---
name: jm-workflow
description: Use when deciding which jm-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for a Journal of Marketing (JM) manuscript. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
---

# Journal of Marketing Workflow (jm-workflow)

## Overview

This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill; it tells you **which jm-* skill to use right now** for your Journal of Marketing manuscript.

Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as JM — the American Marketing Association's (AMA) premier *general-audience* marketing journal, published by SAGE on the AMA's behalf. JM's mission is to develop and disseminate knowledge about **real-world marketing questions** useful to scholars, educators, managers, policy makers, consumers, and other societal stakeholders. Its gatekeeping criterion is publishing "the most impactful, thought-leading **substantive** research in the marketing discipline." The non-negotiable bar: a **substantive insight** into an important marketing question, with genuine **managerial, policy, or societal relevance** — not methodological novelty for its own sake. JM is methodologically "big tent" (experiments, field studies, surveys, interviews, observational, and secondary data) and actively promotes **empirics-first** research grounded in real-world phenomena.

> Editorial team: Editor in Chief Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp (UNC Kenan-Flagler), three-year term began 2025-07-01 (succeeding Shrihari Sridhar); Coeditors Marc Fischer (Cologne), Kelly L. Haws (Vanderbilt), Maura L. Scott (Arizona State), Rebecca J. Slotegraaf (Indiana). The new team's "Big Ideas" platform pushes back on "unnecessarily complex analyses" at the expense of topic importance (待核实 — editorial paywalled). Verify the masthead on the AMA editorial-leadership page.

## When to trigger

- "What should I do next?" with a half-built JM manuscript
- You have results but the managerial/societal "so what" is thin
- A reviewer/editor questions whether the contribution is *substantive* or merely a new-context replication
- You received a JM decision letter (R&R or reject) and need to switch into response mode
- You keep bouncing between phenomenon, theory, method, and writing without a plan

## Routing table

| Current symptom                                                          | Next skill                  |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|
| Idea is vague; not sure it is substantive or JM-fit (vs. JMR / Mktg Sci) | `jm-topic-selection`        |
| Phenomenon is real but the conceptual logic is underdeveloped            | `jm-theory-development`     |
| Front end reads as gap-spotting; substantive conversation not engaged    | `jm-literature-positioning` |
| Design may not match the question (causality, field realism, level)      | `jm-methods`                |
| Have data; unsure about identification, exact-statistic reporting, replication | `jm-data-analysis`     |
| Results exist but managerial/policy/societal relevance is thin           | `jm-contribution-framing`   |
| Tables/figures cluttered or lack a managerial takeaway                   | `jm-tables-figures`         |
| Prose buries the substantive argument; off AMA house style               | `jm-writing-style`          |
| Ready to submit; need the ScholarOne (Sage Track) preflight              | `jm-submission`             |
| Want to understand how JM double-anonymized review works                 | `jm-review-process`         |
| Received an R&R; need to plan and draft the response                     | `jm-rebuttal`               |

## Default order

1. `jm-topic-selection` — lock a substantive, managerially relevant question with JM fit
2. `jm-theory-development` — build conceptual logic grounded in the real-world phenomenon
3. `jm-literature-positioning` — engage the substantive conversation; avoid new-context incrementalism
4. `jm-methods` — match design (experiment / field / survey / secondary / qualitative) to the question
5. `jm-data-analysis` — identification, exact p-values/SEs/effect sizes, JM Dataverse replication
6. `jm-contribution-framing` — turn results into a substantive + managerial/policy/societal contribution
7. `jm-tables-figures` — finalize exhibits with managerial takeaways in AMA style
8. `jm-writing-style` — full-manuscript prose polish (front-loaded substantive argument)
9. `jm-submission` — ScholarOne (Sage Track) preflight (anonymization, 50-page format, files)
10. `jm-review-process` — set expectations for double-anonymized, multi-round review
11. `jm-rebuttal` — after an R&R, plan revisions then draft the response letter

> `jm-tables-figures` and `jm-writing-style` are **late-stage polish**. Do not invoke them while the substantive contribution or identification is still unsettled.

## Decision shortcuts

- "I have a finding but no managerial story" → `jm-topic-selection` then `jm-contribution-framing`
- "My intro says 'no one has studied X in this context'" → `jm-literature-positioning`
- "Reviewer says it's a new-context replication" → `jm-contribution-framing` (substantive novelty)
- "My paper is mostly a clever model" → reconsider fit (Marketing Science / JMR), then `jm-topic-selection`
- "I reported p < .05" → `jm-data-analysis` (exact p-values, SEs, effect sizes)
- "Conditional acceptance — what do I deposit?" → `jm-submission` / `jm-data-analysis` (JM Dataverse packet)
- "Got an R&R" → `jm-review-process` then `jm-rebuttal`

## Difference vs. JMR / Marketing Science / JCR stacks

- **JM**: substantive insight into real-world marketing questions *with managerial/policy/societal relevance*; "big tent" empirics-first; AMA/SAGE; 50-page inclusive limit; ScholarOne at mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ama_jm.
- **JMR** (AMA/SAGE sister journal): methods-forward empirical rigor — measurement, models, methods; route quant-methods-driven work here.
- **Marketing Science** (INFORMS): analytical, game-theoretic, and structural modeling — route modeling-for-its-own-sake here.
- **JCR** (Oxford UP / ACR): interdisciplinary consumer-behavior theory.

If your paper centers on a modeling/methods advance rather than a substantive marketing insight, JM is the wrong venue.

## Anti-patterns

- **Do not** skip `jm-contribution-framing` — JM rejects work with no managerial/societal relevance.
- **Do not** dress up a new-context replication as a contribution.
- **Do not** let complex analysis substitute for an important, substantive question.
- **Do not** let `jm-rebuttal` draft a response letter before the manuscript is actually revised.