Use when starting or navigating any Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript and you need the right next sub-skill, chosen by lifecycle stage and whether the paper makes a genuinely comparative claim across countries or over time. It dispatches; it does not draft content.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill cps-workflow --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Cps Workflow?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-cps-workflow)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: cps-workflow
description: Use when starting or navigating any Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript and you need the right next sub-skill, chosen by lifecycle stage and whether the paper makes a genuinely comparative claim across countries or over time. It dispatches; it does not draft content.
---
# CPS Workflow Router (cps-workflow)
The orchestrator for a Comparative Political Studies submission. Figure out the stage, then send the
user to the matching skill. CPS is the discipline's **comparative-politics specialist** (SAGE, since
1968) — the router's first job is to confirm the paper makes a *comparative* argument (across countries,
subnational units, or over time), not a single-case study with no comparative leverage.
## When to trigger
- Starting a new CPS paper and unsure where to begin
- Mid-project and unsure which skill applies next
- Unsure whether the paper is comparative enough for CPS (vs. a single-country area-studies piece)
- Returning with a decision letter (route to `cps-rebuttal`)
## First question: is it comparative?
| Situation | CPS fit | Route to |
|-----------|---------|----------|
| Cross-national or cross-regional claim | Strong | normal pipeline below |
| Subnational comparison or over-time within one country | Strong (intra-national counts) | normal pipeline |
| Single case used to build/test a portable theory | Conditional — must travel | `cps-topic-selection` + `cps-theory-building` |
| Single country, descriptive, no comparative leverage | Weak — likely off-fit | `cps-topic-selection` (reframe) |
| General US poli-sci or pure IR theory | Off-fit — see sibling guard | reconsider venue |
> CPS publishes work on democratization & regimes, institutions, political behavior & participation,
> ethnic politics & conflict, comparative political economy, and parties & elections — **comparative**
> in design or in the portability of the claim.
## Routing map (stage → skill)
```text
Idea / comparative fit? → cps-topic-selection
Where does it sit in the field? → cps-literature-positioning
What's the argument? → cps-theory-building
Is the design defensible? → cps-research-design
Are the analyses sound? → cps-data-analysis
Are the exhibits clear? → cps-tables-figures
Does it read for comparativists? → cps-writing-style
Replication & transparency? → cps-transparency-and-data
How will it be judged? → cps-review-process
Ready to submit? → cps-submission
Got an R&R / decision? → cps-rebuttal
```
## Default order
`topic-selection → literature-positioning → theory-building → research-design → data-analysis →
tables-figures → writing-style → transparency-and-data → review-process → submission → rebuttal`
Iterate: most papers loop theory ↔ design ↔ analysis several times before writing-style.
## Comparative-fit routing check
Before selecting the next skill, force a one-minute CPS fit check:
| Check | Pass condition | Route if weak |
|-------|----------------|---------------|
| Comparative leverage | The variation that identifies the claim is *across* cases or time, not within one snapshot. | `cps-research-design` |
| Travel | The argument is stated as a portable mechanism a comparativist of another region can import. | `cps-theory-building` |
| Generality | The contribution speaks to a comparative-politics debate, not only to one country's specialists. | `cps-topic-selection` |
| Transparency | Quantitative results have a CPS Dataverse plan; qualitative evidence has a documentation plan. | `cps-transparency-and-data` |
If the paper fails the comparative-leverage check, do not route to writing-style — it needs a design or
fit repair, because CPS reviewers reject well-executed single-case papers that never become comparative.
## Anti-patterns
- Treating CPS like an area-studies outlet — a lone country case with no comparative leverage is off-fit
- Pitching to the whole discipline like APSR/AJPS — CPS wants the *comparative-politics* contribution
- Submitting a pure-IR or pure-formal-theory paper that never compares political systems
- Deferring the replication package to acceptance — quantitative papers cannot be finally accepted without it
## Output format
```
【Stage】idea / positioning / theory / design / analysis / exhibits / writing / transparency / review / submit / rebut
【Comparative?】cross-national / subnational / over-time / single-case-that-travels / not-yet
【Route to】cps-<skill>
【Why】one line
【Then】the next skill after that
```
## Supplementary resources
- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — comparative-politics data + software by method
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — official CPS / SAGE URLs behind every fact in this pack
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!