REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal is an online scientific journal, with continuous publication quarterly (three issues per year: Jan./Apr.; May/Aug.; Sept./Dec.), published by the Associação Nacional de Estudos em Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas (ANEGEPE).

The REGEPE had its first edition in 2012 and, until 2022 (v.11, n.3) its title was Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas (ISSN 2316-2058). After these 10 years, from 2023 (v.12, n.1) the journal was renamed REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal  (2965-1506).

The REGEPE, from v.12, n.2 of 2023, implemented multimedia editing, that is, it adopts the inclusion of audio and video of its articles. The audios reproduce, in the three languages ​​(Portuguese, Spanish and English), information on the title, authors and their affiliations, abstract and keywords. The video, on the other hand, brings the scientific dissemination of the article, presented by the authors themselves. This action thus favors the range of multimedia accessibility resources (RMA).

In addition, REGEPE, as of v.12, n.2 of 2023, made its transition to adherence to the principles of open science, as well as started publishing articles in the Extensible Markup Language (XML) format, following the set of elements and the tagging rules defined by the SciELO Publishing Schema. This action makes REGEPE and its content accessible to any type of platform, browser and device, contributing to accessibility and greater visibility.

The REGEPE adopts the best practices of scientific publication through the open platform of the Open Journal System - OJS and its editorial policy. OJS is the main software for the management of scientific journals and one of its most important features for the interoperability of its metadata between systems is the use of the OAI-PMH protocol. The OAI-PMH protocol - Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting- is a mechanism developed by the Open Archives Initiative for the harvesting of metadata from repositories. The REGEPE follows integration/interoperability standards and protocols through the OAI-PMH, which can be found here: REGEPE OAI.

REGEPE has a team of national and international editors and reviewers committed to the content and quality of submitted articles. This journal is associated with the Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos - ABEC.

Short title of the journal

• REGEPE Entrep. Small Bus. J.

Acronym

• REGEPE

MISSION

The REGEPE mission aims to promote the debate of relevant topics in the area of ​​Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management, in addition to serving as a channel to disseminate conceptual and methodological advances and promote studies and theoretical and empirical formulations for the area of ​​entrepreneurship and small business management.

TARGET AUDIENCE

The articles published in REGEPE are aimed at those interested in the area, such as researchers, professors, undergraduate and graduate students, consultants, professionals from public, private and third sector organizations, in addition to public policy makers. In all editions it offers a teaching case.

LANGUAGES AUDIENCE

The REGEPE is one of the only Brazilian scientific journals, in the area of ​​business, that since 2020 (v.9, n.1) has been publishing its works in three languages: Portuguese, Spanish and English. The article in English is the main one and will always be published. Thus, if the submission is in Portuguese or Spanish, if the article is approved, the authors must provide an English version of the work in Portuguese/Spanish approved. The translation must be performed by a native speaker or a translator with experience in this activity and the respective translation letter or certificate must also be attached to the system.

Welcome to REGEPE and happy reading.

The REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal follows the Open Access model, allowing unrestricted virtual access (including financial restrictions) to all scientific articles published by the journal.
Open access is the condition in which the copyright holder of an academic work grants usage rights to third parties through an open license (Creative Commons Attribution, CC-BY), enabling immediate free access to the work and allowing any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, index them, use them as data for software, or use them for any other lawful purpose. REGEPE believes that the principle of making scientific knowledge freely available to the public fosters greater global democratization of knowledge.

The Open Science [OS] movement, as defined in the Unesco report, proposes guidelines for collaborative, shared and public scientific practice. In this report (Unesco, p. 8), there is a synthesis that emphasizes three factors, namely:

• Open science increases collaborations and the sharing of scientific information for the benefit of science and society;
• Makes multilingual scientific knowledge available and accessible and reusable for all;
• Opens the processes of creation, evaluation and communication of scientific knowledge to actors in society, in addition to the traditional scientific community.

In line with the OS guidelines, REGEPE adopts a series of practices, such as:

• The open access policy;
• The code of good practices for editors included in our Ethics Policy;
• The precise indication of the role of each of the authors in articles with multiple authorship, according to the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) taxonomy;
• The use of social networks (LinkedIn and Youtube) to publicize published manuscripts; and
• The publication of audio-summary and video-summary as well as publication in XML.

Additionally, REGEPE also encourages:

• The publication of preprints on public platforms;
• Sharing content underlying research development;
• The opening of manuscript evaluations.

These OS principles, adopted by REGEPE, impact our entire scientific community - readers, reviewers, authors, and editorial board - and society in general. The following paragraphs detail these three topics above, and we inform you that this section is MANDATORY READING for the entire community, but mainly for researchers and authors who wish to submit manuscripts to REGEPE. Each of these actors in the scientific community should pay close attention to the information described below.

With these procedures, we fulfill the objectives of the Open Science policy present in the REGEPE Editorial Development Plan (PDE), especially those focused on promoting, training and compliance with OS.

Below, we list in a didactic way our practices in relation to OS, including preprints, the data underlying the research and the opening of manuscript evaluations.

1) Preprint

■ What is it? It is a manuscript not yet published in a scientific journal, but made available in public and open access online repositories.

■ What does REGEPE recommend? REGEPE STRONGLY recommends the inclusion of your manuscript in a preprint repository. We recommend using the SciELO Preprints as a repository, although there are others (e.g. EmeRI and Preprints).

■ What are the advantages of using preprint? Making the manuscript available in preprint follows the precepts of OS, such as the premise of "Publish first, evaluate later!", making the results of your research available to the whole world immediately, enabling an open discussion, before being published, (e.g. through features such as "leaving comments").

• If the authors choose to use SciELO Preprints, we remind you that the platform provides integration of your preprint with the PREreview and Hypothes.is tools, which are platforms/tools that allow for evaluations/comments on preprints. REGEPE will be able to use these evaluations/comments in its evaluation process.

■ What are the disadvantages of using preprint? Currently, we are not aware of a preprint repository that is fully integrated with any scientific journal submission system and, therefore, this WILL REQUIRE extra effort from the authors to fill in the necessary metadata in the preprint system, and that later, at the time of submission to REGEPE, will have to be filled in again. However, the process is simple, albeit repetitive.

■ How to make the deposit in the SciELO Preprint? To deposit your preprint in the SciELO Preprints, simply access the website, create your account, and follow the instructions. Questions can be clarified by the website's FAQ. After depositing your preprint, when submitting your manuscript to REGEPE, the authors must inform the preprint's DOI in the Declaration of Open Science Compliance, which is mandatory at the time of submission. See Figure 1.

2) Opening of underlying research data

■ What is it? It is the opening of the data used by the authors to create their research. The publication of this data helps in the greater transparency of the scientific method, provides the possibility of replicating the study and encourages collaboration between researchers.

• Examples of research data: This is all the data necessary to interpret and eventually replicate the results presented in the article. Examples are: the codes of statistical tests performed in data analysis software; primary or secondary databases; interview scripts; figures/illustrations that support content analysis in qualitative studies, among others. In qualitative studies, the underlying data can also be files related to the pre-registration of the research, such as the Free and Informed Consent Form (FICF), Data Use Commitment Term (DUCT) and Proof of Project Submission on the Plataforma Brasil*, where the project registration number (Certificate of Presentation of Ethical Appreciation - CPEA) is included in the CEP-Conep system.
• * Foreign researchers, check with their respective research ethics bodies.

■ What does REGEPE recommend? REGEPE STRONGLY recommends that all authors proceed with the opening of the data used to prepare the research that culminated in the manuscript accepted for publication to REGEPE. To this end, we recommend using data SciELO REGEPE, although there are others (e.g. Zenodo, Figshare and OSF). However, data SciELO REGEPE is the official data repository where all approved and published articles will have their respective underlying research data record made available.

• REGEPE gives the option, through the mandatory completion of the Declaration of Open Science Compliance, at the time of submission, that the authors indicate that they will upload the subjacent data to the research after the submission of the manuscript, thus awaiting the outcome of the editorial decision. See Figure 2.

■ What are the advantages? Data opening provides for the possibility of recognizing the authors' effort by granting them badges that represent each specific opening effort. The use of badges is an international initiative to promote OS led by the Center for Open Science. It is important to mention that a published article that presents badges not only encourages other authors and researchers to also make the underlying data available, but also increases the visibility of the study itself. In addition, research data are citable, and authors themselves can cite them in the submitted manuscript, including them in the reference list. 

■ What are the disadvantages? REGEPE understands that the data opening procedure requires an additional effort with which authors and researchers are not yet familiar. However, it is noteworthy that this is a procedure that is gaining more legitimacy every day. Therefore, REGEPE is positioned as a leading journal in its field of activity.

■ How to prepare the data opening? REGEPE was inspired by the Guidelines of the Guide to promoting the opening, transparency and reproducibility of research published by SciELO journals (GuiaTOP), which are in accordance with the Open Science Foundation. In this way, REGEPE will manage the recognition of manuscripts with badges at Level 2 of the SciELO GuiaTOP, including: Data transparency ; Analytic methods (code) transparency ; Research materials transparency , Preregistration of studies  and Supplementary data . The procedure for preparing the research underlying data is available in SciELO's Research data preparation guidelines.

• The submission of the research underlying data can be done directly in the journal's own system (OJS) or it can be done at data SciELO REGEPE. In both cases, the submission of this data may be made later than the submission of the article, thus awaiting the outcome of the editorial decision.
• We emphasize that the reviewers are free to demand any underlying research data during the evaluation process, in order to clarify doubts, confer or assist the review procedure.

■ REGEPE adopts Level 2 of openness of the SciELO TOP Guide, according to Figure 3.

• It is acknowledged that, at some point in the future, REGEPE may advance to Level 3 of the SciELO GuiaTOP, of a more demanding nature, which not only requires the availability and opening of data, but also that the publication of the article is conditional on verification of the reproducibility of results.

■ "Data Availability Statement" section: After the manuscript is approved, according to the guidelines of the SciELO Brasil guide, REGEPE will create a section called "Open Science: Data Availability", where all information regarding the availability of research underlying data. If there are restrictions on data sharing for ethical or legal reasons, they must be informed by completing the mandatory, at the time of submission, Declaration of compliance with Open Science, as shown in Figure 4.

• Figure 5 presents some examples of possible categories: data provided, data not provided and data provided upon contact with the author. When sending the Proof of Reading*, the authors will have the opportunity to check and validate the information contained in the "Open Science: Data Availability" section.
• * Proofreading consists of the stage in which REGEPE will send the authors the final files in PDF format for checking and validation before the final online publication.

■ Note on manuscripts originating from qualitative research: REGEPE encourages a plurality of research and analysis methods, including qualitative research. We also know that the sharing and opening of data linked to research of this nature present unique complexity, including ethical and legal dilemmas. Thus, REGEPE strongly suggests that the opening of this data be done parsimoniously, that is, revealing the greatest possible number of data for the maximum possible understanding and replicability of the study, without affecting the ethical and legal restrictions to which the data may be associated. In the case of non-opening of data, due to ethical and legal restrictions, even so, during the peer review process, the reviewers, Associate Editor responsible or even the Editor-in-Chief, may request the data from the authors for the purpose of conference or clarification of doubts. We suggest to the authors of qualitative studies that they appreciate the two articles below, as they deal with the theme of transparency and replicability in this type of study (qualitative).

• Pratt, M. G., Kaplan, S., & Whittington, R. (2019). Editorial Essay: The Tumult over Transparency: Decoupling Transparency from Replication in Establishing Trustworthy Qualitative Research*. Https://Doi.Org/10.1177/0001839219887663, 65(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839219887663
• Pratt, M. G., Sonenshein, S., & Feldman, M. S. (2020). Moving Beyond Templates: A Bricolage Approach to Conducting Trustworthy Qualitative Research. Https://Doi.Org/10.1177/1094428120927466, 25(2), 211–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120927466

3) Opening of Peer-review report

■ What is it? It is the process, aligned with the precepts of OS, in which the journal implements a system in which the authors and reviewers have the possibility to express themselves about the way in which the evaluation they will carry out will be opened.

■ What does REGEPE recommend? REGEPE STRONGLY recommends that all Peer-Review Report be opened*, both its content and the identity of the reviewers. The publication of the Peer-Review Report is only made at the end of the process, when the approved article is published. In short, we suggest that both authors and reviewers agree to the publication of the Manuscript Evaluation Report.

• * Do not confuse with the open evaluation process that, according to our editorial policy, continues to be double-blind evaluation, that is, neither authors nor reviewers know the identity of each other.

■ What are the advantages of opening the evaluations? The entire scientific community benefits from this process, as it increases the transparency of the evaluation process and generates learning for peers, through access to substantiated and high-level evaluations. In addition, REGEPE has defined that its Peer-Review Report is a scientific product designated with a DOI and, therefore, the reviewers related to this evaluation process will be able to publicize it in their curricula, reports, among others.

■ What are the disadvantages of opening the evaluations? We understand that the process of opening the evaluations is recent and may be unknown to some authors. Some reviewers, when choosing to disclose their identity, may feel that:

• they will not be able to be as critical as they could, due to embarrassment;
• may suffer future retaliation by the authors of the evaluated manuscript;
• and other situations such as those described here.

■ How to open the evaluations? REGEPE created two procedures for this process, one for the authors and one for the reviewers, being.

• For authors: At the time of manuscript submission, and already described in the journal's submission, section it is mandatory that the authors complete the Declaration on Open Science Compliance and choose one of the options in each block, shown in Figure 6.

• For reviewers: After the reviewers have accepted the evaluation invitation and started this process, they will see at the end of the Evaluation Form* the question regarding the opening process and may choose one of the three options, as shown in Figure 7.

■ Note on evaluator recognition: REGEPE, with a view to recognizing and increasing the visibility of the evaluations carried out by its reviewers, strongly recommends that the reviewers have an active registration on the ReviewerCredits platform. Registration is done simply and quickly and, generating a profile where proof of the reviews carried out by the reviewers can be accessed.

* REGEPE Manuscript Evaluation Forms:

Research article (Theoretical-empirical)

Theoretical essay

Teaching case

Technological article

Methodological article

Discussion (Pensata)

Book review

Obituary

REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of ethics and quality in publishing. We expect all parties involved in publishing in our journal—the author, the journal editor, the reviewer, and the publisher to adhere to the same ethical principles. We do not accept plagiarism or other unethical behavior.

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE):

REGEPE supports the development and practical application of consistent ethical standards throughout the academic publishing community. In the event of research or publication misconduct, REGEPE adheres to the Committee's flowcharts.

For the sake of clarity, we would like to highlight that our ethical practices in publishing are also guided by Elsevier's guidelines, which include: (i) editors' duties; (ii) reviewers' duties, and (iii) authors' duties.

Furthermore, signatories to the ethical practices in publishing reported here include high-impact and reference journals in fields of study similar to REGEPE, such as the Journal of Business Research and Technovation.

Below, we have listed and summarized the key points that REGEPE considers relevant for the entire academic community to observe.

Editors' Duties:

• Publication Decision: The editor of the journal is responsible for determining which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and is constrained by such legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may consult the editorial board or reviewers in making decisions.
• Peer review: The editor must ensure that the peer review process is fair, impartial, and carried out in a timely manner. Research articles should be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers, and the editor should seek additional opinions when necessary. The editor should select reviewers who have extensive experience in the field of research, taking into account the need for appropriate, inclusive, and diverse representation.
• Fair play: The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. The journal's editorial policies should encourage transparency and full and honest reporting, and the editor should ensure that peer reviewers and authors have a clear understanding of what is expected of them.
• Journal metrics: The editor should not attempt to influence REGEPE's ranking by artificially increasing any of the journal's metrics.
• Confidentiality: The editor and any member of the editorial team must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher (maintainer), as appropriate. The editor is responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of reviewers, unless they choose to fully disclose their personal information during the review of articles.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Information and ideas obtained through the peer review process must be kept confidential and may not be used for personal advantage. The editor should refrain from considering 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 with the work. All submissions must be subject to the usual journal procedures. These include independent peer review, carried out without influence from the author, editor, or their research groups. Any published article must include a clear statement to this effect.
• Vigilant oversight of published records: The editor is responsible for safeguarding the integrity of REGEPE's published record by analyzing and evaluating reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, review, and editorial) in conjunction with the maintainer. Additionally, the editor must utilize the publisher's systems for detecting misconduct, such as plagiarism, in an appropriate manner.
• The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal's editorial process: It is not permitted for the editor or any member of the editorial team to load a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by the editor to assist in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript. The editor is responsible for the editorial process, the final decision, and the communication of that decision to the authors.

Reviewer's Duties

• Professional responsibility: It is the responsibility of reviewers to only accept manuscripts for review if they possess the necessary knowledge to conduct an appropriate evaluation.
• Contribution to the editorial decision-making process: It is expected that reviewers will treat authors and their work with the same respect they would like to receive themselves and will maintain cordiality and good manners throughout the review process. Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or who knows that their immediate review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.
• Confidentiality: All manuscripts submitted for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with other individuals. Any privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must be kept confidential and may not be used for personal advantage.
• Ethical considerations: It is the responsibility of the reviewer to be aware of any potential ethical issues in the article and to bring them to the attention of the editor. This includes any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published article of which the reviewer has personal knowledge.
• Standards of objectivity and conflicting interests: It is essential that reviews are conducted in an objective manner and that reviewers present their opinions in a clear and substantiated manner. It is inappropriate to engage in personal criticism of the author. If a reviewer suggests that an author include citations to the reviewer's work (or that of their collaborators), this should be done for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the number of citations to the reviewer or increasing the visibility of their work (or that of their collaborators).
• The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the peer review process: When a researcher is invited to review another researcher's article, it is imperative that the manuscript be treated as a confidential document. It is not permitted for reviewers to upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool. This confidentiality requirement extends to the peer review report, as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, reviewers should not upload their peer review report to an AI tool, even if it is only for the purpose of improving language and comprehension.

Author's Duties

• Writing standards: Authors of original research reports are expected to provide an accurate account of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the article. It is essential that an article contains sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Any fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable.
• Access to and retention of data: Authors may be required to provide the research data on which their article is based for editorial review and/or to comply with the journal's open data requirements. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to this data, if possible, and should be prepared to retain this data for a reasonable number of years after publication.
• Originality and acknowledgment of sources: Authors are responsible for ensuring that their work is original and that any material they have used has been properly cited or referenced. All forms of plagiarism are considered unethical editorial behavior and are therefore unacceptable.
• Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: It is generally not recommended that authors publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. It is unethical to submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously and/or to publish the same article in different journals.
• Confidentiality: Information obtained in the course of confidential activities, such as manuscript evaluation or funding applications, should not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these activities.
• Article Authorship: The authorship of a study should be limited to those who made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All individuals who have made a significant contribution to the project should be listed as co-authors. In the event that other individuals have contributed to the research project in a substantive manner, they should be duly acknowledged or listed as contributors. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in the article and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and agreed to submit it for publication. The authors assume collective responsibility for the work.
• The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in scientific writing: When authors employ generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, these technologies should be utilized solely to enhance the clarity and language of the work. The use of technology in this context should be overseen by a human supervisor and subject to rigorous review and editing by the author. Ultimately, authors are responsible for the content of their work. Authors are required to disclose the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in their manuscripts, and a statement will appear in the published paper. Authors should not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as authors or co-authors, nor cite AI as authors. The role of authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be assigned to and carried out by human beings.
• The use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in figures, images, and artwork: Please be advised that the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or alter images in submitted manuscripts is not permitted. This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature into an image or figure. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable, provided that they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. The only exception to this policy is if the use of AI or AI-assisted tools is part of the research project or research methods. In such cases, the use of AI or AI-assisted tools must be described in a replicable way in the methods section. Please provide an explanation of how AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the process of creating or altering the image, including the name of the model or tool, the version and extension numbers, and the manufacturer. Authors are required to adhere to the specific usage policies of the AI software and ensure correct attribution of the content. The use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in the production of artistic works is not permitted.

Publisher's Duties:

• It is our policy to ensure that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenues do not impact or influence editorial decisions.

The REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal publishes nine types of manuscript (Research article, Theoretical essay, Case study, Technological article, Methodological article, Discussion (Pensata), Book review and Obituary) in the areas of entrepreneurship and small business management.

REGEPE defends and encourages plurality in the topics addressed and in theoretical and methodological approaches. Topics of interest to the publication include, among others:

1. Entrepreneurial Ecosystems
2. Entrepreneurial behavior and intrapreneurship
3. Sustainable, cultural, social and gender entrepreneurship
4. Innovation, technology and venture capital
5. Public Entrepreneurship and relations with SMEs: policies, actions and impacts
6. Education, Ethics and Training for Entrepreneurship and SMEs
7. International and Immigrant Entrepreneurship and SME Internationalization
8. Learning, entrepreneurship and SMEs and their relationships in contexts with socioeconomic restrictions
9. Management and strategy in SMEs
10. Business networks, productive arrangements and local development
11. Financing and promotion for SMEs
12. Teaching Cases: entrepreneurship and SMEs
13. Minority Entrepreneurship
14. Franchises, consultancy and
15. Emerging topics and free topics in entrepreneurship and SMEs

REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal has a policy of archiving its records in two systems:

• PKP Preservation Network (see Archival Status tab).
• Rede Cariniana (see Archival Status tab).
• Preservação Digital do Programa SciELO (see Archival Status tab)
• Both networks use the LOCKSS system, developed by Stanford University, to create a distributed archive between the participating libraries. The system allows these libraries to create permanent journal archives for preservation and restoration purposes.

REGEPE is also included in Publishing Policy Guidelines such as Diadorim and Sherpa/RoMEO

Authors are allowed and encouraged to post their work (Submitted version, Accepted version [Manuscript accepted by author] or Published version [Version of record]) online, for example in institutional repositories or on their website, as it can lead to productive exchanges as well as previous and larger citations of published work. REGEPE asks as policy conditions for Authors: They must indicate/link the published article with a DOI.

(see The Effect of Open Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html.

Database 

• SCOPUS
• REDALYC
• The Electronic Library SPELL   
• EBSCO Host publishing
• Gale Cengage Learning
• Google Scholar   

Directory/Portals 

• DOAJ Directory
• Latindex
• DIALNET
• DIADORIM
• MIGUILIM   
• Ulrich's Periodicals Directory   
• Public Knowledge Project - PKP
• ERIHPLUS
• ROAD   
• Sherpa Romeo

Disclosure sources

• OpenAire
• LivRe! 
• REDIB

Metrics

• CiteScore
• Qualis
• CIRC
• MIAR
• GSM

Bibliographic Journal Information

• Journal Title: REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal
• Short title: REGEPE Entrep. Small Bus. J.
• Publication of: Associação Nacional de Estudos em Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas (ANEGEPE)
• Frequencye: Three times a year (2012-2024); Anual (2025 -)
• Publication type: Continuous publication
• Year of Journal Creation: 2012

Cataloging in the Publication elaborated by Gildenir Carolino Santos - CRB-8ª/5447

Websites and Social Media

Stay on top of what happens at REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal through our social media:

The ANEGEPE (Publisher):

Facebook

LinkedIn

Instagram

The REGEPE:

LinkedIn

Instagram

YouTube

Preprints

REGEPE encourages publication of preprints on public platforms, such as Preprints, SciELO Preprints, and EmeRI, so that, if appropriate, they can be discussed openly before being published. For more details, see item 1 (Preprint) in the Open Science Compliance section.

Peer Review Process

The article submitted to REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal goes through an evaluation process consisting of the following stepsd, namely:

1. A screening (Desk Review) carried out by the Editor-in-Chief, who analyzes its adequacy to the editorial policy and editorial standards of REGEPE, being rejected in case of inadequacy. At this stage, similarity analysis is also performed through Ithenticate's Similarity Check, which employs Turnitin.

2. Once the manuscript has passed this initial screening (desk review), the external review process begins, at which point the manuscript is sent to one of the Associate Editors, who analyzes the relevance and contribution of the text. If appropriate, the Associate Editor will then forward the manuscript to at least two double-blind reviewers selected on the basis of their expertise in the field.

3. The Associate Editors carry out the monitoring of this entire evaluation process, which can be extended by several rounds of evaluations. In each evaluation round the reviewers, through an opinion written in REGEPE's own Form*, will indicate the result, which can be one of the three:

• Submit a new version for consideration based on the suggestions/recommendations indicated.
• Disapprove based on the suggestions/recommendations pointed out.
• Approved.

4. When the results (ii) or (iii), the process then returns to the Editor-in-Chief, who will be responsible for making the final decision and communicating it to the authors.

5. Whenever authors are asked to revise, they must send 3 files: (i) a final version of the article, in a clean file, preferably in Word; (ii) a version with all the changes made and identified as a revision, preferably in Word and marked with a different color and not using the change control; (iii) a letter to the Editors commenting on all the changes made or not accepted, as directed by the reviewers.

6. After the approval of the article, it will proceed to the process of proofreading, translation (when applicable), digramation and final publication.

In line with Open Science communication practices, REGEPE now adopts in its editorial policy, opening the peer review process in agreement with the reviewer. Thus, authors and reviewers may choose one of the means of opening the peer review process offered by the journal, as well as authors may agree to interact directly with reviewers responsible for evaluating the manuscript, when offered the option.

To confirm and recognize the evaluation, in addition to giving visibility to the valuable volunteer effort in the preparation of the opinions, REGEPE has the ReviewerCredits system  integrated into the journal's system, and the reviewer can select the options he wants.  ReviewerCredits is a commercial website that provides a free service for academics to track, verify, and showcase their peer review by disclosing their editorial contributions to academic journals.

We inform you that, in the case of the disclosure of evaluations that support the decision to publish an article, it may be edited by the editorial board of the journal.

About manuscripts processing time

Since 2022, REGEPE has been vigorously improving its internal management processes to reduce manuscript processing times. The evolution of our editorial performance is illustrated by the following averages:

2023

• Submissions received: 110
• Desk rejection rate: 75%
• Acceptance rate: 11%
• Average time to first desk review decision: 25 days
• Average time from submission to final acceptance: 15.0 months
• Average time from submission to online publication: 19.4 months

2024

• Submissions received: 113
• Desk rejection rate: 88%
• Acceptance rate: 7%
• Average time to first desk review decision: 35 days
• Average time from submission to final acceptance: 8.4 months
• Average time from submission to online publication: 16.3 months

REGEPE's manuscripts evaluation forms: 

• Research article (Theoretical-empirical)
• Theoretical essay
• Case study
• Technological article
• Methodological article
• Discussion (Pensata)
• Book review
• Obituary

Open Data

REGEPE encourages the sharing of analysis datasets, instruments, statistical analysis scripts, scripts and additional materials made available in open online repositories, e.g. Zenodo, Figshare and OSF, if they cannot be published in the paper itself, and this information should be indicated in the manuscript. Consequently, articles reporting research should indicate and reference the availability of the content underlying the development of the research and the results obtained.

Ethics and Misconduct, Correction and Retraction Policy

Crossmark Policy

Crossmark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref to provide a standard way for readers to locate the current version of a piece of content.

Since January 2021 all REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal publications will carry a CrossMark icon that, with just one click on the CrossMark icon, readers will be able to see the status of a publication, viewing its complete history, tracking possible updates and corrections, retractions, or replacements. The Crossmark button will always be available on PDF publications, on the article page, and in other future formats that may become available such as Epub and HTML.

By applying the Crossmark logo, REGEPE is committing to maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers of changes if and when they occur.

Clicking on the CrossMark logo will tell you the current status of a document and may also give you additional publication record information about the document.

Update policies

It is the authors' responsibility to inform REGEPE of any updates or modifications that may be necessary.

REGEPE values science, the integrity of the editorial process, and of scientific publications and recognizes the inestimable value of authors, editors, reviewers, readers, and other collaborators that contribute to REGEPE's continued publication of research results.

Thus, we seek to respect the scientific integrity and the editorial procedures in order to contribute to the maintenance of confidence in the published works. Considering publications since January 2021, updates as indicated below are subject to tracking:

• Addendum
• Clarification
• Correction
• Corrigendum
• Erratum
• Expression_of_concern
• New_edition
• New_version
• Partial_retraction
• Removal
• Retraction
• Withdrawal

REGEPE does not remove published papers.

For more information about CrossMark, please visit: www.crossref.org/crossmark

Policy on Conflict of Interest

What constitutes a conflict of interest?

A conflict of interest is any action or interest that may influence or appear to influence the impartiality, review or publication process for research or non-research articles submitted to REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal.

Conflicts of interest may arise from financial or non-financial sources, professional or personal motivations. These conflicts can occur within institutions, organisations or other individuals.

It is a requirement of REGEPE that all potential conflicts of interest are declared. This is an integral part of transparent research reporting.

Failure to declare a conflict of interest may result in the immediate rejection of a manuscript. If an undisclosed conflict of interest comes to light after publication, REGEPE will act in accordance with COPE guidelines and issue a public notification to the community.

Please find below some detailed guidelines on the assessment and declaration of conflict of interest for the submission and publication of papers to REGEPE.

What to declare

All individuals involved in the peer review process, including authors, editors, reviewers, and readers, must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may arise within five years of conducting the research under consideration or preparing the article for publication.

Additionally, any interests that may be considered competing according to the aforementioned definition must be disclosed, even if they occurred outside the five-year period.

Financial Conflicts of Interest

Financial conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to:

• Ownership of stocks or shares;
• Paid employment or consultancy;
• Board membership;
• Patent applications (pending or actual), including individual applications or those belonging to the institution with which the authors are affiliated and from which the authors may benefit;
• Research grants (from any source, restricted or unrestricted);
• Travel grants and honoraria for speaking or attending meetings;
• Gifts.

Non-financial Conflicts of Interest

Non-financial competing interests include, but are not limited to:

• Acting as an expert witness
• Membership of a government or other advisory board
• Relationship (paid or unpaid) with organizations and funding bodies, including non-governmental organizations, research institutions or charities
• Membership of lobbying or advocacy organizations
• Writing or consulting for an educational company
• Personal relationships (e.g. friend, spouse, family member, current or former mentor, adversary) with individuals involved in the submission or evaluation of an article Such individuals may include authors, reviewers, editors, or members of REGEPE's editorial board
• Personal convictions related to the topic of an article may also affect the publication process. Examples of such convictions include political, religious, ideological, or other beliefs that could influence the content or presentation of the article
• Please be advised that the submission of previously published versions of the work at scientific events such as congresses, symposia, meetings, and others is an acceptable practice. However, if the congress subsequently publishes the full article, this will be identified as a similar work in the report. In this regard, REGEPE recommends that authors provide the full reference (APA 7th) at the time of submission to indicate that the work has already been published.

Who should declare conflicting interests?

Authors:

At the time of submission, authors must list all competing interests relevant to the research submitted. Examples may include, but are not limited to:

• Names of all funding sources
• Description of the funder's role in the design of the study, collection, analysis and interpretation of the data, writing of the paper, and/or decision to submit for publication
• Whether they have acted as expert witnesses in relevant legal proceedings
• Whether they have served or are currently serving on a committee of an organization that may benefit from the publication of the article
• If they are part of the editorial team (Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor, Executive Editor, Assistant Executive Editor, Associate Editors, Editorial Policy Committee, National Scientific Editorial Board, Foreign Scientific Editorial Board, Ethics Committee) of the journal to which they are submitting. REGEPE ACCEPTS these members to submit manuscripts to the journal, but they must inform the editor of this condition in the “Comments for the editor” field.
• REGEPE DOES NOT ACCEPT submissions from members of the Board of Directors of the Publisher, i.e. the Board of Directors of the Associação Nacional de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas -ANEGEPE with the exception of members of its Fiscal Council.

Editors and reviewers:

It is the responsibility of editors and reviewers to declare any potential conflicts of interest and, if necessary, to disqualify themselves from involvement in the evaluation of a manuscript.

The following are examples of situations that may necessitate an editor or reviewer's recusal from the peer review process:

• They are employed by the same institution or organization as the author, currently or recently
• They have collaborated with an author, currently or recently
• They have published with an author during the last five years
• They have held fellowships with an author, currently or recently
• They have a financial relationship with the company that funded the research
• They have a personal relationship with an author that prevents them from evaluating the manuscript objectively

Readers

In accordance with the REGEPE commenting policy, all individuals posting comments on articles published in this journal are required to declare any competing interests (financial or non-financial) at the time of posting.

Editorial Actions and Decisions

• REGEPE editors must consider all conflicting interests during the review process and ensure that any relevant interests are declared in the published article;
• REGEPE editors will not publish commissioned articles or any other non-research articles if they are aware of a competing interest that, in their judgment, could introduce bias or a reasonable perception of bias;
• REGEPE editors do not consult reviewers who have conflicting interests that, in the opinion of the editors, could interfere with impartial review.

Adoption of similarity software

As part of the Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos (ABEC), REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal uses Ithenticate's Similarity Check service, which employs one of the most powerful tools for similarity detection – Turnitin.

Thus, the works submitted to REGEPE are compared to the largest scientific, technical and medical database in the world.

On the other hand, REGEPE contributes to the world community, as its articles are incorporated into the Ithenticate database.

In this way, REGEPE guarantees its community exquisite security regarding the originality of its published articles.

REGEPE recognizes that the analysis of the similarity report provided by Ithenticate must above all be qualitative and not based solely on the numerical value of the similarity index. In this sense, REGEPE, based on the CPG/FCA 06 Normative Instruction of Faculdade de Ciências Aplicadas of the Universidade Estadual de Campinas, defines that:

• Similarity index of up to 30%: text is fit to continue the Desk-Review editorial flow.
• Similarity index above 30%: The Editor-in-Chief will qualitatively analyze the index to check the passages and excerpts that caused such an index and decide whether to refuse or approve it to continue in the Desk-Review editorial flow.

Gender and Sex Issues

DEIA Principles (Diversity, Equity, Equality, and Accessibility)

The REGEPE constantly takes actions with the objective of always seeking alignment with the DEIA principles. These include:

 Sex and Gender Issues

The REGEPE editorial team, as well as the authors who publish in the journal, should always observe the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines. The SAGER guidelines comprise a set of guidelines that guide the reporting of sex and gender information in study design, data analysis, and in the results and interpretation of findings. In addition, REGEPE observes gender equity policy in the training of its editorial board.

Accessibility issues

The REGEPE, as of v.12, n.2, 2023, has implemented multimedia editing, that is, it adopts the inclusion of audios and videos of its articles. The audios reproduce, in the three languages (Portuguese, Spanish, and English), the information of the title, authors and their affiliations, abstract, and keywords. The video, on the other hand, brings the scientific disclosure of the article, presented by the authors themselves. This action favors, thus, the amplitude of multimedia accessibility resources (RMA).

In addition, REGEPE, also from v.12, n.2, 2023, made its transition to adherence to the principles of open science as well as began publishing the articles in the Extensible Markup Language (XML) format following the set of elements and markup rules defined by the SciELO Publishing Schema. This action makes REGEPE and its content accessible to any type of platform, browser and device, contributing to its accessibility and greater visibility.

Finally, REGEPE does not charge any Article Processing Charge (APC) for published texts, nor for those submitted for evaluation, review, publication, distribution or download. The publication is totally free and open access.

Ethics Committee

Note on Research with Human Participants:

REGEPE understands that ethics govern the standards of conduct for scientific researchers. Therefore, we emphasize the importance of adhering to ethical principles to protect the dignity, rights, and well-being of research participants. REGEPE also acknowledges that, due to its publication scope—Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management—submitted studies will exclusively involve individuals as research participants, excluding, for instance, clinical patients and studies involving animals and/or plants.

Based on the above and in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, REGEPE requires its researchers to comply with ethical research standards. All studies involving people—whether representative individuals of a sample or interviewees, for example—must be evaluated by a legitimate research ethics committee before being conducted.

Regarding participant consent, authors must indicate whether participants provided written consent. The documentation of participant consent should include, for example, all potential risks associated with participation in the research, as well as clear communication regarding the participant’s right to refuse participation at any point during data collection and the measures taken to ensure the anonymity of participating individuals.

• For Brazilian authors, we recommend that the issuance and certification of supporting documents for the above guidelines be carried out through the Plataforma Brasil. Thus, documents such as the Free and Informed Consent Form (TCLE), the Data Usage Commitment Form (TCUD), and the Project Submission Receipt in Plataforma Brasil—where the project registration number (Certificate of Ethical Appreciation Submission - CAAE) in the CEP-Conep system is listed—should be submitted.
• In the case of international researchers who do not have models for the aforementioned terms directed by their respective Ethics Committees, we strongly recommend completing the consent training provided by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and making cautious use of the models suggested by the World Health Organization.

For studies where participant consent is waived, authors must submit a declaration such as the example below:

"The Ethics Committee [TO BE COMPLETED] waived the need for ethical approval and participant consent for the collection, analysis, and publication of retrospectively obtained and anonymized data for this study."

REGEPE recommends that authors of any research study pay close attention to the rules (laws and policies) established by their respective national regulatory bodies, as well as their institutions, regarding the necessity of compliance with ethical guidelines when conducting research involving human subjects.

For research conducted in other locations, authors must adhere to the procedures outlined by their respective countries and competent authorities.

Copyright

The REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal is licensed under CC BY 4.0 license, thus preserving the integrity of articles in an open access environment. The journal allows the author to retain publishing rights without restrictions. The authors are free to:

• Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
• Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.

This license is approved for Free Cultural Works.

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:

• Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
• No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Intellectual Property and Terms of Use

Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:

• The author(s) authorize the publication of the text in the journal;
• The journal is not responsible for the opinions, ideas, and concepts expressed in the texts, as they are the sole responsibility of their authors;
• Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work published under the CC BY 4.0  License, which allows sharing the work with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal;
• Authors are allowed and encouraged to post their work (Submitted version, Accepted version [Manuscript accepted by the author], or Published version [Record version]) online, for example in institutional repositories or preprints, as it can lead to productive exchanges as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. REGEPE requires that authors indicate/link the published article with DOI. See the Effect of Open Access.

Associação Nacional de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas - ANEGEPE (Editora/Mantenedora)

• Edmundo Inácio Júnior
  Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo/SP – Brasil
  Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/1608673584881629, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0137-0778, e-mail: regepe.esbj@anegepe.org.br

• Fernando Antonio Prado Gimenez 
  Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, Paraná/PR – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/7562586543877346, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5143-9553, e-mail: gimenez@ufpr.br
• Gildenir Carolino Santos
  Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo/SP – Brasil
  Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/1221773207784315, ORCID: | https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4375-6815| e-mail: gilldenir@unicamp.br
• João Paulo Moreira Silva 
  Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais (PUC-MG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais/MG – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/3018970502044577, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9470-2905, e-mail: joao.msilva@live.com

• Vaibhav Chaudhary 
  Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (ITT), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8501-1849, e-mail: vaibhav.chaudhary@iitbombay.org

• Fernanda Paula Arantes Manso 
  Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG), Goiânia, GO – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/5028692700447479, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4751-1911, e-mail: arantes.fp@ufg.br

• Patrícia Trindade de Araújo
  Associação Nacional de Estudos em Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas (ANEGEPE), Rio de Janeiro, RJ – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/4871819223995011, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5313-863X, e-mail: patriciatrindade@anegepe.org.br

• Jéssica Borges de Carvalho 
  Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG), Goiana, GO - Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/6353609271013620, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6780-6733, e-mail: jessica.carvalho@ufg.br
• Siliane Ferrari Voltolini 
  Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing (ESPM), São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/8116302419243730, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3194-0882, e-mail: silianeferrari@gmail.com

• Ana Cláudia Azevedo
  Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV), Viçosa, Minas Gerais/MG – Brasil
  Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/9387070507339667, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8141-9265, e-mail: anaazevedo@ufv.br
• Arnaldo Fernandes Matos Coelho 
  Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra – Portugal. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4345-1349, e-mail: acoelho@fe.uc.pt
• Augusto Rocha 
  University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh – UK. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8419-476X, e-mail: augusto.rocha@ed.ac.uk
• Cândido Borges 
  Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG), Goiânia, Goiás/GO – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/4803860037213326, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3362-4074, e-mail: candidoborges@gmail.com
• Cássio Garcia Ribeiro
  Universidade Federal de Ubertlância (UFU), Uberlândia, Minas Gerais/MG – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/5269031128431861, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9290-0660, e-mail: cassiogarcia@ufu.br
• Colette Henry 
  Dundalk Institute of Technology and Griffith University, Dundalk, Ireland and Nathan, Australia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4172-5695, e-mail: colette.henry@dkit.ie
• Cristiano Morini
  Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo/SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/3528005892616225, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2868-3280, e-mail: cmorini@unicamp.br
• Daiane Johann
  Universidade do Vale do Itajai (Univali), Biguaçu, Santa Catarina/SC – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/0849427666183846, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3184-632X, e-mail: daianejohann@yahoo.com.br
• Eduardo Pinto Vilas Boas
  Escola de Empreendedorismo do SEBRAE (ESE), São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/4043215950282755, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7831-0856, e-mail: duvilasboas@gmail.com
• Felipe Luiz Neves Bezerra de Melo 
  Instituto Federal de Ciência e Tecnologia do Rio Grande do Norte (IFRN), Nova Cruz, RN – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/7838023745515909, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5579-3763 e-mail: felipe.neves@ifrn.edu.br
• Glessia Silva
  Universidade Federal de Sergipe (UFS), São Cristóvão, Sergipe/SE – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/7838023745515909, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5579-3763, e-mail: glessia@academico.ufs.br
• Hugo Kantis 
  Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento, Buenos Aires – Argentina. e-mail: hkantis@gmail.com
• Jane Mendes Ferreira 
  Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, Paraná/PR – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/4240421546504397, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6156-4342, e-mail: janemff@yahoo.com.br
• Jefferson Lopes La Falce
  Universidade FUMEC (FUMEC), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais/MG – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/6293113259634794, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3293-2908, e-mail: jefferson.la.falce@gmail.com
• Julio Araújo Carneiro da Cunha
  Universidade Nove de Julho (UNINOVE), São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/6202822187041175, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1435-055X, e-mail: juliocunha@yahoo.com
• Laodicéia Amorim Weersma
  TEIAcollab, Fortaleza, Ceará/CE – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/4123726895965818, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4202-3369, e-mail: laoweersma@gmail.com
• Liliane de Oliveira Guimarães
  Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais (PUC Minas), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais/MG – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/5278212666838086, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3346-2207, e-mail: lilianeog@pucminas.br
• Liney Manjarres-Henríquez
  Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla – Colômbia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9136-5042, e-mail: lmanjarres@cuc.edu.co
• Louis Jacques Filion 
  HEC Montreal Business School, Montreal, Quebec – Canadá. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4572-2536, e-mail: louisjacques.filion@hec.ca
• Luísa Margarida Cagica Carvalho 
  Setúbal Polytechnic University, Setúbal – Portugal. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9804-7813, e-mail: luisa.c.carvalho@esce.ips.pt 
• Manuel Jacinto de Ascensão Jardim 
  Universidade Aberta (UAb), Lisboa, LIS – Portugal. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0600-3128, e-mail: jacinto.jardim@uab.pt
• Marcelo Rabelo Henrique
  Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/8872607903177348, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5940-4267, e-mail: marcelo@mrhenriqueconsult.com.br
• Márcia Freire de Oliveira
  Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU), Uberlândia, Minas Gerais/MG – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/5410927608982362, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0569-2363, e-mail: marciafreire@ufu.br
• Marcos Hashimoto
  Millikin University - Tabor School of Business, Decatur, Illinois – Estados Unidos. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/8655211749535634, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9072-7160, e-mail: hashi.marcos@gmail.com
• Marcos Segantini Cóppola
  Universidad ORT Uruguay,  Montevideo – Uruguay. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2872-5789, e-mail: segantini@ort.edu.uy
• Pedro Lucas de Resende Melo
  Universidade Paulista (UNIP)
  Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUCSP), São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/8524481535740035, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5947-6279, e-mail: plresende@pucsp.br
• Reed Elliot Nelson
  Universidade da Louisiana, Lafayette, Los Angeles – Estados Unidos. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7460-0488, e-mail: nelson.reed@louisiana.edu
• Renato Lima de Oliveira 
  Asia School of Business (ASB), Kuala Lumpur - Malaysia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7343-3681, e-mail:  renato.lima@asb.edu.myr
• Roberto Carlos Bernardes
  Fundação Inaciana Padre Sabóia de Medeiros (FEI), São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/8441249529400604, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2065-3223, e-mail: bernardes@fei.edu.br
• Roberto Pessoa de Queiroz Falcão
  ​Universidade UNIGRANRIO, São Paulo, SP - Brasil. Lattes:https://lattes.cnpq.br/6312062730390527, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8125-0938, e-mail: roberto.falcao@unigranrio.edu.br
• Rose Mary Almeida Lopes 
  ANEGEPE, São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/9773917058292481, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2359-7519, e-mail: roselopesbr@gmail.com
• Saras D. Sarasvathy 
  University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virgínia – Estados Unidos. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9135-0150, e-mail: sarasvathyS@darden.virginia.edu
• Slavica Singer 
  J. J. Strossmayer University, Osijek, Croatia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7205-1403, e-mail: singer@efos.hr
• Tales Andreassi 
  Fundação Getúlio Vargas (EAESP/FGV), São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/8678896439466385, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7636-3014, e-mail: tandreassi@gmail.com
• Teodoro Malta Campos
  Felps USA, Inc, Atlanta, Geórgia, Estados Unidos. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/3624649186229598, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9920-8095, e-mail: teodoromalta@gmail.com
• Vânia Maria Jorge Nassif 
  Universidade Nove de Julho (UNINOVE), São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/6936403740310206, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3601-2831, e-mail: vania.nassif@gmail.com
• Victor Silva Corrêa
  Universidade Paulista (UNIP), São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/6859163721198187, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7412-2375, e-mail: victor.correa@docente.unip.br
• Yákara Vasconcelos Pereira 
  Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE), Recife, Pernambuco/PE – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/3420201580418099, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0865-6170, e-mail: yakarav@gmail.com
• Yuriko Sawatani 
  NUCB Business School, Nagoya, Japão. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4921-3966, e-mail: yuriko_sawatani@gsm.nucba.ac.jp

• Mônica Império Costa
  Palavra Seleta - Orientação e Revisão Textual, São Paulo, SP – Brasil. Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/4118160950891786, e-mail: palavraseleta@uol.com.br

Digital Object Identifier (DOI) in Published Manuscripts

• All works approved upon their final publication in the REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal will receive their Digital Object Identifier (DOI).

Accepted languages in submission

• REGEPE prioritizes submissions made directly in English. However, we will always value and accept submissions made in Portuguese or Spanish.
• In the case of submissions made in English or when submitting the English version, after the approval of the submitted article (in Portuguese or Spanish), REGEPE will check the manuscript using the free tool AJE’s (American Journal Expert - Part of Springer Nature) Grammar Check Tool. Only manuscripts in which the tool indicates that their Language Assessment Score (LAT) is equal to or greater than the 75th percentile will be accepted, as shown in the example in Figure 1.

Figure 1
Example of report generated by the Grammar Check Tool with accepted result

Note: Own elaboration based on the Grammar Check Tool.

Types of Documents Accepted*

• Research article (Theoretical-empirical): This is a work that combines a detailed theoretical review with the collection and analysis of empirical data to test hypotheses and/or answer specific research questions. This type of article typically begins with an introduction presenting the research problem, followed by a literature review that theoretically underpins the study. It then details the methodology used to collect and analyze the data, presents the findings, and discusses these results in light of existing theory. Finally, it concludes with practical and theoretical implications, study limitations, and suggestions for future research, highlighting the originality and relevance of the findings to the field of knowledge;
• Theoretical essay: This is understood as an argumentative, planned, and systematized text through sections and/or subsections, in which the author presents, synthesizes, discusses, and eventually contrasts theoretical concepts, constructs, and/or paradigms of the addressed research field. It is expected that a theoretical essay presents a robust theorizing process, concluding with a synthesis, framework, or research model that allows for the advancement of a new theoretical perspective, including its use in future theoretical-empirical research. The theoretical essay differs from the Discussion (Pensata) by having a more robust theoretical body and not necessarily accessing emerging empirical themes or frontiers; and it differs from the Editorial by being a text open to submission for the entire academic community, without a predefined theme by the editorial board. For submission to REGEPE, a theoretical essay should also not be understood as synonymous with literature reviews, bibliometric studies, or theoretical foundations ("theoretical framework") common in theoretical-empirical articles;
• Case study: This is a detailed description of a real situation used for educational and training purposes. This type of document presents a complex scenario that simulates real challenges faced in professional, business, or organizational contexts. The main objective is to promote discussion, critical analysis, and the development of problem-solving skills among students. A case study generally includes an engaging narrative describing the context, characters, and dilemmas faced, as well as questions and activities that encourage reflection and debate. It should be accompanied by teaching notes that provide guidance for instructors on how to effectively use the case in the classroom;
• Technological article: This is a report of developments, innovations, techniques, methods, or practical applications in specific technologies, highlighting their characteristics, implementation processes, and impacts. This type of article usually includes an introduction that contextualizes the importance of the discussed technology, a detailed description of the principles and functionalities of the innovation, and examples of practical applications. Additionally, it addresses the benefits and limitations of the technology, providing critical analyses and perspectives for improvement. The technological article also discusses implications for the future of the field, potential developments, and how innovation can be integrated into different contexts, helping to guide future research and development work in the technological area;
• Methodological article: This is a descriptive-explanatory and illustrative text (that exemplifies) in which the author presents, systematizes, comments on, and/or demonstrates essentially methodological aspects - e.g. research methodologies, techniques, or tools or procedures, such as the use of software and languages. It is expected that a methodological article offers a rational and didactic structure for the application, conduct, and/or analysis of approaches or procedures specific to research in the field of study in question, including its strengths and limitations. It should be noted that the Methodological Article may cover any type of epistemological perspective present in the field. The Methodological Article differs from the Theoretical Essay by having its scope delimited to methodological aspects of research activity;
• Discussion (Pensata): This is a provocative and opinionated text in which the author develops a critical perspective on the chosen topic, generating reflection and innovative debates challenging the academic and practitioner community. Importantly, the topic under discussion should be a frontier topic, properly contextualized regarding its relevance and potential impact in the research field in question. The Discussion (Pensata) should not be confused with a mere opinion article, since scientific foundation, such as clear and cohesive argumentation using current and impactful bibliographic references, is an indispensable part of the Discussion;
• Book review: This is a brief and objective text in which the author exposes, comments on, and qualitatively evaluates the content of a current and impactful work in the research field in question. It is expected that the reviewed works are recent, high-impact, and have the potential to generate fruitful discussions within the academic and practitioner community;
• Obituary: This is a descriptive and opinionated text in which the author pays tribute to and summarizes the life, works, and contributions of an important researcher in the field of study who has recently passed away, highlighting their main achievements and impact on the community or area. The productions that make up this section are previously discussed and selected by the Editorial Board of REGEPE in accordance with the Publisher's Directorate (ANEGEPE), prepared by invitation to different national or international authors; and
• Editorial: This is an article, usually invited, meaning that the Editorial Board of REGEPE in accordance with the Publisher's Directorate (ANEGEPE) invites one or more authors to publish a manuscript of interest to the journal. The Editorial can refer to any of the types of manuscripts described above.

*Note: Regarding manuscripts in Literature Review format, which are of the Research Article type: in search of greater transparency in the editorial process, REGEPE communicates that only those Literature Review articles that are highly structured and provide clear and objective contributions to the research field will be accepted for further evaluation in the editorial process. We recommend reading the introductory text on the topic, published by Emerald Publishing, as well as the study by Kraus et al. (2020) on the subject. For recreational purposes, we also recommend reflecting on Prof. Dr. Peter Schulz's work.

In relation to the Preprints, it is important to point out that the REGEPE does not consider that the publication of articles in repositories of preprints takes away the originality of the submitted article. REGEPE is attentive to the updates of the principles of Open Science and, in this sense, foresees that articles published in repositories of preprints can be submitted to the journal, without prejudice to its originality.

Word count for each type of manuscript*

• Research article (Theoretical-empirical): Up to a maximum of about 8,500 words;
• Theoretical essay: Up to a maximum of about 6,500 words;
• Case study: Up to a maximum of about 5,000 words, including the case study and teaching notes;
• Technological article: Up to a maximum of about 6,000 words;
• Methodological article: Up to a maximum of about 6,000 words;
• Discussion (Pensata): Up to a maximum of about 4,000 words;
• Book review: Up to a maximum of about 2,000 words;
• Obituary: Up to a maximum of about 4,000 words; and
• Editorial: Depending on its type, follows the quantity of one of the types mentioned above.

*Note: These values represent the entire work, including titles, abstracts, keywords, tables, figures, notes, appendices, and bibliographic references.

Authors' Contribution

The REGEPE adopts the taxonomy structure of CRediT. The author submitting the article must fill in the form REGEPE - Information on Authors' Contributions and Acknowledgments, at the time of submission.

Manuscript Preparation

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

• The article deals with entrepreneurship and/or small business management and/or innovation as its main theme.                                                                     
• There is no author identification in the file and nor in the file properties.
• The text follows ALL requirements described in Guidelines for Authors, and the authors have read and are aware of the Ethics Policy on the Journal's website;
• The manuscript contains up to five co-authors.
• ORCID: it is MANDATORY to fill the field ORCID in the submission metadata.
• Originality: the author submitting the article must download the Declaration of Originality, sign it and upload it to the system as supplementary material.  
• Conflicts of interest: after reading the Guidelines for declaring conflicts of interest, I declare that there are none. If subsequently approved, the corresponding author must sign the Declaration of conflicts of interest.
• Open science compliance: the author submitting the manuscript must mandatorily read our Open Science Compliance and Research involving human subjects sections, only after that, download the Declaration on Open Science Compliance, sign it, and upload it to the system as supplementary material.
• Authors’ statement of individual contributions and the use of Artificial Inteligence (AI): The REGEPE adopts the taxonomy structure of CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy). The author submitting the article must fill in the form REGEPE - Information on Authors' Contributions and Acknowledgments, at the time of submission, including the declaration of the use of AI.
• Research involving human subjects: I confirm that, in the case of research involving human subjects, all the documents required by the legislation of my country have been duly carried out and are attached to the submission or are present in the document submitted to REGEPE.
• I confirm the quality of the submission in English (if applicable): If the article is submitted in English or when the English version is sent, upon approval of the submitted article (in Portuguese or Spanish), REGEPE will check the manuscript using the free AJE (American Journal Expert - Part of Springer Nature) Grammar Check tool. Only those manuscripts for which the tool indicates that Your Language Assessment Score (LAT) scores greater than or equal to 75th percentile, as shown in the following imagem example.
• I undertake to act as a reviewer for the journal: As a form of reciprocity with the academic community, REGEPE reinforces the commitment that authors of approved papers have to act as reviewers for manuscripts submitted to the journal. In order to give visibility to the valuable voluntary effort involved in writing the review, REGEPE has the ReviewerCredits system integrated into the journal's OJS system, and the reviewer can select the options he or she wishes in relation to open science, i.e. the publication of his or her review, with or without identification.
• I declare the truthfulness of the information.

Article Submission Format

Applicable to all types of manuscripts.

• Structured abstract
  • The abstract should contain up to 250 words;
  • Be written in the three languages, with the first language being the same as the manuscript, followed by the other two ([pt, en, and es] or [en, pt, and es] or [es, en, and pt]);
  • Be structured, containing pertinent items according to the type of manuscript, as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2
Suggestion of elements of the structured abstract according to manuscript type

Note: Own elaboration.

• File formatting for submission
  • As the final articles published in REGEPE are made with scientific publishing software, such as InDesign and LaTeX, we minimize the pre-formatting requirements in submitted works as much as possible. Therefore, for the Word file (.docx), there are no specifications for margins, spacing, font size, and type; these are at the discretion of the authors.
  • The manuscript should be organized as follows: sequence of Title, Abstract, and Keywords in each of the three languages. After, generally, the Introduction, the various parts containing the Development, the Conclusions, Endnotes [Optional], and finally, the References and Appendices [Optional]. Figure 3 brings a suggestion of sections by type of manuscript.

Figure 3
Suggestion of sections according to manuscript type

Note: Own elaboration.

Digital Assets

• Figures
  • Preferably, figures should be created using software such as Adobe Illustrator, Microsoft PowerPoint, Microsoft Visio, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Word (Illustrations menu), among others;
  • The mandatory font is Cambria, ensuring sizes 12 or larger;
  • Number the figures sequentially as they appear in the text: 1, 2, 3, and so on;
  • If it is not possible to submit the editable file of the figures, ensure the figure file is in .png format, with a minimum resolution of 300 dpi;
  • Photographic images should be high-quality .png files with at least 1920x1080 pixels. If the images are figures, images, or photographs from third parties, express authorization for their use or information about the source of the free database will be required.

• Tables
  • Tables within the manuscript file should be editable and not images;
  • Number the tables sequentially as they appear in the text: 1, 2, 3, and so on;
  • Follow the APA 7th edition format for constructing tables.

• Position of tables and figures in the manuscript
  • All Tables and Figures should be inserted at the end of the text, after the references, starting on a new page. Indicate in the body of the text where each figure or table should be inserted, for example:

    "------- Table 1 here -------",

    or

    "--------  Figure 1 here -------".

• Endnotes
  • Avoid using them as much as possible. The purpose of including endnotes is to not distract the reader from the main text with elements of secondary importance. Number the endnotes sequentially: 1, 2, 3, and so on;
  • Footnotes are not allowed.

Citations and References

Citation and reference Styles

• Follow the presentation format of these elements in the manuscript according to APA 7th edition guidelines. In this standard, for example, there are no frames, illustrations, or other designations, only Tables and Figures;
• In this standard, long quotations are those with more than 40 words, not those with more than 3 lines;
• We strongly recommend using bibliographic management software such as EndNote, Mendeley, Zotero, among others, to automatically generate references;
• DOI: All references must present the DOI (when applicable) following the format https://doi.org/xxxx. The format "dx.doi.org/xxxx" has been discontinued.

1) Book

• Rothwell, R., & Zegveld, W. (1982). Innovation and the small and medium sized firm: their role in employment and in economic change. Frances Pinter.

Citação parentética: (Rothwell & Zegveld, 1982); Citação narrativa: Rothwell e Zegveld (1982)

2) Book chapter

• Brush, C. G. (2008). Women Entrepreneurs: A Research Overview. In A. Basu, M. Casson, N. Wadeson, & B. Yeung (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Entrepreneurship. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199546992.003.0023

Citação parentética: (Brush, 2008); Citação narrativa: Brush (2008)

3) Journal articles

• Stam, E. (2013). Knowledge and entrepreneurial employees: A country-level analysis. Small Business Economics, 41(4), 887–898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9511-y

Citação parentética: (Stam, 2013) ; Citação narrativa: Stam (2013)

• Sussan, F., & Ács, Z. J. (2017). The digital entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 49(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9867-5

Citação parentética: (Sussan & Ács, 2017); Citação narrativa: Sussan and Ács (2017) 

4) Dissertation and thesis

• Wiklund, J. (1998). Small firms growth and performance: entrepreneurship and beyond [Doctoral dissertation, Jönköping University. Jönköping International Business School]. Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet.urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-207

Citação parentética: (Wiklund, 1998).; Citação narrativa: Wiklund (1998) 

5) Scientific report

• OECD. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: The measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities (4th ed.). OECD Eurostat. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264304604-en

Citação parentética: (OECD, 2018); Citação narrativa: OECD (2018)

Mandatory and Supplementary Documents

• Manuscript [Mandatory]: The work itself, without any identification of authorship or information that allows the identification of authorship. Since REGEPE has adhered to the principles of open science and encourages authors and reviewers to do the same, there will come a time when this requirement will no longer be relevant. However, if authors and reviewers do not check this respective option in their Open Science Conformity Declaration forms, the evaluation will continue through the double-blind peer review process;
• The three forms [Mandatory]:
• Declaration of Originality;
• Declaration of conflicts of interest;
• Declaration on Open Science Compliance.
• The online form [Mandatory]: This is the completion of the individual contributions of each co-author according to the contributor roles taxonomy (CRediT). Along with this form, there is the Acknowledgments section where authors can use, filling out this section is optional.
• REGEPE - Author Contribution and Acknowledgment Information;
• Figures [Mandatory]: Upload to the system according to the guidelines above.
• Certificate or Declaration of Translation [When applicable]: If the submitted manuscript is in English and was not written by an author whose native language is English.
• Underlying content of the manuscript [Optional]: May be submitted as supplementary documents, additional analyses, additional references, or any content that may serve as "additional" content for readers.

If the Manuscript is approved

• Video abstract: If the submitted manuscript is approved by REGEPE, meaning it's confirmed that it will be published, the corresponding author, on behalf of all others (if any), will receive instructions through the system to create and submit the Video Summary according to the Instructions on how to prepare the video abstract.

Financing Statement

The financial support that ANEGEPE gives to REGEPE comes from diversified sources of resources, the most important of which are: the annual fees of the partner members of ANEGEPE; registration fees for its biannual congress; fees for courses offered, and finally, fees arising from consulting services and research projects with financiers from organizations that promote science, technology and innovation.

Additional Information

Details of the Structure of a Case study

It must consist of three documents:

• Case study;
• Teaching Notes; and
• Copyright Declaration. 

1. Case study

It must follow the following Structured abstract:

• Study objective: Indicate the purpose of the work, i.e., what it intends to demonstrate or describe.
• Dilemma or problem: Clearly describe the dilemma or problem.
• Relevance/originality: Indicate the theoretical gap in which the study is inserted, also presenting the academic relevance of the theme.

It must follow the following Sections:

• Introduction: Highlighting the problem in which the case is inserted and, mainly, the Educational Objectives;
• Firm description: its brief history, its products and/or services, market, sector of activity, financial indicators, among other relevant information for the case;
• Problem or dilemma under analysis: Present the characters involved, context of decision making, among other information present in the scene. In this part, signal some decision alternatives, however, without exhausting possible alternatives, which may be created by students in the case discussion activity;
• Case closure: Creating concerns to think about how this company would be from the presented scenario;
• Questions: At the end of the text for discussion in the classroom. These have the role of guiding the situation, as a script, in addition to assisting the teacher in conducting the activity.

2. Teaching notes

It must follow the following guidelines:

• Theoretical content: Necessary for discussion of the subject, relative to the case study.
  Pedagogical alternatives: Present proposals for the application of the case study in the classroom.
• Pedagogical alternatives: Present proposals for the application of the case study in the classroom. 
• Dynamics: Should accompany suggestions for discussion or applicable activities, presenting what are the expected behaviors by students, positive and/or negative;
• Environment/conditions: Describe the physical, structural, and/or laboratory environment that can provide better development of the case.
• Decisions/solutions: Possible alternatives for analyzing the situation focused on the case study text, in order to support the work of the teacher who will apply the case and collaborate with obtaining relevant results in the use of the case study as a didactic instrument.

3. Copyright Declaration

It is very important that the company that originated the case study authorizes the publication of the data. Therefore, written authorization is fundamental for the publication of the case, and it is the responsibility of the authors to provide the authorization from the company/organization to publish the case in REGEPE.

Regarding the submission process in the REGEPE System

1. Start

• Choose the submission language, i.e., the language in which the manuscript was written;

• Choose the manuscript section, i.e., what type of manuscript it is

• Read and check all conditions, some of which require actions such as filling out specific forms.

• In the Comments for the Editor field (OPTIONAL), the author can insert their Cover Letter. The REGEPE Cover Letter should include a brief introduction of the work, highlighting the importance and originality of the research, the main results, and their implications. It should also explain why the manuscript is suitable for the journal, mentioning how the work contributes to the specific field and aligns with the interests of the journal's readers. The REGEPE Editor-in-Chief Cover Letter template can be obtained here.

• Read and, if in agreement, check the copyright and privacy statement, then click the Save and continue button.

2. Upload Submission

• Upload the submission files, which are MANDATORY: 

• Manuscript without author identification in Word format (.docx). See guidelines above;
• All three declarations: Declaration of Originality, Declaration of conflicts of interest, and Declaration on Open Science Compliance;
• Figures (images) used in the manuscript. See guidelines above.
• If the submitted manuscript is in English and was not written by an author whose native language is English [Mandatory]: 
• Certificate or Declaration of translation attesting to the quality of the translation or taking responsibility for it. This also applies if the translation was done by one of the authors.
• Other files that are OPTIONAL, such as: 
• Cover Letter to the Editor-in-Chief;
• Any other files related to the manuscript's underlying content.
• The upload is done by clicking either the Add File button or the Upload File link.

• After uploading, choose the file type by clicking the Article Text link if it refers to the manuscript for review or the Other link to select the most appropriate type. There are also Edit and Remove buttons that allow you to modify or delete the files, respectively. Once all files have been uploaded, click the Save and continue button.

3. Enter Metadata

• Fill out the: 

• Manuscript title in three languages (pt, en, and es). Only the first letter of the beginning of the title and after the colon ":" (if any) are capitalized. See examples in published articles. Do not fill in the Prefix and Subtitle fields; 
• Manuscript abstract in three languages (pt, en, and es). Please pay attention to the required structure for each type of manuscript. See each structure above

• Include all coauthors:
• Click the Add Contributor button to add one coauthor at a time. A new window will open;

• In this window provide: 
• Full name of the coauthor (except for the family name);
• Family name of the coauthor;
• Contact email of the coauthor. If the corresponding author, they will receive all communications from the system at this email;
• Coauthor's country means their nationality;
• ORCID of the coauthor is MANDATORY and must be provided in the User Details field. Provide the complete URL, example: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0137-0778. Also, click the Send e-mail to request ORCID authorization from contributor option below. This is ESSENTIAL! The system will send an automatic email to the provided co-author's email, who has 24 hours to follow the instructions and associate their registration with their ORCID;
• Coauthor affiliation. REGEPE adopts ONLY the main name of the institution in Portuguese, without the need to provide the department, institute, laboratory, graduate program name, among others. If in doubt about the name of your institution, you can consult the standardized database of Research Organization Registry (ROR). The standard will be: University, Institution, or Organization Name (ACRONYM), City, State, Country. Example: California Institute of Technology (CALTECH), Pasadena, CA, United States of America. The ACRONYM field is optional;
• Contributor's role. If this field is active in your window, choose the Author option;
• Principal contact for editorial correspondence checkbox. If the co-author is the corresponding author, check this option;
• Click the Save button.

• If any information is wrong, click the blue arrow next to the coauthor's name, which will open two options buttons: Edit and Delete. Choose the button of your preference to correct the information.

• Provide JEL classification. The Journal of Economic Literature (JEL) classification system is a standard method of classifying academic literature in the field of economics, including the area of management. Example: B31 D24 J53 (Maximum 3). Type one at a time (only in the chosen submission language) into the system and press Enter. 
• Provide keywords. Keywords are provided both in the manuscript file to be submitted and in this specific field of the OJS system. In both cases, fill out as follows: Between three to five keywords that characterize the work, starting with a capital letter. Type one at a time (in all 3 languages: pt, en, and es) into the system and press Enter.
• Provide references. Cut and paste all references from the references section of your manuscript into this field. Pay attention to the required norms mentioned above in the section General formatting for submission, item Citation and reference style.

• Provide funding information. Click the Add Funder button to include one funding organization at a time. A new window will open.

• Provide the name of the funding organization (if it exists, it is mandatory) in the Funder name and identification field. Start typing the name or acronym, and the field will show possible options, as it comes from the Open Funder Registry (OFR) database, maintained by CrossRef.
• Provide the process code in the Grant numbers field according to the agency's format. Then, click the Save button.

• Recommend a reviewer (Optional). In the Recommended reviewers text field, as indicated, you can suggest the name(s), affiliation(s), institutional email address(es), and the reasons why each individual should be considered for inclusion/exclusion as reviewers. Then, click the Save and continue button.

4. Confirmation

• In this step, you can review the entire process, navigating through the tabs, or click the Finish Submission button.

• Another window will open to confirm if you are sure you want to Submit. If yes, click the OK button; otherwise, click the Cancel button.

5. Next Steps

• In this screen, the system thanks you for your submission, informs you that the Editor-in-Chief has been notified, and you have the option to click the Create a new submission link or the Return to your dashboard link.

Contact

Main Contact: Prof. Dr. Edmundo Inácio Júnior - Editor-in-Chief, State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), regepe.esbj@anegepe.org.br, +55 (19) 3701-6673 / 6683
Technical Support Contact: M. Eng. Patrícia Trindade Araújo - Executive Editor, patriciatrindade@anegepe.org.br
Main Contact – ANEGEPE: Profa. Dra. Rose Mary Almeida Lopes – Presidente, roselopesbr@gmail.com
Address: Av. Casa Verde, 2515 - Sala 05, Bairro Casa Verde, São Paulo - SP, Brazil, CEP 02519-200