|Journal title||Average duration||Review reports
(1st review rnd.)
|(click to go to journal page)||1st rev. rnd||Tot. handling||Im. rejection||Number||Quality||Overall rating||Outcome|
|International Journal of Knowledge Management||0.1
|Motivation: The EIC is helpful, although his practice may not be generally adopted. A few days after my initial submission, he wrote a fairly long paragraph of constructive feedback asking for my revision but he has made it "rejected" on record. I still submit it again given he explicitly asked me to do so.
I addressed the comments accordingly (after a few months as I was working on other papers and there is no given deadline for such "revision"), and then it went through a more usual practice. Both reviewers were very positive. Only minor edits were needed, and my article was accepted very quickly after the 2nd round revision.