Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →brycewang-stanford/asq-literature-positioning
Use when situating an Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ) manuscript within organization-theory conversations and sharpening the gap/tension it addresses. Positions the argument; it does not develop the core theory or write the methods.
Passed 20 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 3 of 22 without it.
and 5 more in the full report
17 fixed3 passed either way2 still failing0 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 17 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
I am preparing a manuscript on organizational sensemaking during crisis for Administrative Science Quarterly, but my literature section reads like a summary list of past research rather than an active debate. Please evaluate my theoretical draft below and provide a structured breakdown covering: the target academic conversations joined, a steelmanned summary of current prevailing views, the theoretical tension or opening created, the organizational theory traditions engaged, how overlapping or near-scoop papers are differentiated, and the recommended subsequent workflow step.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| The response includes the structured tag header 【Conversation(s)】. | Missed | Passed |
| The response specifies asq-methods under the 【Next step】 tag. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
ASQ readers are organization theorists. They expect you to enter a specific, identifiable conversation and advance it. The literature section is an argument that creates the space for your contribution — not a comprehensive survey.
Steps:
ASQ has a long lineage in organization theory and the sociology of organizations, running back to its 1956 founding by James D. Thompson. Failing to engage the relevant tradition is a common rejection trigger. Many of these traditions were defined or sharpened in ASQ's own pages — so the relevant prior is often an ASQ paper, not an AMJ/SMJ one. Map your puzzle to the canonical lineages where appropriate (verify exact citations yourself):
You need not cite all of these — but you must show command of the relevant lineage and recent ASQ-adjacent work in it.
test cases passed, vs 3 / 22 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.