Administrative Science Quarterly Workflow (asq-workflow)
SkillDev toolsUse when deciding which asq-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for an Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ) manuscript. Routes, it does not replace, the specialized skills.
Instructions available. Your AI can read the instructions. Execution depends on the setup they require.
Account requirements not reviewed. Check the skill instructions before use; ahel provides instructions and does not run this skill.
Add ahel to your AI once: Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Claude Code or Codex. Then ask it to use this.
Then ask your AI: use the Administrative Science Quarterly Workflow (asq-workflow) skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills in Administrative-Science-Quarterly-Skills/skills/asq-workflow/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
Overview
This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill; it tells you which asq- skill to use at your current stage*.
Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ) — a top, theory-driven journal in organization theory and the sociology of organizations, founded in 1956 by James D. Thompson (first editor 1956–1973; author of Organizations in Action) and published by SAGE in association with the Samuel Curtis Johnson Graduate School of Management at Cornell University. Its motto: "Dedicated to advancing the understanding of administration through empirical investigation and theoretical analysis." ASQ's hallmark is a deep, often surprising theoretical insight about organizations, delivered with superb craft. It publishes both rigorous quantitative work and rich qualitative/inductive studies (grounded-theory, ethnographic, historical) — method follows the theoretical question. The current Editor is Beth Bechky (UC Davis; term began July 1, 2025, succeeding Christine Beckman and András Tilcsik), an ethnographer of work and occupations — a signal of ASQ's openness to inductive fieldwork. ASQ has no submission fee, is exceptionally selective (reported acceptance ~8%), uses APA references (since January 2025), and is distinctive among management journals for its standing book review section.
When to trigger
- The user asks "what should I do next?"
- The user drops a draft and needs the current bottleneck diagnosed
- Work keeps ping-ponging between theory, methods, and prose with no clear state
- An ASQ decision letter arrived and the user needs to switch into review/rebuttal mode
Routing table
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|---|---|
| Idea is interesting but not yet surprising; unsure it fits ASQ | asq-topic-selection |
| Have a phenomenon but no theoretical engine / mechanism | asq-theory-development |
| Lit review reads like a list; not in dialogue with org-theory traditions | asq-literature-positioning |
| Unsure whether design should be qualitative or quantitative; rigor gaps | asq-methods |
| Have data but coding/analysis is opaque; no data-to-theory link | asq-data-analysis |
| Can't state the contribution as a "so-what" for organization theory | asq-contribution-framing |
| Tables/figures are dense or do not show the data structure (qual or quant) | asq-tables-figures |
| Prose is flat, jargon-heavy, or "variance-speak" where process is needed | asq-writing-style |
| Preparing to submit; need a preflight checklist | asq-submission |
| Want to understand ASQ's developmental review before/after submitting | asq-review-process |
| Received an R&R and need to write the response | asq-rebuttal |
Default order
asq-topic-selection— lock the puzzle and the surprising organizational insightasq-theory-development— build the theoretical engine (process or variance) before data workasq-literature-positioning— situate in organization-theory conversationsasq-methods— choose and justify design (qualitative or quantitative); set the rigor barasq-data-analysis— execute analysis and the data-to-theory linkasq-contribution-framing— sharpen the theoretical "so what" once results existasq-tables-figures— finalize data tables, data-to-theory tables, models, figuresasq-writing-style— full-manuscript prose and craft polishasq-submission— pre-submission preflightasq-review-process— understand the developmental, multi-round processasq-rebuttal— after the R&R decision
asq-writing-styleandasq-tables-figuresare late-stage polish — do not run them while the theoretical contribution is still unsettled. At ASQ, craft cannot rescue a thin idea.
Decision heuristics
- "I have a result but no surprise" →
asq-topic-selection - "My theory is a box-and-arrow model with no mechanism" →
asq-theory-development - "My lit review cites everyone but argues with no one" →
asq-literature-positioning - "I ran hypotheses but learned nothing new about organizations" →
asq-theory-developmentthenasq-contribution-framing - "My informant quotes are decorative, not evidentiary" →
asq-data-analysis - "Reviewer says 'this is a method in search of a theory'" →
asq-contribution-framing - "I'm about to submit tonight" →
asq-submission - "I got a high-risk R&R with three reviewers" →
asq-review-processthenasq-rebuttal
Differences vs. other management packs
- ASQ: theory first; surprise and craft are paramount; qualitative/inductive work is fully first-class (think Barley's 1986 CT-scanner study or Weick's 1993 Mann Gulch paper); process theory is common; the sociology-of-organizations lineage is central. Reviews books as well as articles.
- AMJ: empirical, hypothesis-testing norm dominates; strong quantitative bar.
- AMR: theory-only; no data at all.
- SMJ: strategy-focused; firm performance / competitive advantage outcomes central.
A pure conceptual paper fits an AMR-style stack better. A hypothesis-testing study aimed purely at firm-performance outcomes with no organizational-theory surprise may belong at SMJ — at ASQ a thin contribution dressed in a strong method will not survive screening, however clean the identification.
Bottleneck triage sheet
When a draft is thrashing, score each row 0–2 (0 = broken, 1 = shaky, 2 = solid). The lowest row is your next skill — at ASQ a low "surprise" or "so-what" score outranks any polished exhibit. Craft never rescues a thin idea here.
ASQ BOTTLENECK TRIAGE score(0-2) route if lowest
surprise / puzzle ............. [ ] asq-topic-selection
theoretical engine (mechanism) [ ] asq-theory-development
dialogue w/ org-theory canon .. [ ] asq-literature-positioning
design fits the question ...... [ ] asq-methods
data -> theory link is visible [ ] asq-data-analysis
"so what" for organization theory[ ] asq-contribution-framing
exhibits show the data structure [ ] asq-tables-figures
prose is process-, not variance- [ ] asq-writing-style
-------------------------------------------------------------
RULE: fix the lowest theory row before touching any craft row.
qualitative & quantitative are equally first-class — method follows the question.
Anti-patterns
- Do not skip
asq-theory-developmentand rush to data — at ASQ the contribution is theoretical, not methodological. - Do not let
asq-tables-figurespolish exhibits before the contribution is settled. - Do not let
asq-rebuttaldraft a response letter before the manuscript itself has been revised. - Do not assume "more sophisticated method" substitutes for a new organizational insight.
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 1k
- Forks
- 155
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Item type
- skill
- Key
asq-workflow- Source
- github.com/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills
github.com/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills
Related picks
Skill · brycewang-stanford
The pick for Academic03-academic-writing
Skill · 24kchengye
The pick for Academicobsidian-markdown
Skill · agricidaniel
The pick for Markdownmarkdown-formatter
Skill · nvidia
The pick for Markdowndocx
Skill · axoviq-ai
The pick for Wordteach
Skill · mattpocock
More in Dev tools