All manuscripts submitted to SAGA: Journal of Technology and Information Systems undergo an initial Desk Review and Initial Manuscript Evaluation by the editorial team.

At this stage, the manuscript is evaluated for its relevance to the journal's focus and scope, originality, academic quality, methodological appropriateness, ethical compliance, completeness, and conformity with the journal's submission requirements.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic editorial or scholarly requirements may be declined at this stage without proceeding to external peer review.

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial evaluation are normally assigned to at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.

Reviewers are selected based on their scholarly expertise, research experience, relevance to the manuscript, independence, and absence of significant conflicts of interest.

SAGA applies a double-blind peer-review model. Under this model, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the peer-review process.

Reviewers assess manuscripts independently and provide scholarly recommendations to assist the Editor in making an editorial decision.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts from both substantive and technical perspectives. The evaluation may include:

• Relevance to the journal's focus and scope;
• Originality and novelty of the research;
• Significance of the scientific or practical contribution;
• Appropriateness and rigor of the research methodology;
• Validity and clarity of data analysis and results;
• Quality and depth of the discussion;
• Consistency between objectives, methods, results, and conclusions;
• Quality and relevance of references;
• Clarity, organization, and scholarly presentation of the manuscript; and
• Compliance with relevant research and publication ethics.

After considering the reviewers' reports and the Editor's assessment, an editorial decision may be:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Resubmit for Review
• Reject

Where reviewer recommendations substantially differ, or where additional technical, methodological, or ethical expertise is required, the Editor may invite an additional independent reviewer before making a final decision.

When revisions are required, the manuscript is returned to the authors together with the relevant reviewer and editorial comments.

Authors are expected to revise the manuscript carefully and provide an appropriate response explaining how each reviewer and editorial comment has been addressed.

Depending on the extent of the revisions, the revised manuscript may be evaluated by the Editor or returned to the original reviewers for further assessment.

The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is made by the responsible Editor based on the reviewers' recommendations, the quality of the revised manuscript, compliance with the journal's requirements, and the overall scholarly merit of the work.

Acceptance is not determined solely by reviewer recommendations. The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the journal's editorial team.

Following formal acceptance, the manuscript proceeds to the production stage, which may include editorial checking, copyediting, layout preparation, metadata verification, proofreading, DOI preparation, and final publication checks.

The article is subsequently scheduled for publication in accordance with the journal's publication schedule.

SAGA seeks to complete the editorial and peer-review process efficiently while maintaining rigorous scholarly standards. Processing times may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, the extent of revisions required, and the number of review rounds.

Any processing or publication timeframe communicated by the journal should therefore be regarded as an estimated timeframe rather than a guaranteed deadline.