and consistency of relevant metadata, including where applicable:

• article title;
• author names;
• affiliations;
• ORCID identifiers;
• abstract;
• keywords;
• references;
• article type;
• publication dates;
• DOI;
• licensing information;
• funding information; and
• other bibliographic information.

SPC seeks to maintain accurate metadata throughout the publication lifecycle and to correct significant metadata errors when identified.

Where applicable, relevant metadata may be deposited or made available through appropriate scholarly infrastructure and discovery services.

 

16. Website and Publishing Platform Operations

SPC and its journals maintain online publishing platforms through which journal and article information is made available.

Operational maintenance should address, as appropriate:

• availability of the website;
• accuracy of published information;
• accessibility of journal policies;
• article accessibility;
• metadata presentation;
• persistent links;
• navigation;
• technical functionality; and
• correction of significant technical or informational errors.

Journal websites should accurately represent the journal's ownership, editorial structure, publishing model, policies, and procedures.

 

17. Author and Reviewer Communication

SPC supports professional and appropriately timely communication with authors and reviewers throughout the publishing process.

Operational communication may include information concerning:

• submission status;
• required actions;
• editorial decisions;
• revision;
• peer review;
• production;
• proof review;
• publication; and
• post-publication matters.

SPC and its journals should avoid communications that create misleading expectations concerning acceptance, publication speed, indexing, citation performance, or other outcomes that cannot reasonably be guaranteed.

 

18. Publication Ethics and Research-Integrity Workflow

SPC maintains operational mechanisms for routing publication-ethics and research-integrity concerns to appropriately authorized editorial personnel.

Where a concern is received, the operational process may include:

Receipt → Recording → Referral → Assessment/Investigation → Decision → Appropriate Action → Documentation

Operational personnel may support communication, record preservation, and administrative coordination.

Substantive determinations concerning alleged misconduct should be made by appropriately authorized individuals or bodies in accordance with applicable policies and procedures.

Confidentiality should be maintained throughout the process to the extent appropriate.

 

19. Complaints and Appeals

Complaints and appeals should be directed through the mechanisms established by the relevant journal and SPC policies.

Operational handling may include:

1. receiving the complaint or appeal;
2. recording the matter;
3. identifying the appropriate responsible person;
4. checking for relevant conflicts of interest;
5. facilitating review;
6. communicating the outcome where appropriate; and
7. maintaining an appropriate record.

Editorial appeals should remain subject to the journal's editorial decision-making framework.

 

20. Post-Publication Operations

SPC recognizes that publication responsibility continues after an article has been published.

Where a published article requires further action, the relevant journal may implement:

• corrections;
• retractions;
• expressions of concern; or
• other appropriate post-publication notices.

Operational implementation should ensure, where technically possible, that such actions are:

• clearly identified;
• linked to the affected publication;
• appropriately documented;
• visible to readers; and
• reflected in relevant publication records and metadata.

The purpose of post-publication action is to maintain the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.

 

21. Digital Preservation and Archiving

SPC recognizes the preservation of published scholarly content as an important publishing responsibility.

Operational arrangements should support, as appropriate:

• backup of publishing content;
• preservation of published articles;
• retention of relevant metadata;
• continuity of access; and
• participation in appropriate digital preservation or archiving arrangements.

Each journal should communicate its applicable preservation arrangements where appropriate.

 

22. Operational Records and Documentation

SPC maintains or supports appropriate operational records to facilitate:

• workflow management;
• accountability;
• continuity of operations;
• investigation of concerns;
• quality review; and
• process improvement.

Records may include relevant submission, peer-review, production, publication, metadata, communication, and post-publication information.

Access to confidential records should be appropriately controlled.

Record retention should be proportionate to the nature of the information and applicable legal, ethical, contractual, and operational requirements.

 

23. Confidentiality and Data Protection

Publishing operations involve the processing of confidential and personal information.

SPC therefore expects operational personnel to handle appropriately:

• unpublished manuscripts;
• reviewer information;
• editorial correspondence;
• author information;
• peer-review reports;
• administrative records; and
• other confidential information.

Access should be limited to individuals with legitimate publishing responsibilities.

Information should not be disclosed or used for purposes unrelated to legitimate publishing activities.

 

24. Staff and Editorial Training

SPC recognizes appropriate training and professional development as important components of reliable publishing operations.

Training may address:

• editorial workflow;
• peer-review management;
• publication ethics;
• research integrity;
• metadata;
• publishing technologies;
• confidentiality;
• responsible use of AI and automated tools; and
• operational quality.

Training priorities may be determined according to operational requirements, identified risks, policy developments, and quality-assurance findings.

 

25. Responsible Use of Technology

SPC may use digital, automated, or AI-assisted technologies to support publishing operations where appropriate.

Such tools should be used with appropriate consideration of:

• accuracy;
• confidentiality;
• data protection;
• human oversight;
• transparency;
• potential bias; and
• research-integrity risks.

Automated tools should not replace appropriate human responsibility for substantive editorial, ethical, or scholarly decisions.

Any use of such technologies must remain consistent with applicable SPC and journal-level policies.

 

26. Operational Continuity

SPC seeks to maintain reasonable continuity of editorial and publishing operations in the event of significant operational disruption.

Depending on the circumstances, continuity measures may include:

• backup of relevant information;
• documented workflows;
• appropriate access management;
• role substitution;
• preservation of essential records;
• alternative communication arrangements; and
• recovery procedures for significant technical disruptions.

Continuity measures should be proportionate to the operational scale and risk profile of the relevant journal.

 

27. Operational Data and Quality Review

Publishing workflows generate operational information that may support quality assurance and improvement.

Examples include:

• submission dates;
• review activity;
• editorial decision dates;
• production dates;
• publication dates;
• metadata corrections;
• technical incidents;
• complaints; and
• post-publication actions.

Such information may be reviewed under the SPC Quality Assurance & Continuous Improvement Framework.

Operational data should be used to understand and improve publishing processes rather than to create misleading measures of quality.

No single numerical indicator, including publication speed, manuscript volume, acceptance rate, or citation-related performance, should be treated as a complete measure of publishing quality.

 

28. Interface with Quality Assurance

The operational framework and quality-assurance framework serve different functions.

The Operations Framework establishes and describes the workflows through which publishing activities are conducted.

The Quality Assurance Framework evaluates whether those workflows are functioning effectively and identifies opportunities for improvement.

Accordingly, operational experience, records, feedback, incidents, and other relevant evidence may contribute to quality-assurance activities.

Where a recurring or significant operational weakness is identified, the matter may be considered through the SPC quality-improvement process.

 

29. Continuous Operational Improvement

SPC recognizes that publishing operations must evolve with changes in scholarly communication, technology, research practices, and organizational experience.

Operational improvements may arise from:

• quality-assurance findings;
• author or reviewer feedback;
• editorial experience;
• technical developments;
• identified risks;
• publication-ethics cases;
• changes in relevant standards; or
• opportunities to improve reliability or efficiency.

Changes should be considered carefully to ensure that improvements in efficiency do not compromise editorial independence, research integrity, transparency, or the reliability of the scholarly record.

 

30. Framework Review and Version Control

This Framework will be reviewed periodically to ensure that it remains appropriate for SPC's publishing activities.

A review may be initiated by:

• significant organizational changes;
• changes in publishing technology;
• changes in relevant scholarly publishing standards;
• quality-assurance findings;
• operational experience; or
• identified risks and improvement opportunities.

Revisions should be documented through appropriate version control.

The current version of this Framework should be clearly identified on the SPC website.

Current Version: 1.0
Year of Publication: 2026
Responsible Organization: Sami Publishing Company

 

31. SPC Commitment to Transparent Publishing Operations

Sami Publishing Company recognizes that trustworthy scholarly publishing requires more than the existence of policies.

Effective publishing depends on the connection between:

Governance → Policy → Implementation → Evidence → Improvement

SPC therefore seeks to make its publishing operations sufficiently transparent for authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and other stakeholders to understand how scholarly content is received, evaluated, reviewed, produced, published, maintained, and, where necessary, corrected after publication.

This Framework represents SPC's publisher-level operational approach. Individual journals remain responsible for maintaining discipline-appropriate editorial policies and procedures consistent with applicable SPC standards.

SPC is committed to developing a publishing environment in which operational responsibilities are clear, editorial independence is respected, publishing processes are reliable, scholarly records are maintained responsibly, and identified opportunities for improvement are addressed through an ongoing quality process.

Transparent publishing is not only a statement of principles; it is the visible connection between what a publisher says, what it does, and the evidence of how it does it.

 

Sami Publishing Company
SPC Editorial & Publishing Operations Framework
Publisher-Level Operations Framework
Version 1.0 | 2026