Asq Writing Style

---
name: asq-writing-style
description: Use for full-manuscript prose and narrative craft on an Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ) manuscript — voice, structure, and the storytelling ASQ is known for. Polishes the writing; it does not change the theory or analysis.
---

# Writing Style & Craft (asq-writing-style)

## When to trigger

- The theory and analysis are settled; the prose needs to reach ASQ's craft bar
- The manuscript is technically correct but flat, jargon-heavy, or hard to follow
- A process study is written in dead "variance-speak"
- Reviewers/editors praise the idea but call the writing "dense" or "unclear"

## ASQ's craft bar

ASQ is known for *superb writing* — long-form articles with a strong narrative arc. The best ASQ papers read as compelling intellectual stories, not as lab reports; Weick's (1993, ASQ) Mann Gulch paper is the canonical example of analysis carried by narrative. The journal's guidelines treat the **compelling presentation of supporting evidence as one dimension of a submission's quality** (verify at journals.sagepub.com/author-instructions/asq), and current editorial communications emphasize **curation** — selecting and shaping papers that will endure. Craft is a real evaluation criterion here, not a courtesy.

## The narrative arc

- **Open with the puzzle.** The first page should make a smart reader curious and slightly uncomfortable — the anomaly, not a literature catalog.
- **Build tension, then resolution.** The paper is an argument that travels from puzzle → why existing theory fails → your insight → evidence → reframing.
- **Foreground theory throughout.** The theoretical thread is visible in every section, not just intro and discussion.
- **Earn the surprise.** Set up the prior carefully so the reader feels the reversal when it comes.
- **Close on generativity.** End by opening new questions, not by restating findings.

## Prose discipline

- **Plain, precise English.** Prefer concrete verbs and clear subjects; cut nominalizations ("the operationalization of the conceptualization…").
- **Define jargon once, then use it consistently.** Do not stack neologisms.
- **One idea per paragraph**, with a topic sentence that carries the argument.
- **Active voice** where it aids clarity, especially in qualitative work where the researcher's role matters.
- **Signpost** transitions so the reader always knows where they are in the argument.

## Process vs. variance voice

- For **process theory**, write in process language: events, sequences, becoming, unfolding, feedback. Do not flatten a process into "factor A raised outcome B."
- For **variance theory**, be precise about relationships, conditions, and magnitudes — but still narrate *why*.

## Qualitative-specific craft

- Weave informant voice into the analysis; quotes should advance the argument.
- Show the field — enough thick description to make the setting vivid and the inference credible — without drowning the theory.
- Maintain analytic distance: vivid but not journalistic; interpretive but disciplined.

## Checklist

- [ ] Opens with the puzzle, not a literature dump
- [ ] A single, traceable theoretical thread runs through every section
- [ ] The surprise is set up so the reader feels the reversal
- [ ] Jargon defined once and used consistently; nominalizations cut
- [ ] One idea per paragraph; topic sentences carry the argument
- [ ] Process papers written in process voice (not variance-speak)
- [ ] Qualitative: informant voice advances the argument; setting is vivid but disciplined
- [ ] Ends on generativity (new questions), not a findings recap

## Anti-patterns

- "Lab-report" prose: mechanical, voiceless, no narrative tension
- Front-loading the literature so the puzzle never lands
- Jargon stacking and undefined neologisms
- Variance-speak imposed on a process phenomenon
- Quote-dumping in qualitative papers with no analytic threading
- A discussion that restates results instead of opening questions

## Output format

```
【Narrative arc】puzzle → tension → insight → evidence → generativity (status)
【Theoretical thread】visible throughout? (yes/no)
【Voice】process / variance — matches phenomenon?
【Prose issues fixed】jargon / nominalizations / paragraphing
【Qual craft】informant voice + setting balanced?
【Next step】asq-submission
```