--- name: organization-studies description: Use when targeting Organization Studies (OS) or deciding whether a European organization-theory / process / institutional / critical manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, method-and-evidence bar, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics. --- # Organization Studies (organization-studies) ## Journal positioning Organization Studies (OS) is the flagship journal of the European Group for Organizational Studies (EGOS), published by SAGE, and the leading home for European organization theory. Its intellectual center is theoretical sophistication and qualitative depth: process theorizing, institutional theory, organizational discourse and sensemaking, practice perspectives, and critical approaches to organizations. OS rewards conceptual ambition and craft over technique; it is not an outlet for variance-model hypothesis testing or applied managerial prescriptions. The audience is organization theorists, many in the European tradition, so a paper must offer a genuine theoretical contribution to how we understand organizing. This skill is a **fit / venue-selection / re-framing** tool. It does not replace the journal's current official submission guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live author instructions on the EGOS / Organization Studies / SAGE site and the submission system. ## When to trigger - The author names Organization Studies / OS (or the EGOS / European organization-theory tradition) as the venue. - A paper makes a process, institutional, discursive, or critical theoretical contribution, usually through qualitative depth. - A theory-rich qualitative study needs a home that values interpretive and critical scholarship. - The author needs OS's desk-reject risks and a credible `administrative-science-quarterly` / `human-relations` / `journal-of-management-studies` alternative list. ## Scope & topic fit - Process and practice theorizing; institutional theory and institutional work; organizational identity, sensemaking, and discourse. - Critical management and organization studies; power, control, and the politics of organizing. - Qualitative, ethnographic, historical, and interpretive research with theoretical ambition. - Conceptual papers that develop or reorient organization theory in the European tradition. ## Method & evidence bar - The theoretical contribution to organization theory is the gate; method serves the argument. - Qualitative and interpretive craft is high — immersive fieldwork, transparent analysis, and a compelling, reflexive data-to-theory path are expected. - Theory and evidence must be deeply integrated; thin theorizing bolted onto rich data will not pass. - Critical and process work must be rigorous and grounded in scholarship, not polemical. ## Structure & house style - The front end develops a theoretical problem with conceptual ambition and engages a live theoretical conversation. - Qualitative papers present a transparent, reflexive analytic narrative rather than a variance-model setup. - The discussion is substantial and states the contribution to organization theory and its broader implications. - OS prizes elegant, scholarly, theoretically literate prose; framing reflects European organization-studies sensibilities. ## Official-submission checklist - Before giving submission-ready advice, read `../../resources/source-basis.md` and `../../resources/official-source-map.md`; start from the official source anchors for this journal family, then cite the current journal-specific page you checked. - Search the live site for "Organization Studies submission guidelines / SAGE author guidelines" and follow the current version. - Re-check word/length limits, abstract format, anonymization for double-blind review, reference style, and any essay/conceptual article-type rules. - Re-check current open-science, data-transparency (as appropriate for qualitative work), and AI-use disclosure policies. - If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win. ## Pre-submission self-check - [ ] One sentence stating the contribution to organization theory in the process/institutional/critical tradition. - [ ] The qualitative/interpretive craft is transparent, reflexive, and meets OS standards. - [ ] Theory and evidence are deeply integrated; the theorizing is the contribution. - [ ] The paper engages a live theoretical debate, not an applied managerial question. - [ ] Framing, references, and anonymization match the current OS guide. ## Common desk-reject triggers - A variance-model, hypotheses-and-regressions study with no process/interpretive theorizing. - An applied or managerial-prescription paper with no theoretical contribution. - Rich data with thin or generic theory; or critical claims that are polemical rather than scholarly. - A US-style empirical paper that ignores the European organization-theory conversation. ## Re-routing decision - US-style theory-driven hypothesis testing → `academy-of-management-journal`; sociology-of-organizations craft at top selectivity → `administrative-science-quarterly`. - Multidisciplinary org theory including computational/quantitative → `organization-science`; theory-development with pluralistic methods → `journal-of-management-studies`. - Pure conceptual theory → `academy-of-management-review`; integrative review → `academy-of-management-annals`. - Interdisciplinary critical/qualitative social science of work → `human-relations`; broad management empirics → `journal-of-management-en`; strategy → `strategic-management-journal`; entrepreneurship → `entrepreneurship-theory-and-practice`. ## Output format ```text [Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason) [Target] Organization Studies [Topic tags] <2–3 closest topics> [Method/evidence] [Top risk] [Official items to re-check] [Re-route suggestion] ```