Review of Public Personnel Administration

Manuscript Submission Guidelines: Review of Public Personnel Administration

This Journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Please read the guidelines below then visit Review of Public Personnel Administration’s submission site [https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/roppa] to upload your manuscript. Please note that manuscripts not conforming to these guidelines may be returned. Remember you can log in to the submission site at any time to check on the progress of your paper through the peer review process.

Sage disseminates high-quality research and engaged scholarship globally, and we are committed to diversity and inclusion in publishing. We encourage submissions from a diverse range of authors from across all countries and backgrounds.

Only manuscripts of sufficient quality that meet the aims and scope of Review of Public Personnel Administration will be reviewed.

There are no fees payable to submit or publish in this Journal. Open Access options are available - see section 3.3 below.

As part of the submission process you will be required to warrant that you are submitting your original work, that you have the rights in the work, and that you have obtained and can supply all necessary permissions for the reproduction of any copyright works not owned by you, that you are submitting the work for first publication in Review of Public Personnel Administration (ROPPA) and that it is not being considered for publication elsewhere and has not already been published elsewhere. Following submission to ROPPA, manuscripts may not be submitted for publication to ANY other source pending official, written notification of the final decision by ROPPA. Submission to ROPPA indicates that this is your primary choice for publication and ROPPA retains sole publication rights until a final publication decision is made. If you have any questions regarding this policy, contact Editor Meghna Sabharwal (meghna.sabharwal@utdallas.edu).

Please see our guidelines on prior publication and note that ROPPA will consider submissions of papers that have been posted on preprint servers; please alert the Editorial Office when submitting (contact details are at the end of these guidelines) and include the DOI for the preprint in the designated field in the manuscript submission system. Authors should not post an updated version of their paper to a preprint server while it is being peer reviewed for possible publication in ROPPA. If your paper is accepted, you will need to contact the preprint server to ensure the final published article link is attached to your preprint. Learn more about our preprint policy here.

If you have any questions about publishing with Sage, please visit the Sage Journal Solutions Portal.

1. What do we publish?
   1.1 Aims & Scope
   1.2 Article types
   1.3 Writing your paper
2. Editorial policies
   2.1 Peer review policy
   2.2 Authorship
   2.3 Acknowledgements
   2.4 Funding
   2.5 Declaration of conflicting interests
   2.6 Research ethics and patient consent
   2.7 Clinical trials
3. Publishing policies
   3.1 Publication ethics
   3.2 Contributor’s publishing agreement
   3.3 Open access and author archiving
4. Preparing your manuscript
   4.1 Formatting
   4.2 Artwork, figures and other graphics
   4.3 Identifiable information
   4.4 Supplemental material
   4.5 Reference style
   4.6 English language editing services
   4.7 Final Check
5. Submitting your manuscript
   5.1 ORCID
   5.2 Information required for completing your submission
   5.3 Permissions
6. On acceptance and publication
   6.1 SAGE Production
   6.2 Online First publication
   6.3 Access to your published article
   6.4 Promoting your article
7. Further information
   7.1 Appealing the publication decision

 

1. What do we publish?

The mission of the Review of Public Personnel Administration (ROPPA) is to present timely, rigorous scholarship on human resource management in public service organizations. ROPPA is a refereed journal that welcomes articles reflecting the varied approaches and methodologies used in the study and practice of HRM. Of particular interest are studies that analyze the effects of specific HR procedures or programs on the management function and studies that assess the impact of HRM on the broader areas of public policy and administration. Both traditional and emerging topics are welcomed. These include, but are not limited to, merit system reforms, the changing workplace/workforce, equal employment opportunity, quality of work life, relations between HR professionals and line managers, nonprofit HR issues, information technology innovations, decentralization, downsizing, deregulation, grievances and appeals, staffing, recruitment, retention, classification and compensation, performance appraisal, training and development, leadership, motivation, employee benefits, diversity, labor-management relations, mediation, arbitration, public sector unions, HRM in international organizations, and comparative HR. If you have a question about what may be considered acceptable, please contact Editor Meghna Sabharwal (meghna.sabharwal@utdallas.edu).

1.1 Aims & Scope

Before submitting your manuscript to Review of Public Personnel Administration, please ensure you have read the Aims & Scope.

1.2 Article types

ROPPA publishes the following article types:

• Original Research Articles
• Book Reviews
• Human Resource in Practice
• Legal Brief
• Research Notes
• Symposia
• Special Issue articles

1.3 Writing your paper

Visit the Sage Author Gateway for general advice on how to get published, plus links to further resources.

Sage Author Services also offers authors a variety of ways to improve and enhance your article including English language editing, plagiarism detection, and video abstract and infographic preparation.

1.3.1 Make your article discoverable

For information and guidance on how to make your article more discoverable, visit our Gateway page on How to Help Readers Find Your Article Online.

Back to top

2. Editorial policies

2.1 Peer review policy

Sage does not permit the use of author-suggested (recommended) reviewers at any stage of the submission process, be that through the web-based submission system or other communication.

Reviewers should be experts in their fields and should be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Our policy is that reviewers should not be assigned to a paper if:

• The reviewer is based at the same institution as any of the co-authors.
• The reviewer is based at the funding body of the paper.
• The author has recommended the reviewer.
• The reviewer has provided a personal (e.g. Gmail/Yahoo/Hotmail) email account and an institutional email account cannot be found after performing a basic Google search (name, department and institution).

Review of Public Personnel Administration’s policy is to have manuscripts reviewed by three expert reviewers. ROPPA utilizes a double-anonymized peer review process in which the reviewer and authors’ names and information are withheld from the other. All manuscripts are reviewed as rapidly as possible, while maintaining rigor. Reviewers make comments to the author and recommendations to the Editor who then makes the final decision.

The Editor or members of the Editorial Board may occasionally submit their own manuscripts for possible publication in ROPPA. In these cases, the peer review process will be managed by alternative members of the Board and the submitting Editor/Board member will have no involvement in the decision-making process.

Special issue manuscripts are sent to Guest Editors upon submission to ensure they meet the scope of the special issue. The rest of the peer review process will be handled by ROPPA’s internal editorial team. Reviewers make comments to the author and recommendations to the Editor who then makes the final decision. 

ROPPA is committed to delivering high quality, fast peer-review for your paper, and as such has partnered with Web of Science (previously Publons). Web of Science is a third-party service that seeks to track, verify and give credit for peer review. Reviewers for ROPPA can opt in to Web of Science in order to claim their reviews or have them automatically verified and added to their reviewer profile. Reviewers claiming credit for their review will be associated with the relevant journal, but the article name, reviewer’s decision and the content of their review is not published on the site. For more information visit the Web of Science website.

2.2 Authorship

All parties who have made a substantive contribution to the article should be listed as authors. Principal authorship, authorship order, and other publication credits should be based on the relative scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their status. A student is usually listed as principal author on any multiple-authored publication that substantially derives from the student’s dissertation or thesis.

Please note that AI chatbots, for example ChatGPT, should not be listed as authors. For more information see the policy on Use of ChatGPT and generative AI tools.

2.3 Acknowledgements

All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an Acknowledgements section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, or a department chair who provided only general support.

Please supply any personal acknowledgements separately to the main text to facilitate anonymous peer review.

Per ICMJE recommendations, it is best practice to obtain consent from non-author contributors who you are acknowledging in your paper.

2.3.1 Third party submissions
Where an individual who is not listed as an author submits a manuscript on behalf of the author(s), a statement must be included in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript and in the accompanying cover letter. The statements must:

• Disclose this type of editorial assistance – including the individual’s name, company and level of input
• Identify any entities that paid for this assistance
• Confirm that the listed authors have authorized the submission of their manuscript via third party and approved any statements or declarations, e.g. conflicting interests, funding, etc.

Where appropriate, Sage reserves the right to deny consideration to manuscripts submitted by a third party rather than by the authors themselves.

2.3.2 Writing assistance

Individuals who provided writing assistance, e.g. from a specialist communications company, do not qualify as authors and so should be included in the Acknowledgements section. Authors must disclose any writing assistance – including the individual’s name, company and level of input – and identify the entity that paid for this assistance. It is not necessary to disclose use of language polishing services.

2.4 Funding

Review of Public Personnel Administration requires all authors to acknowledge their funding in a consistent fashion under a separate heading.  Please visit the Funding Acknowledgements page on the Sage Journal Author Gateway to confirm the format of the acknowledgment text in the event of funding.

2.5 Declaration of conflicting interests

Review of Public Personnel Administration encourages authors to include a declaration of any conflicting interests and recommends you review the good practice guidelines on the Sage Journal Author Gateway.

2.6 Research ethics and patient consent

If applicable, authors are required to state in the methods section whether participants provided informed consent.

Information on informed consent to report individual cases or case series should be included in the manuscript text. A statement is required regarding whether written informed consent for patient information and images to be published was provided by the patient(s) or a legally authorized representative. Please do not submit the patient’s actual written informed consent with your article, as this in itself breaches the patient’s confidentiality. Review of Public Personnel Administration requests that you confirm to us, in writing, that you have obtained written informed consent but the written consent itself should be held by the authors/investigators themselves, for example in a patient’s hospital record. The confirmatory letter may be uploaded with your submission as a separate file.

Please also refer to the ICMJE Recommendations for the Protection of Research Participants.

2.7 Clinical trials

Review of Public Personnel Administration is committed to facilitating openness, transparency and reproducibility of research, and has the following research data sharing policy. For more information, including FAQs please visit the Sage Research Data policy pages.

Subject to appropriate ethical and legal considerations, authors are encouraged to:

• Share your research data in a relevant public data repository
• Include a data availability statement linking to your data. If it is not possible to share your data, use the statement to confirm why it cannot be shared.
• Cite this data in your research

If you need to anonymize your research data for peer review, please refer to our Research Data Sharing FAQs for guidance

Back to top

3. Publishing policies

3.1 Publication ethics

Sage is committed to upholding the integrity of the academic record. We encourage authors to refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics’ International Standards for Authors and view the Publication Ethics page on the Sage Author Gateway.

3.1.1 Plagiarism

Review of Public Personnel Administration and Sage take issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice in publication very seriously. We seek to protect the rights of our authors and we always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of Review of Public Personnel Administration against malpractice. Submitted articles may be checked with duplication-checking software. Where an article, for example, is found to have plagiarized other work or included third-party copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, or where the authorship of the article is contested, we reserve the right to take action including, but not limited to: publishing an erratum or corrigendum (correction); retracting the article; taking up the matter with the head of department or dean of the author's institution and/or relevant academic bodies or societies; or taking appropriate legal action.

3.1.2 Prior publication

If material has been previously published it is not generally acceptable for publication in a Sage journal. However, there are certain circumstances where previously published material can be considered for publication. Please refer to the guidance on the Sage Author Gateway or if in doubt, contact the Editor at the address given below.

3.2 Contributor’s publishing agreement

Before publication, Sage requires the author as the rights holder to sign a Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement. Sage’s Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement is an exclusive license agreement which means that the author retains copyright in the work but grants Sage the sole and exclusive right and license to publish for the full legal term of copyright. Exceptions may exist where an assignment of copyright is required or preferred by a proprietor other than Sage. In this case copyright in the work will be assigned from the author to the society. For more information, please visit the Sage Author Gateway.

3.3 Open access and author archiving

Review of Public Personnel Administration offers optional open access publishing via the Sage Choice program and Read and Publish agreements, where authors at participating institutions can publish open access with fees paid by the institution. Find out if your institution is participating by visiting Open Access Agreements at Sage. For more information on Open Access publishing options at Sage please visit Sage Open Access. For information on funding body compliance, and depositing your article in repositories, please visit Sage’s Author Archiving and Re-Use Guidelines and Publishing Policies.

Back to top

4. Preparing your manuscript

4.1 Formatting

Basic Submission Package Requirements: A cover sheet with the manuscript’s title and all authors’ names, affiliations, and complete contact information (mailing address, phone, fax, and email address), plus about five keywords must be included. Biographical statements for each author not exceeding 40 words and an abstract not exceeding 150 words should be provided on separate pages. The manuscript's title should also appear on the page containing the abstract. All copy (including tables, endnotes, and references) should be double-spaced using Times New Roman size 12 font, one-inch margins, and numbered pages. Prospective authors should follow the manuscript format described below.

Format: The preferred format for your manuscript is Word. All copy, including indented matter, notes, and references should be typed double-spaced on standard white background with one-inch margins using Times New Roman size 12 font. All pages should be numbered.

Manuscript Length: Manuscripts should not exceed 25 typewritten double-spaced pages, inclusive of tables, charts, graphs, and endnotes, and exclusive of the front matter indicated below. Manuscripts should conform to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th edition)

Front Matter: Because editors and referees review articles without reference to the author’s name or institutional affiliation, identifying information should be removed from all portions of the submitted manuscript with the exception of the cover sheet. To facilitate this process, the first three separate pages of the submitted manuscript, in order, should be:

1. A cover sheet containing the manuscript title, author name (s), affiliation (s), mailing address (es), primary telephone and fax numbers, email addresses, and four or five keywords.
2. Biographical statements for each author of not more than 40 words.
3. An abstract of no more than 150 words, with the manuscript’s title repeated above the abstract.

Text Citations: All references in the text or any notes should be identified by the last name of the author, year of publication, and include pagination where appropriate. Format should be as follows:

1. Author’s name in text: Johnston (2001, p. 150)
2. Author’s name not in text: (Johnston, 2001)
3. Two authors: (Johnston & Denby, 2001, p. 150)
4. Three or more authors:
   • First citation: (Johnston, Denby, & Smith, 2001, p. 150)
   • Subsequent: (Johnston et al., 2001, p. 150)

Ibid., op. cit., loc., supra infra, or cf: should not be used. Subsequent citations of the same source should be listed in the same manner as the first citation, except as noted above for multiple authors. Complete information for every reference should be listed at the end of the article starting on a new page labeled REFERENCES.

Footnotes: Footnotes are not to be used in the main text. If it is important enough to say, include it in the text.

Notes: Notes are for discursive comments and not for documentation. Superscripted numbers for notes should be inserted into the text, but not electronically embedded in the text. All notes included in the article should appear at the end of the article, starting on a new page labeled NOTES.\

Heads: Articles, titles, subtitles, and text subheads should be selected carefully with consideration to appropriateness and conciseness. Subheads should be limited to three levels:

1. Major level (flush left, bold, all caps)
2. Second level (indented, bold, caps and lowercase)
3. Third level (indented, italicized, caps and lowercase, period following, text following on the same line)

4.2 Artwork, figures and other graphics

Tables and figures should be typed on separate sheets of paper and numbered in Arabic. Indicate placement of tables or figures in the text by writing "Insert Table 1 about here," or "Insert Figure 1 about here." Footnotes to tables or figures should be superscripted in the table body and indicated beneath the table by the use of lower case "a," "b," "c," etc. Table or figure source material should follow lettered footnotes as one paragraph headed with the word "Sources." Sources for tables and figures should be cited as in text and in references. Figures must be originals, and all lines should be clean and jet-black. Tables should not have cells or lines dividing the different elements. Preferably, each element will be separated by tabs. If not created within the context of .doc, .wpd, or .rtf files, final versions of figures, charts, or graphs for publication should be submitted in one of the following postscript or bitmapped formats: EPS, GIF, JPEG, TIF or WMF. For guidance on the preparation of illustrations, pictures and graphs in electronic format, please visit Sage’s Manuscript Submission Guidelines.

Figures supplied in color will appear in color online regardless of whether or not these illustrations are reproduced in color in the printed version. For specifically requested color reproduction in print, you will receive information regarding the costs from Sage after receipt of your accepted article.

4.3 Identifiable information

Where a journal uses double-anonymized peer review, authors are required to submit:

1. A version of the manuscript which has had any information that compromises the anonymity of the author(s) removed or anonymized. This version will be sent to the peer reviewers.
2. A separate title page which includes any removed or anonymized material. This will not be sent to the peer reviewers.

Visit the Sage Author Gateway for detailed guidance on making an anonymous submission

4.4 Supplemental material

This Journal is able to host additional materials online (e.g. datasets, podcasts, videos, images etc.) alongside the full-text of the article. For more information please refer to our guidelines on submitting supplemental files.

4.5 Reference style

Review of Public Personnel Administration adheres to the APA reference style. View the APA guidelines to ensure your manuscript conforms to this reference style.

Every citation must have a reference and every reference must be cited. References should be double-spaced and listed alphabetically by author and (for the same author cited in different sources) chronologically by the year of publication with the most recent year first; use "a," "b," "c," etc. after the same year if necessary. Do not use et al in the reference list; names of all authors of a publication cited should be listed.

References must be complete. References for books must include author(s) with the last name of the author listed first, followed by the author’s first and middle initials, date, title of publication, place of publication and publisher. For periodical references, the entry must include author(s) with the last name of the author listed first followed by the author’s first name and middle initials, date, title of article and journal, volume number, and pages; for foreign journals include city of publication. Examples of acceptable references appear below.

• Gossett, C. W. (1997, November). Civil service reform: The case of Georgia. Paper presented at the Southern Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA.
• Griggs v. Duke Power Co. 401 U.S. 424 (1971).
• Human Resources (1999, February). Governing, 23-25.
• International City/County Management Association (ICMA). (1999). Performance indicators/support services/human resources. ICMA Comparative Performance Measurement Program. Retrieved May 30, 1999, from http://www.icma.org/performance/PI-support.cfm.
• Kettl, D., Ingraham, P. W., Sanders, R., & Horner, C. (1996). Civil service reform: Building a government that works. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.
• Mishra, A. K. (1996). Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.) Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 261-287). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
• National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA). (1983). Revitalizing federal management: Managers and their overburdened systems. Washington, DC: NAPA.
• Perry, J., Wise, L. R., & Martin, M. (1994). Breaking the civil service mold: The case of Indianapolis. Review of Public Personnel Administration 14 (2), 40-54.

4.6 English language editing services

Authors seeking assistance with English language editing, translation, or figure and manuscript formatting to fit Review of Public Personnel Administration’s specifications should consider using Sage Language Services. Visit Sage Language Services on our Journal Author Gateway for further information.

4.7 Final Check

Be sure to:

1. Provide complete contact information.
2. Use single spaces rather than double spaces between sentences and after colons.
3. Spell out or define acronyms, abbreviations, or jargon on first use.
4. Provide translations for non-English titles in references.

Back to top

5. Submitting your manuscript

Review of Public Personnel Administration is hosted on Sage Track, a web based online submission and peer review system powered by ScholarOne™ Manuscripts. Visit [https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/roppa] to login and submit your article online.

IMPORTANT: Please check whether you already have an account in the system before trying to create a new one. If you have reviewed or authored for Review of Public Personnel Administration in the past year it is likely that you will have had an account created.  For further guidance on submitting your manuscript online please visit ScholarOne Online Help.

5.1 ORCID

As part of our commitment to ensuring an ethical, transparent and fair peer review process Sage is a supporting member of ORCID, the Open Researcher and Contributor ID. ORCID provides a unique and persistent digital identifier that distinguishes researchers from every other researcher, even those who share the same name, and, through integration in key research workflows such as manuscript and grant submission, supports automated linkages between researchers and their professional activities, ensuring that their work is recognized.

The collection of ORCID IDs from corresponding authors is now part of the submission process of this Journal. If you already have an ORCID ID you will be asked to associate that to your submission during the online submission process. We also strongly encourage all co-authors to link their ORCID ID to their accounts in our online peer review platforms. It takes seconds to do: click the link when prompted, sign into your ORCID account and our systems are automatically updated. Your ORCID ID will become part of your accepted publication’s metadata, making your work attributable to you and only you. Your ORCID ID is published with your article so that fellow researchers reading your work can link to your ORCID profile and from there link to your other publications.

If you do not already have an ORCID ID please follow this link to create one or visit our ORCID homepage to learn more.

5.2 Information required for completing your submission

You will be asked to provide contact details and academic affiliations for all co-authors via the submission system and identify who is to be the corresponding author. These details must match what appears on your manuscript. The affiliation listed in the manuscript should be the institution where the research was conducted. If an author has moved to a new institution since completing the research, the new affiliation can be included in a manuscript note at the end of the paper. At this stage please ensure you have included all the required statements and declarations and uploaded any additional supplementary files (including reporting guidelines where relevant).

5.3 Permissions

Please also ensure that you have obtained any necessary permission from copyright holders for reproducing any illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere. For further information including guidance on fair dealing for criticism and review, please see the Copyright and Permissions page on the Sage Author Gateway.

Back to top

6. On acceptance and publication

6.1 SAGE Production

Your Sage Production Editor will keep you informed as to your article’s progress throughout the production process. Proofs will be made available to the corresponding author via our editing portal Sage Edit or by email, and corrections should be made directly or notified to us promptly. Authors are reminded to check their proofs carefully to confirm that all author information, including names, affiliations, sequence and contact details are correct, and that Funding and Conflict of Interest statements, if any, are accurate.

6.2 Online First publication

Online First allows final articles (completed and approved articles awaiting assignment to a future issue) to be published online prior to their inclusion in a journal issue, which significantly reduces the lead time between submission and publication. Visit the Sage Journals help page for more details, including how to cite Online First articles.

6.3 Access to your published article

Sage provides authors with online access to their final article.

6.4 Promoting your article

Publication is not the end of the process! You can help disseminate your paper and ensure it is as widely read and cited as possible. The Sage Author Gateway has numerous resources to help you promote your work. Visit the Promote Your Article page on the Gateway for tips and advice.

Back to top

7. Further information

Any correspondence, queries or additional requests for information on the manuscript submission process should be sent to the Review of Public Personnel Administration editorial office as follows:

Meghna Sabharwal, Editor-in-Chief, meghna.sabharwal@utdallas.edu

7.1 Appealing the publication decision

Editors have very broad discretion in determining whether an article is an appropriate fit for their journal. Many manuscripts are declined with a very general statement of the rejection decision. These decisions are not eligible for formal appeal unless the author believes the decision to reject the manuscript was based on an error in the review of the article, in which case the author may appeal the decision by providing the Editor with a detailed written description of the error they believe occurred.

If an author believes the decision regarding their manuscript was affected by a publication ethics breach, the author may contact the publisher with a detailed written description of their concern, and information supporting the concern, at publication_ethics@sagepub.com

Back to top