Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Use 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.
| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 42% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 107% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 13% | 0% |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 7% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 40% | 0% |
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.
| 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 |
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-style and asq-tables-figures are late-stage polish — do not run them while the theoretical contribution is still unsettled. At ASQ, craft cannot rescue a thin idea.
asq-topic-selectionasq-theory-developmentasq-literature-positioningasq-theory-development then asq-contribution-framingasq-data-analysisasq-contribution-framingasq-submissionasq-review-process then asq-rebuttalA 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.
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.
textASQ 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.
asq-theory-development and rush to data — at ASQ the contribution is theoretical, not methodological.asq-tables-figures polish exhibits before the contribution is settled.asq-rebuttal draft a response letter before the manuscript itself has been revised.Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.