Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Author Guidelines

General Conditions:

Before submitting manuscripts for evaluation, authors must be aware of, and confirm that:

  • The theme of the manuscript aligns with the Scope and Focus and fits into the Themes of interest of RCO, as defined on the About page of the Journal.
  • The concepts, opinions, and ideas published in the works are entirely and solely the responsibility of their author(s).
  • Manuscripts submitted to RCO are unpublished. Works published in proceedings of scientific events, such as congresses, seminars, symposiums, etc., are considered unpublished.
  • Manuscripts are not under evaluation in any other publication venue during the entire evaluation process.
  • Maximum number of authors per article: 4. Exceptional cases properly justified may be analyzed by the RCO Executive Committee.
  • Anonymity of authors in all submitted documents.
  • Authors commit to submitting, after approval for publication, the article in two versions: one in Portuguese and another in English.

 

Submission Preparation:

  • Articles and documents will be submitted only through the electronic form available on the journal's website (http://revistas.usp.br/rco).
  • Authors must correctly fill in their data in the submission system; this information is indispensable at the time of publication.
  • Submissions that do not comply or are incomplete will be returned to the authors.
  • Direct, concrete, and objective style. Avoid the use of acronyms, including variable names in the text and tables. The variable name should be self-explanatory, direct, and immediate.
  • Readers should easily understand what is being discussed.

 

Submission of Manuscripts:

Articles and teaching cases can be submitted in Portuguese or English. After approval for publication, authors commit to submitting the article in the English version. RCO will provide authors with a list of accepted translation services. If the article is submitted only in English, proofreading service will be required.

 

Rules for submitting scientific articles here.

Rules for submitting teaching cases and other teaching contributions here.

Download the Sample Cover Letter here

Submission Preparation Checklist

All submissions must meet the following requirements:

  • The contribution is original and unpublished and is not being evaluated for publication by another journal.
  • The submission file is in Microsoft Word format.
  • Authors agree to submit, after approval for publication, the article in two versions: one in Portuguese and another in English.
  • URLs for the references have been provided whenever possible.
  • Follow the blind review recommendations (not identifying in the text).
  • A letter to the editor, containing 5 suggestions of reviewers and the effective contributions of each author.
  • The manuscript contains an abstract in Portuguese and English.
  • Authors agree to integrate the journal's review group.
  • The manuscript contains a 'Table of practical implications' (see "Rules for submission of scientific articles").

 

Evaluation Process:

The evaluation process consists of preliminary verification at the secretariat, evaluation by the chief editor and associates (Desk Review), and peer review. The evaluation aims to ensure scientific rigor and adequacy to the editorial line and also to develop the overall quality of manuscripts by supporting authors.

Secretariat Verification: Metadata, compliance with submission rules, and initial similarity check are analyzed. Each case of identified similarity, even if minimal, is made available to the Chief and associated editors for analysis in the Desk Review process.

Desk Review - The preliminary evaluation of articles received by the Editor-in-Chief and associate editors assesses, in this order of priority: suitability for the journal's focus, contributions offered for the advancement of scientific knowledge, theoretical and empirical balance and adequacy, and overall manuscript quality. Articles that receive a positive evaluation at this stage proceed to Peer Review.

 

Peer Review - The double-blind peer review assesses:

  • Originality of the work and advancement of knowledge on the topic;
  • Contribution and practical implications of the results;
  • Defined and justified research problem;
  • Theoretical relevance and consistency;
  • Adequacy and appropriate use of methods and techniques;
  • Quality of writing and organization of the text.

 

The evaluation process is considered a fundamental stage for manuscript improvement. For this reason, RCO evaluators are encouraged to provide, in addition to the publication opinion, suggestions for improvement regarding content and form.

The Editor-in-Chief, after the reviewers' opinions, reviews the final version of the work, either approving it, requesting new adjustments, or sending the manuscript back for peer review. The final decision will always be made by the Editor-in-Chief; in case of discrepancies between the opinions, the Editor-in-Chief may or may not request the opinion of a new reviewer.

Authors, besides being able to check the stages of the evaluation process on the journal's website, are notified of the status of their submission by email. A total period of 50 days is estimated for Desk Review, and 3 to 4 months to receive the result of double-blind review.

The result of the evaluation process is: Approval, Request for revisions, or Rejection. In all cases, authors are informed of the opinions of the chief editors, associates, and reviewers.

As a way to recognize the essential work of the reviewers, RCO strongly recommends that they record their evaluations on the Publons platform.

Copyright Notice

RCO adopts the Open Access policy (Libre Open Access), under the standard Creative Commons agreement (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). The agreement provides that:

  • The submission of text authorizes its publication and implies a commitment that the same material is not being submitted to another journal. The original is considered definitive;
  • Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows sharing the work with authorship recognition and initial publication in this journal;
  • Authors are permitted and encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their personal page) before or during the editorial process, as this can generate productive changes as well as increase the impact and citation of the published work (See The Open Access Effect);
  • The journal does not pay copyright fees to the authors of published texts;
  • The copyright holder of the journal, except for those already agreed upon in the Libre Open Access agreement (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), is the Department of Accounting of the Faculty of Economics, Administration, and Accounting of Ribeirão Preto at the University of São Paulo.

No submission or publication fees are charged.

 

Up to 4 authors per article are accepted. Exceptional cases properly justified may be analyzed by the RCO Executive Committee. Considered exceptional cases are: multi-institutional projects; manuscripts resulting from collaboration of research groups; or involving large teams for evidence collection, primary data construction, and comparative experiments.

The authorship order by contribution is recommended for each of the individuals listed as authors, especially in the design and planning of the research project, data collection or analysis and interpretation, and writing. Authors must declare the effective contributions of each author, filling out the letter to the editor, early in the submission process, taking responsibility for the information given.

Author exchanges are allowed throughout the evaluation process and before manuscript publication. Authors must indicate the final composition and order of authorship in the document signed by all those involved in acceptance for publication. If the composition and order of authorship are different from what was previously informed in the system, all previously listed authors must express their agreement.

In case of identification of authorship without merit or contribution (ghost, guest, or gift authorship), RCO follows the procedure recommended by COPE.

 

Policy on Conflicting Interests

A conflicting interest is any financial, professional, or personal interest that potentially interferes with impartiality in the elaboration, evaluation, or publication of a manuscript.

Authors' conflict of interests. Authors must ensure that their results are free from sponsors, employers, or any dependence relationship. In the submission process, authors must declare the existence of any financial, personal, or professional interests that may potentially have influenced the manuscript preparation.

They must declare the existence of:

  • Research grants received from any sources, for travel or participation in meetings, provision of paid services, relationships with the RCO editorial board;
  • Relationships with the organizations involved and participation in government agencies;
  • Funding sources for the work, including their role and involvement in the decision to submit the article for publication.

The concepts, opinions, and ideas published in the articles are the responsibility of their author(s). The Institution or any editorial bodies linked to RCO are not responsible for them.

Reviewers' conflict of interests. Reviewers must be free from links to proceed with the manuscript evaluation. Despite the double-blind evaluation, currently the title of the articles and their content can be detected in pre-print databases or proceedings of online congresses. If the authorship of the manuscript is identified by the reviewer, if there is any conflict of interest, this must be reported before acceptance.

Editors' conflict of interests. Associate editors can submit manuscripts for evaluation, however, they are excluded from the evaluation process involving their submission.

Cases involving possible conflict of interest in which the relevance, as well as the implication on the manuscript, has not been clearly defined, will be analyzed by the Editor-in-Chief and the Executive Committee.

Privacy Statement

The names and addresses provided in this journal will be used exclusively for the services provided by this publication and will not be made available for other purposes or to third parties.

 

Reports, complaints, and suggestions

RCO welcomes voluntary reports from the scientific community (whistleblowers), complaints from authors, reviewers, readers, and the community in general through its communication channels: email (rco@usp.br), Facebook, or phone (+55 16 3315-9086).

In case of reports of suspected conflicts of interest, data fabrication, and other ethical deviation issues, it must be made necessarily through RCO's email. Responses will be provided within 48 hours after the start of the demand.

In cases of serious ethical misconduct or conflicts of interest, if the responsible Editor cannot resolve the reported problem, RCO commits to forwarding the issue to COPE.

In case of suggestions and doubts, authors, reviewers, and readers can directly contact the secretariat by phone.