OJS Editorial Workflow: Complete Guide to Journal Publishing Process

Open Journal Systems (OJS) provides a structured editorial workflow that guides manuscripts from initial submission through peer review, copyediting, and final publication. Whether you're a journal manager setting up a new publication, an editor handling submissions, or an author wondering what happens after you click "submit," understanding this workflow is essential. This comprehensive guide explains each stage of the OJS editorial workflow, the roles involved, and what happens at every step of the journey from submission to published article.

What is the OJS Editorial Workflow? #

The OJS editorial workflow is a systematic process that manages scholarly manuscripts through four distinct stages: Submission, Review, Copyediting, and Production. Each stage has specific purposes, participants, and actions that move the manuscript closer to publication.

Think of the workflow as an assembly line for academic publishing—each station adds value and quality control before the manuscript moves to the next stage. This structured approach ensures consistency, maintains quality standards, and creates a transparent record of all editorial decisions.

OJS has evolved significantly over the years. The current version, OJS 3.5, offers a streamlined interface and enhanced features compared to earlier versions. However, the fundamental four-stage workflow has remained consistent since OJS 3.0, making this guide applicable to OJS 3.x installations.

The Four Workflow Stages at a Glance #

Stage 1 — Submission: Authors submit their manuscripts, editors perform initial screening, and appropriate section editors are assigned to handle the submission.

Stage 2 — Review: Peer reviewers evaluate the manuscript's scholarly merit, authors respond to feedback, and editors make decisions based on reviewer recommendations.

Stage 3 — Copyediting: Accepted manuscripts undergo language editing, formatting corrections, and preparation for final publication.

Stage 4 — Production: Copyedited files are converted into publishable formats (PDF, HTML), proofread, and scheduled for publication in a journal issue.

Understanding OJS User Roles #

Before diving into the workflow stages, it's essential to understand who does what in OJS. The system uses role-based permissions to ensure each participant can access only what they need.

Core Editorial Roles #

Journal Manager: The administrative backbone of the journal. Journal Managers configure settings, manage users, and oversee the entire publishing operation. They typically don't handle individual manuscripts but ensure the system runs smoothly.

Editor (Journal Editor): The chief decision-maker for manuscripts. Editors receive new submissions, assign them to appropriate section editors or handle them directly, and make final publication decisions.

Section Editor: Handles manuscripts within their area of expertise. Section Editors manage the review process, communicate with authors and reviewers, and recommend decisions to the Editor.

Reviewer: Subject matter experts who evaluate manuscripts for scholarly quality, methodology, originality, and contribution to the field. Reviewers provide recommendations but don't make final decisions.

Production Roles #

Copyeditor: Improves manuscript clarity, grammar, and adherence to journal style guidelines. Copyeditors work with accepted manuscripts before they enter production.

Layout Editor: Converts copyedited manuscripts into final publication formats such as PDF and HTML. Layout Editors ensure the published article looks professional and meets technical standards.

Proofreader: Performs final quality checks on formatted galleys before publication, catching any remaining errors in the publication-ready files.

Author Role #

Author: Submits manuscripts, responds to reviewer feedback, reviews copyedits, and approves final galleys before publication. Authors interact with the system throughout the entire workflow.

Note: In smaller journals, one person may fulfill multiple roles. An Editor might also serve as Section Editor, Copyeditor, and Layout Editor. OJS accommodates this flexibility while maintaining clear workflow stages.

Stage 1: Submission #

The Submission stage is where every manuscript journey begins. This stage serves as the gateway to your journal, handling initial quality checks and administrative setup.

What Happens During Submission #

Author Actions:

Authors register with the journal (if not already registered), then complete a multi-step submission wizard that typically includes:

• Selecting the appropriate article section (e.g., Research Article, Review, Case Study)
• Agreeing to the submission checklist and copyright terms
• Uploading the manuscript file and any supplementary materials
• Entering metadata: title, abstract, keywords, and co-author information
• Adding any comments for the editor
• Confirming and completing the submission

Editor Actions:

Upon receiving a new submission notification, editors perform an initial screening to determine if the manuscript fits the journal's scope and meets basic requirements. Editors can then:

• Assign a Section Editor to handle the submission
• Send to Review directly if the manuscript is ready
• Accept and Skip Review (rare, typically for invited content or editorials)
• Decline Submission if clearly unsuitable for the journal

Key Features of the Submission Stage #

Submission Files Panel: Displays all files uploaded by the author, including the main manuscript, figures, tables, and supplementary materials.

Pre-Review Discussions: A communication tool allowing editors to contact authors for clarifications or additional information before review begins.

Participants Panel: Shows everyone currently involved with the submission and allows adding new participants.

Metadata Access: Editors can view and edit submission metadata, including title, abstract, and contributor information.

Possible Outcomes from Submission Stage #

Manuscripts leaving the Submission stage typically move to one of these destinations:

Send to Review: The most common path—manuscripts meeting initial requirements proceed to peer review.

Accept and Skip Review: Used for invited articles, editorials, or content not requiring peer review.

Decline Submission: For manuscripts clearly outside the journal's scope or failing to meet basic standards. Declined submissions move to the Archives.

Stage 2: Review #

The Review stage is often the longest and most critical part of the editorial process. Here, subject matter experts evaluate the manuscript's scholarly merit and provide recommendations.

Review Types in OJS #

OJS supports three peer review models that journals can configure based on their policies:

Double-Blind Review: Neither authors nor reviewers know each other's identities. This is the most common model in academic publishing, designed to minimize bias.

Single-Blind Review: Reviewers know author identities, but authors don't know who reviewed their work. Allows reviewers to consider author expertise and track record.

Open Review: Both parties know each other's identities. Promotes accountability and transparency in the review process.

The Review Process Step by Step #

Step 1 — Reviewer Assignment: The Editor or Section Editor identifies appropriate reviewers based on expertise and invites them to review. Reviewers receive an email with the manuscript abstract and review timeline.

Step 2 — Reviewer Response: Invited reviewers accept or decline the invitation within the specified response deadline (commonly 7-14 days). If they decline, new reviewers must be found.

Step 3 — Review Completion: Accepted reviewers download the manuscript, evaluate it against the journal's criteria, complete any review forms, provide written feedback, and submit their recommendation.

Step 4 — Editorial Decision: Once reviews are complete, the editor evaluates reviewer feedback and makes a decision on the manuscript's fate.

Reviewer Recommendations #

Reviewers typically choose from these recommendation options:

Accept Submission: The manuscript is ready for publication with no changes required.

Revisions Required: Minor changes needed—no additional peer review necessary after revisions.

Resubmit for Review: Major revisions needed—manuscript should undergo another round of peer review.

Resubmit Elsewhere: Manuscript doesn't fit this journal but may be suitable for another publication.

Decline Submission: Manuscript has significant flaws and is unsuitable for publication.

See Comments: Reviewer provides detailed feedback without selecting a specific recommendation.

Editorial Decisions After Review #

Based on reviewer recommendations, editors can:

Request Revisions: Ask the author to make minor changes without requiring additional review.

Resubmit for Review: Request major revisions and send the revised manuscript through another review round.

Accept Submission: Move the manuscript to Copyediting stage.

Decline Submission: Reject the manuscript and archive it.

Revision Rounds #

When revisions are requested, authors upload their revised manuscript along with a response to reviewer comments. OJS tracks multiple revision rounds, maintaining a complete history of changes and decisions.

Stage 3: Copyediting #

Once a manuscript is accepted, it moves to Copyediting. This stage focuses on improving the manuscript's readability, grammar, and adherence to journal style guidelines.

What Happens During Copyediting #

Editor Actions:

• Assign a Copyeditor to the submission
• Provide copyediting instructions if needed
• Monitor progress and communicate with participants

Copyeditor Actions:

• Download the accepted manuscript from Draft Files
• Edit for grammar, spelling, punctuation, and style consistency
• Ensure proper formatting of references, tables, and figures
• Upload the copyedited file
• Notify the editor when complete

Author Actions:

• Review copyedited changes when invited
• Approve changes or request modifications
• Respond to any queries from the copyeditor

Copyediting Discussions #

The Copyediting Discussions panel allows all participants to communicate about editing changes, clarifications, or concerns. This creates a documented trail of all copyediting-related communications.

Moving to Production #

Once copyediting is complete and approved, the editor clicks "Send to Production" to move the manuscript to the final stage. Files selected for production become the basis for creating publication-ready galleys.

Stage 4: Production #

The Production stage transforms copyedited manuscripts into final publication formats and schedules them for publication in a journal issue.

What Happens During Production #

Layout Editor Actions:

• Download production-ready files
• Create galley files (PDF, HTML, XML, or other formats)
• Ensure proper formatting, pagination, and layout
• Upload completed galleys to the system

Proofreading:

• Authors and/or proofreaders review final galleys
• Check for typographical errors, formatting issues, or missing content
• Request corrections if needed
• Approve galleys for publication

Editor Actions:

• Review completed galleys
• Verify metadata accuracy
• Schedule the article for publication in an issue
• Assign DOI if applicable
• Publish the article

Creating Galleys #

Galleys are the final publication files readers will access. Common galley formats include:

PDF: The most common format, preserving exact layout and formatting across devices.

HTML: Web-friendly format offering better accessibility and mobile reading experience.

XML: Machine-readable format required for certain indexing services and archives.

Note: OJS does not automatically convert Word documents to PDF or HTML. Layout Editors must use external tools to create galley files before uploading them to OJS.

Scheduling for Publication #

Once galleys are ready, editors schedule the article for publication by:

• Assigning the article to an existing or new issue
• Setting page numbers (optional)
• Configuring permissions and licensing information
• Adding DOI identifier (if enabled)
• Publishing immediately or scheduling for future publication

Communication Throughout the Workflow #

OJS provides robust communication tools to keep all participants informed throughout the editorial process.

Discussion Panels #

Each workflow stage has its own Discussion panel where participants can create conversation threads. Discussions are visible only to participants assigned to that stage, maintaining appropriate confidentiality.

Email Notifications #

OJS automatically sends email notifications at key workflow points:

• New submission acknowledgment to authors
• Reviewer invitations and reminders
• Editorial decision notifications
• Copyediting and proofreading requests
• Publication announcements

Journals can customize these email templates to match their communication style and include specific instructions.

Activity Log #

Every submission maintains a complete Activity Log recording all actions, decisions, and communications. This audit trail ensures transparency and helps resolve any disputes about the editorial process.

Workflow Flexibility in OJS #

While OJS provides a structured four-stage workflow, it offers significant flexibility:

Skip Stages: Editors can skip stages that don't apply to certain content. For example, editorials might skip review and go directly from Submission to Copyediting.

Custom Roles: Journals can create custom roles or rename existing ones to match their organizational structure.

Simplified Workflows: Small journals where one person handles multiple roles can still benefit from the structured workflow while minimizing complexity.

Quick Submit Plugin: For journals that don't use the full editorial workflow, the Quick Submit plugin allows uploading articles directly to Production for immediate publication.

Typical Timeline for Manuscript Processing #

While timelines vary significantly between journals and disciplines, here's a typical breakdown:

Common Workflow Challenges and Solutions #

Finding Reviewers #

Challenge: Difficulty finding available reviewers willing to accept invitations.

Solution: Maintain a robust reviewer database, send invitations to multiple reviewers simultaneously, and use OJS's reviewer interest features to match expertise.

Delayed Reviews #

Challenge: Reviewers missing deadlines or not responding.

Solution: Configure automatic reminder emails, set realistic deadlines, and have backup reviewers ready.

Author Revision Delays #

Challenge: Authors taking too long to submit revisions.

Solution: Set clear revision deadlines, send reminders, and communicate consequences of missed deadlines.

Production Bottlenecks #

Challenge: Backlog of articles waiting for galley creation.

Solution: Establish a regular production schedule, consider outsourcing galley creation, or use automated tools where possible.

Best Practices for Efficient Workflow Management #

For Journal Managers #

• Configure email templates with clear, helpful information
• Set realistic default deadlines for each workflow stage
• Create comprehensive author and reviewer guidelines
• Regularly review and optimize workflow settings
• Train all editorial team members on their specific roles

For Editors #

• Process new submissions promptly (within 1 week)
• Assign at least 2-3 reviewers to ensure timely feedback
• Provide clear instructions when requesting revisions
• Use Discussion panels to document important decisions
• Monitor the dashboard regularly for pending tasks

For Authors #

• Follow submission guidelines carefully
• Provide complete and accurate metadata
• Respond promptly to revision requests
• Review copyedits and galleys thoroughly
• Use the Discussion feature to communicate with editors

OJS Version Differences #

While this guide focuses on OJS 3.x (including 3.5), journals still running OJS 2.x will find some differences:

OJS 2.x: Uses a five-step workflow with separate Review, Editing, and Proofreading phases. The interface is more complex, and some features work differently.

OJS 3.x: Streamlined four-stage workflow with improved user interface, better mobile support, and enhanced discussion features. The transition from OJS 2.x to 3.x consolidates some stages for efficiency.

If your journal is still running OJS 2.x, consider upgrading to benefit from the improved workflow, enhanced security, and modern features of OJS 3.5.

Related Guides #

For detailed instructions on specific workflow aspects, see our companion guides:

• OJS Author Guide: How to Submit a Manuscript
• OJS Editor Guide: Managing Submissions and Review
• OJS Reviewer Guide: Completing Peer Reviews
• OJS Production Guide: Copyediting to Publication