Peter Thrower, PhD,  the Editor-in-Chief of Carbon, the international journal of the American Carbon Society, and Professor Emeritus of Material Sciences and Engineering at Penn State University , USA  finds that  when a manuscript is submitted to a high-quality scholarly journal, it goes through intense scrutiny  — even before it's seen by the editor-in-chief and selected for peer review. At Elsevier, between 30 percent to 50 percent of articles don't even make it to the peer review process. His advice to authors: "By avoiding these pitfalls, you will save reviewers, editors and staff time and frustration, and ensure that your work is judged by its scientific merit, not mistakes."

Given that  volunteer or unpaid reviewers who are basically lazy and find or invent many false excuses take months and months to produce a detailed review report which are mostly low in quality, inadequate and unhelpful to the authors and that journal takes several months to accept a paper, World Business Institute has  ( see www.worldbizins.org) instituted a program to engage  paid experienced reviewers to provide quality  written review report on pre-submitted Papers that takes care about both technical and editorial issues which would expedite the process of acceptance and publication in high quality, high impacted , ranked and indexed ( by Scopus, ABDC, Cabells, ISI ) journals. You don’t have to wait months for a quality and detail review report or attend conferences (most of them are useless in terms of providing quality feedback on your paper).  Our reviewers know the Dos and Don’ts of high ranked journals and both technical and editorial issues that must be addressed before submission od manuscript since they have a wealth of experience in publishing in high quality  journals. 

Our reviewers who are paid to engage their time for extensive  review work will investigate every section of the paper to verify the compliance to the both technical and editorial issues and, compliance to the standard of the highly ranked journals .They will check the following points, in addition to other useful suggestions to improve the paper. 

  1. Is there Professional and scientific presentation of abstract?
  2. Have you addressed both technical and editorial issues in the paper ?
  3. Does Title of the paper reflect the content of the paper ?
  4. Have you  focused  on a story that progresses logically, rather than chronologically ?
  5. Have you written “Introduction” as per requirement of the journal ?
  6. Have you provided ‘motivation’ enough to convince the editor that your paper focus on something new ?
  7. Are recent and seminal papers professionally reviewed to derive research question and linking it with hypotheses , title and importance of the paper?
  8. Have you provided justifications  for sample size,  methods and models ? Have you over-stated your models and methodology? 
  9. Is there any flaws in study design ?( example: Choice of an incorrect method or model that is not suitable for the problem to be studied)
  10. Have you used Inappropriate methodology for answering your hypothesis or used old methodology that has been surpassed by newer, more powerful methods that provide more robust results ?
  11. Have you provided convincing explanation of your results ?
  12. Is the analysis provided contain a statement showing how you have advanced the knowledge  forward ?
  13. Have you shown, in conclusion, how are your findings  different from the latest credible findings and how are you claiming new findings ?
  14. Have you complied to the requirement of the target journals such as ethical issues ?
  15. Have you formatted or presented arguments to reduce your chances of rejections  and have you shown novelty of your findings ?
  16. Have you picked up the  right journal ?  Is the content fit with the aims and objectives of the journals ?
  17. Does your research sit within the wider scholarly landscape, and have you addressed gaps in knowledge and is there  lack of context or lack of clarity about why is the research important? 
  18. Have you overstated your claim about the findings ?
  19. Have you followed the correct submissions procedures ?
  20. Does the paper conform to the Guide for Authors for the journal it is submitted to?
  21. Is it partly for fully plagiarised ?
  22. Are there Lack of originality, novelty, or significance?
  23. Is there any Inadequate preparation of the manuscript ?
  24. Has your paper stand out among many papers on the same issue or topic? If not, how to make it different ?
  25. Is your paper exciting or boring ?

Moreover, our reviewers will comment on research element of your paper, such as soundness of study, design, reporting of method, significance to field, ethical soundness, and sufficiency of data analysis. They will also provide a detailed check of journal compatibility to minimize chances of rejection. Our team’s feedback will be focused on paper quality in terms of clarity of presentation, organization and structure, empirical evidence , adequacy of literature review, concluding materials etc.

You can engage more than one reviewer ( maximum three reviewers) to 

Get diverse points of view

eliminate biasness 

determine the quality of review

Common points that must be addressed before the paper is submitted


Cost of review depends on the number of reviewers to be engaged, length of papers which does not included tables, figures, and references , Our target time for completion of review work varies between 2 and 3 weeks which is required for producing quality review report.  Any review period less than 2 weeks impact the quality of the report. 

Interested ?

Send your complete papers  to Professor Mohammad Hoque ( who is the editor of Journal of Business and Policy Research) via his email : haqz53@gmail.com who will skim through your paper and coordinate your submission with the reviewers within a given time .