Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

ABDIMAS: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Universitas Wahid Hasyim as the implementation of science, technology, economics, environment, and social in empowering the community.


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Every article submitted to the editor will be received first by the editor then editor will do the Initial Review process. The editor will continue the article to the reviewer stage. After that, the article of the review process will be sent to the editor to be received or returned to the author for revision. This process takes two month. In each manuscript, the editorial board and peer reviewers will be assessed from substantial and technical aspects.

All submitted manuscripts are read by editorial staff. the manuscript evaluated by the editor becomes incompatible with journal criteria rejected immediately without any external reviews. The manuscript evaluated to be a potential interest for our readers is sent to reviewer desks. The editor then makes a decision based on reviewers' recommendations of several possibilities: rejected, revision required, or accepted. The editor has the right to decide which manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published.

Review Process:

  1. The author submits the script
  2. Editor's Evaluation (some manuscripts denied or returned before the review process)
  3. Blind peer review process
  4. Editor's Decision
  5. Confirm to an author


Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.


Publication Ethics

ABDIMAS, is a peer-reviewed journal, published biannually by LP2M Unwahas Semarang Indonesia. It is available online as open access sources as well as in print. This statement clarifies an ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor-in-chief, the Editorial Board, the reviewer, and the publisher.
The article submitted has not yet been published elsewhere, original, research-based, unpublished and not under review for possible publication in other journals.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in ABDIMAS is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific methods. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the editor, the reviewer, the publisher, and the society. As the publisher of ABDIMAS, Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and it recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities. Publisher committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Publication Decisions

The editor of the ABDIMAS is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair Play

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.


Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.


Review Guidelines

Responsibility of Peer Reviewer Peer reviewer is responsible for critiquing by reading and evaluating manuscripts in the field of expertise, then giving constructive advice and honest feedback to the author of the article submitted. Peer reviewers, discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article, how to increase the strength and quality of the paper, and evaluate the relevance and authenticity of the manuscript. Before reviewing, please note the following: • Is the article requested to be reviewed in accordance with your expertise? If you receive a script that covers the topics that are not appropriate areas of your expertise, please notify the editor as soon as possible. Please recommend an alternative reviewer. • Do you have the time to review this paper? The review process must be completed within two weeks. If you agree and require a longer period, notify the editor as soon as possible, or suggest an alternative reviewer. • Is there any potential conflict of interest? Meanwhile, conflicts of interest will not disqualify you as a reviewer, disclose all conflicts of interest to the editor before reviewing. If you have any questions about potential conflicts of interest, do not hesitate to contact the editorial office. Review Process When reviewing the article, please consider the following: • Title: is it clearly illustrating the article? • Abstract: does it reflect the contents of the article? • Introduction: does it describe the accuracy of matters submitted by the author and clearly state the problem being considered? Typically, the introduction should summarize the context of the relevant research, and explain the findings of the research or other findings, if any, offered for discussion. This research should explain the experiments, hypotheses and methods. Content of the Article In order to determine the originality and suitability for the journal, are there any elements of plagiarism over 25% of this paper field? Quick literature search can use certain tools such as Scopus to see if there are similarities from other parts. if the study had been previously done by other authors, it is still eligible for publication? is the article is fairly new, fairly deep, and interesting to be published? does it contribute to knowledge? does the article adhere to the standards of the journal? Scope - Is the article in line with the objectives and scope of the journal? Method Comprehensive and perfect: • does the author accurately describe how the data is collected? • is the theoretical basis or reference used appropriate for this study? • is the exposure design suitable for the answer to the question? • is there a decent enough information for you to imitate the research? • does the article identify following procedures? • are there any new methods? If there is a new method, does the author explain it in details? • is there any appropriate sampling? • have the tools and materials used been adequately explained? and does the article exposure describe what type of data is recorded; right in describing the measurement? Results: This is where the author must explain the findings in his/her research. It should be clearly laid out and in a logical sequence. You will need to consider whether the appropriate analysis has been carried out; the use of statistical tools? If you have a better statistical tools to be used in this study, notify it, and the interpretation need not to be included in this section. Discussion and Conclusion: • are the claims in this section is supported by the fair results and quite reasonable? • does the author compare the research results with other previous ones? • do the results of research written in the article contradict the previous theories? • does the conclusion explain how a better scientific research to be followed-up? Tables and Pictures: Is it suitable with the referred explanation by showing data which is easy to to interprete and understanable for the readers? Writing Styles • Authors must be critical mostly to the literature systematic review of the issues, which is relevant to the field of study • Reviews should be focused on a single topic • All exposure should be in English and written in a god and coherent grammar • Easy to understand • Interesting to read. Things that need to be considered: • Perspective. A unique perspective that describes experiences and situations related to issues in marketing management, finance management, strategic management, operation management, human resource management, e-business, knowledge management, management accounting, management control system, management information system, international business, business economics, business ethics and suistainable, and entrepreneurship. Originality Research. • The original data and testing. It must present data that offers a new approach to improve systems, processes, and precision of the tools which are used. • Research policy and observational analysis. It should clarify the feasibility, effectiveness, and implementation on the research results. It is not limited to the topic of marketing management, finance management, strategic management, operation management, human resource management, e-business, knowledge management, management accounting, management control system, management information system, international business, business economics, business ethics and suistainable, and entrepreneurship. • In Practice (case study). The paper should explain the situation regarding the future challenges in marketing management, finance management, strategic management, operation management, human resource management, e-business, knowledge management, management accounting, management control system, management information system, international business, business economics, business ethics and suistainable, and entrepreneurship, within its conclusions, and things which can be learned. • Reference. • First Person (Interview); • Book Reviews; • Insight Technology (Product Review) Final Review • All results of the review submitted by reviewers are confidential • If you want to discuss the article with a colleague, kindly inform the editor • Do not contact the author directly. • Ethical issues: - Plagiarism: If you suspect the article is mostly plagiarism from other authors, please let the editor knows the details - Fraud: It is very difficult to detect a fraud catogory, but if you suspect the results in the article is not true, please inform the editor Complete "The Review" by the due date to the editorial office. Your recommendation for the article will be considered when the editor makes a final decision and your honest feedback is highly appreciated. When you write a comment, please show the part of the comment that is only intended for the editor and parts that can be returned to the author. Please do not hesitate to contact the editorial office with any questions or problems that you may encounter.


Reviewer Acknowledgement

Prof. Dr. Mohammad Djaeni, ST, MT, (Scopus ID:16027817500), Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
Prof Dr Mahmutarom SH, MH, (Scopus ID:57197874053), Universitas Wahid Hasyim, Indonesia
Prof. Jaka Sriyana, SE, M.Si, Ph.D, (Scopus ID: 55589316800), Universitas Islam Indonesia
Akhsyim Afandi, MA.Ec, Ph.D, (Scopus ID: 57199499981), Universitas Islam Indonesia
Dewi Hastuti, S.Pt, MP, (Sinta ID:5978207), Universitas Wahid Hasyim
Yance Anas, M.Sc, Apt, (Scopus ID: 53864580900), Universitas Wahid Hasyim, Indonesia
Indah Hartati, ST, MT, (Scopus ID: 57035287700), Universitas Wahid Hasyim, Indonesia
Dedi Sulaeman, M.Pd, (Scopus ID: 57203639858), Universitas Sunan Gunung Djati, Indonesia
Dr. Khafiizh Hastuti, S.Kom., M.Kom, (Scopus ID: 56485990500), Universitas Dian Nuswantoro, Indonesia
Agus Darmawan, M.Pd, (Scopus ID: 57224782125), Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia
Muhammad Taufiqurrohman, S.S., M.Hum, (Scopus ID: 57221945563), Universitas Jenderal Sudirman, Indonesia
Dr. Nor Hadi, SE, M.Si, Akt, CA, (Scopus ID: 57211788873), Institut Agama Islam Negeri Kudus, Indonesia
Dr. Siti Wahyuni, M.Sc., (Scopus ID: 6507185543), Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia
drh. Siti Susanti, Ph.D, (Scopus ID: 54988500100), Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
Darmanto, ST, M. Eng, (Scopus ID: 57212274031), Universitas Wahid Hasyim, Indonesia


Abstracting and Indexing

ABDIMAS: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat UNWAHAS has been indexed by the following service (click the link for the further information):
1. Crossref
2. Google Cendekia