Use when deciding which amj-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
Scanned 6/4/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill amj-workflow --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Amj Workflow?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-amj-workflow)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: amj-workflow
description: Use when deciding which amj-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
---
# Academy of Management Journal Workflow (amj-workflow)
## Overview
This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill; it tells you **which amj-* skill to use right now** for your AMJ manuscript.
Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as AMJ — the premier *empirical* management journal published by the Academy of Management (AOM), founded in 1958 and published bimonthly (Feb/Apr/Jun/Aug/Oct/Dec). AMJ's stated mission is "to publish empirical research that tests, extends, or builds management theory and contributes to management practice." It explicitly welcomes **all empirical methods** — qualitative, quantitative, field, laboratory, meta-analytic, and mixed — and judges every manuscript on **three criteria**: a strong empirical contribution, a meaningful theoretical contribution, and practical relevance. The non-negotiable bar: a strong empirical study that **also makes a clear theoretical contribution**. Reviewers and the action editor will ask "what new theory do we learn?" as insistently as "is the method sound?" Both must pass.
> Editorial team changes: Gary A. Ballinger (University of Virginia, McIntire) is the incoming Editor-in-Chief whose team began receiving submissions on 1 July 2025; verify the current masthead at journals.aom.org/journal/amj. Impact factor and acceptance rate fluctuate (2023 JCR IF ≈ 9.5) — treat any figure as **approximate** and confirm on the official page.
## When to trigger
- "What should I do next?" with a half-built AMJ manuscript
- You have a dataset and a result but no clear theoretical story
- A reviewer/editor pushes on "theoretical contribution" and you are unsure which stage is the real bottleneck
- You received an AMJ decision letter (R&R or reject-and-resubmit) and need to switch into response mode
- You keep bouncing between theory, method, and writing without a plan
## Routing table
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|
| Idea is vague; not sure it is theory-driven or AMJ-fit | `amj-topic-selection` |
| Hypotheses are descriptive; no clear theoretical mechanism | `amj-theory-development` |
| Front end reads as gap-spotting; canonical theory not engaged | `amj-literature-positioning`|
| Design may not match the question (level, source, timing, causality) | `amj-methods` |
| Have data; unsure about measurement validity, CMB, endogeneity, models | `amj-data-analysis` |
| Results exist but the "so what for theory" is thin | `amj-contribution-framing` |
| Tables/figures cluttered, off house style, or not self-explanatory | `amj-tables-figures` |
| Prose is jargon-heavy, passive, or buries the argument | `amj-writing-style` |
| Ready to submit; need the ScholarOne preflight | `amj-submission` |
| Want to understand how AMJ review/decisions work before/after submit | `amj-review-process` |
| Received an R&R; need to plan and draft the response | `amj-rebuttal` |
## Default order
1. `amj-topic-selection` — lock a theory-driven question with AMJ fit
2. `amj-theory-development` — build the mechanism and derive hypotheses *a priori*
3. `amj-literature-positioning` — engage canonical theory; state the conversation you join
4. `amj-methods` — match design to the question (level, source, timing, causal logic)
5. `amj-data-analysis` — measurement validity, CMB, endogeneity, the right estimator
6. `amj-contribution-framing` — turn results into an explicit theoretical contribution
7. `amj-tables-figures` — finalize main exhibits in AOM house style
8. `amj-writing-style` — full-manuscript prose polish (Front-loaded argument, active voice)
9. `amj-submission` — ScholarOne preflight (anonymization, format, files)
10. `amj-review-process` — set expectations for the developmental, multi-round process
11. `amj-rebuttal` — after an R&R, plan revisions then draft the response letter
> `amj-tables-figures` and `amj-writing-style` are **late-stage polish**. Do not invoke them while the theoretical contribution or identification is still unsettled — you will polish an argument you may still have to rebuild.
## Decision shortcuts
- "I have a finding but no theory story" → `amj-topic-selection` then `amj-theory-development`
- "My intro says 'no one has studied X'" (gap-spotting) → `amj-literature-positioning`
- "Hypotheses are just 'A relates to B'" → `amj-theory-development`
- "Single-source, single-wave, self-report" → `amj-data-analysis` (common-method bias)
- "Archival design, treatment may be endogenous" → `amj-methods` then `amj-data-analysis`
- "Reviewer says contribution is incremental" → `amj-contribution-framing`
- "Submitting tomorrow" → `amj-submission`
- "Got an R&R with 3 reviewers" → `amj-review-process` then `amj-rebuttal`
## Difference vs. AMR / ASQ / SMJ stacks
- **AMJ**: empirical contribution that *also* advances theory — data and theory weighted equally. AOM journal; 40-page main-body limit; ScholarOne at mc.manuscriptcentral.com/AMJ.
- **AMR** (theory-only): a *sister AOM journal* with no data — the contribution is a novel, internally consistent theory, typically ~25-30 double-spaced pages excluding references. Use an AMR stack.
- **ASQ**: Cornell/SAGE journal (not AOM); empirical or theoretical, prizes deep contextual/qualitative work and bold framing.
- **SMJ**: Strategic Management Society / Wiley journal (not AOM); strategy-focused, performance and competitive-advantage questions, often archival.
If your paper has no original data and is purely conceptual, AMJ is the wrong venue — target AMR.
## Anti-patterns
- **Do not** skip `amj-theory-development` and jump to analysis — AMJ rejects atheoretical "gap-spotting."
- **Do not** let `amj-tables-figures` beautify exhibits before the model and contribution are settled.
- **Do not** let `amj-rebuttal` draft a response letter before you have actually revised the manuscript.
- **Do not** treat `amj-writing-style` as a substitute for a real theoretical contribution — polish cannot rescue thin theory.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!