If your journal is struggling to attract strong manuscripts, the problem may not be insufficient promotion.
Authors want to publish in journals that have a clear purpose, credible leadership, helpful submission guidance and dependable editorial standards. When these foundations are weak, repeated calls for papers may attract more submissions without improving their relevance or quality.
Here are five practical areas your editorial team can strengthen.
1. Clarify the journal’s focus
A journal should be able to explain clearly what it publishes and the academic community it serves.
An overly broad or confusing scope can attract unsuitable manuscripts. It can also make it difficult for editors to choose qualified reviewers and build a recognisable reputation.
Review your journal’s aims and scope. Specify the disciplines, research problems, article types and contributions you welcome. If certain subjects or submission types are outside the journal’s focus, state this clearly.
A well-defined identity helps authors decide whether their research genuinely belongs in your journal.
2. Strengthen the editorial board
An editorial board should contribute more than respected names.
Members should understand their responsibilities and be willing to support the journal through editorial advice, manuscript assessment, reviewer recommendations or responsible promotion within their academic networks.
Review the board periodically. Confirm that members have agreed to serve, their affiliations are accurate and their expertise reflects the journal’s current scope. The Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing recommend maintaining an appropriate and up-to-date editorial or advisory body.
A smaller, active board can be more valuable than a long list of people who rarely participate.
3. Improve the author guidelines
Poorly prepared manuscripts are not always the result of careless authors. Sometimes, the journal’s instructions are incomplete, inconsistent or difficult to understand.
Author guidelines should explain:
- The journal’s accepted article types
- Manuscript structure and formatting
- Referencing requirements
- Authorship and conflict-of-interest policies
- Research ethics requirements
- Supporting documents
- How manuscripts are reviewed
- Any applicable charges
Clear instructions help authors prepare suitable submissions and make initial editorial checks easier.
Ask someone unfamiliar with the journal to read the guidelines. If they still have several basic questions, the instructions need improvement.
4. Make peer review rigorous and efficient
Strong authors value meaningful feedback, but unnecessary delays can damage their confidence in a journal.
Editors should select reviewers with relevant expertise, check possible conflicts of interest, provide clear review criteria and follow up consistently. Reviewers should understand the expected deadline and the kind of feedback that will help the editor reach a fair decision.
Speed should never replace quality. The goal is to remove avoidable waiting while preserving independent and constructive evaluation.
Record where delays commonly occur. You may discover that manuscripts wait too long before editor assignment, reviewer invitations or final decisions.
5. Publish consistently and protect quality
A journal builds trust by maintaining dependable standards over time.
Choose a publication schedule your team can realistically sustain. It is better to publish fewer well-prepared issues consistently than to announce an ambitious schedule that is repeatedly missed.
Every accepted article should pass through appropriate editorial checks, proofreading and final approval. Corrections should be handled transparently when genuine errors are discovered after publication.
The DOAJ Guide to Applying distinguishes between mandatory requirements and recommended practices for open-access journals. Even when a journal is not applying to DOAJ, the guidance provides a useful benchmark for transparency and editorial quality.
Improve one area at a time
A stronger journal is not built through one dramatic change. It grows through consistent improvements to its identity, leadership, author guidance, peer review and publishing standards.
Review your journal against these five areas. Identify the weakest one, choose one practical improvement and begin working on it this month.
Better submissions are more likely when authors can see that a journal is clearly focused, professionally managed and committed to publishing credible research.
