Journal of Work Ecosystems — Work ecosystems.
Authorship, accountability and contributions
Authorship requires a substantial scholarly contribution, participation in drafting or critical revision, approval of the submitted version and accountability for the work. All authors must agree to inclusion and order. Gift, guest and ghost authorship are unacceptable. Contributions are disclosed using CRediT roles; technical assistance, funding or supervision alone does not establish authorship. Changes require editorial approval and written agreement from all affected authors.
Research ethics and consent
Protect employee anonymity and account for employer–employee power relationships. Participation must not be linked to appraisal, employment benefits or adverse consequences.
Obtain ethics review and informed consent where required before research begins. Report the approving body and reference, or explain a justified exemption. Publication of identifiable participant information requires appropriate consent. Explain how confidentiality and secure handling were maintained. Editors may request documentary evidence, which should not be placed in public supplementary files.
Originality and integrity
Submit original work that is not under consideration elsewhere. Disclose related publications, preprints and reused material; obtain permissions where required. Plagiarism, undisclosed redundant publication, fabricated or falsified data/images, manipulated peer review and coercive or irrelevant citation practices are unacceptable. Similarity scores are indicators for human investigation, not automatic proof of misconduct.
Competing interests and funding
Authors, reviewers and editors must disclose financial and non-financial relationships that may affect judgement, including employment, consulting, grants, personal relationships and academic competition. State the funder’s role or absence of influence. Editors and reviewers must recuse themselves when conflicts cannot be managed.
AI and automated tools
AI tools cannot be authors. Disclose generative AI used for substantive content, analysis or interpretation, including the tool, version when available, purpose and verification undertaken. Routine spelling, grammar and formatting assistance need not be declared. AI output is not an authoritative evidence source; verify claims against original sources. Studies of AI output may document that output as research material. Authors remain accountable for every statement, reference, image and analysis. Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential material to external AI services or delegate their assessments or decisions to generative AI. Any future routine publisher automation must be disclosed, tested and subject to human oversight.
Complaints and suspected misconduct
Concerns may be raised by authors, reviewers or readers with evidence. The editorial office will acknowledge, document and assess them fairly, seek responses from affected parties and obtain independent advice or contact institutions where appropriate. Decisions should be proportionate and distinguish honest error from misconduct. Complaints about an editor will be referred to an unconflicted senior editor or publisher representative; commercial interests must not govern the outcome. Contact the editorial office at [email protected]. Procedures are informed by COPE guidance; no COPE membership is claimed.
Post-publication discussion and amendments
The journal considers substantiated post-publication concerns. Material errors may require a linked correction; unresolved serious concerns may warrant an expression of concern; unreliable or seriously unethical work may require retraction. Notices explain the reason and responsible party, are clearly identified, and link to the original article. Retracted work normally remains accessible with clear marking to preserve the record; exceptional removal is reserved for compelling legal or safety grounds. Significant changes are not made silently.