smj-workflow

Strategic Management Journal Workflow (smj-workflow)

Overview

This is the router. It does not do the work of any specialized skill — it tells you which smj- skill to use right now* given where your manuscript stands.

Default assumption: unless you say otherwise, the target is the Strategic Management Journal (SMJ) — the flagship strategy journal published by Wiley for the Strategic Management Society (SMS), founded 1980 and led by four Co-Editors (current slate, pinned 2026-06-23: Agarwal, Benner, Gaba, and Silverman; roster rotates, so verify the live SMS masthead). SMJ wants a clear contribution to strategy theory (firm performance, competitive advantage) backed by rigorous, identification-aware empirics. It is highly selective (third-party estimates ~7% acceptance — UNVERIFIED), uses double-blind review, and requires two abstracts (research summary + managerial summary, ≤125 words each), five keywords, and APA references within a ~40-page budget. Generic "management" framing and unaddressed endogeneity are the two fastest paths to rejection. If the paper's engine is entrepreneurship or internationalization, the SMS siblings SEJ or GSJ may fit better than SMJ.

When to trigger

• "What should I do next?" on an SMJ-targeted paper
• You have a draft and need to find the binding constraint
• You keep bouncing between theory, methods, and writing without a plan
• You received SMJ reviewer comments and need to switch into revision mode

Routing table

Default order

1. smj-topic-selection — lock the strategy question (performance / competitive advantage)
2. smj-theory-development — build the theoretical mechanism and hypotheses
3. smj-literature-positioning — position against the live strategy conversation
4. smj-methods — sample, unit of analysis, measures, identification design
5. smj-data-analysis — estimate, and explicitly defeat endogeneity / selection / reverse causality
6. smj-contribution-framing — sharpen the contribution to strategy theory
7. smj-tables-figures — finalize self-contained exhibits
8. smj-writing-style — full-draft polish (do this late)
9. smj-submission — preflight (dual abstracts, 5 keywords, APA, page budget, anonymization)
10. smj-review-process — understand what happens after submission (Co-Editor screen → action editor)
11. smj-rebuttal — after the R&R decision

smj-writing-style is a late-stage polish. Do not polish prose while the identification strategy or the theoretical contribution is still unsettled.

Decision heuristics

• "I have data but no strategy story" → smj-topic-selection
• "My hypotheses are just signed correlations" → smj-theory-development
• "My intro never names whose conversation I'm joining" → smj-literature-positioning
• "My DV is firm performance and my X is a strategic choice" → smj-data-analysis (selection into the choice is the #1 threat)
• "A reviewer could say 'this is management, not strategy'" → smj-contribution-framing
• "I have nine tables" → smj-tables-figures
• "I submit tomorrow" → smj-submission
• "I got a Major Revision" → smj-review-process then smj-rebuttal

Stage-gate triage

Run the gates top to bottom; the first FAIL names the skill to invoke today. Do not skip ahead — a later gate passed on top of an earlier failure is wasted polish.

SMJ stage-gate triage — first FAIL wins
GATE 1  Strategy DV     dependent construct ties to firm performance
                        or competitive advantage?                        FAIL → smj-topic-selection
GATE 2  Mechanism       each hypothesis states WHY, not just a sign?     FAIL → smj-theory-development
GATE 3  Conversation    intro names the strategy debate it joins?        FAIL → smj-literature-positioning
GATE 4  Design          unit of analysis, sample, measures,
                        identification plan all fixed?                   FAIL → smj-methods
GATE 5  Endogeneity     selection into the strategic choice and
                        reverse causality explicitly defeated?           FAIL → smj-data-analysis
GATE 6  So-what         contribution to strategy theory statable
                        in two sentences?                                FAIL → smj-contribution-framing
GATE 7  Exhibits        every table self-contained; a path/effect
                        figure carries the argument?                     FAIL → smj-tables-figures
GATE 8  Prose           argument visible on a skim; hedging and
                        jargon trimmed?                                  FAIL → smj-writing-style
GATE 9  Preflight       two abstracts (research + managerial,
                        <=125 words each), 5 keywords, APA refs,
                        ~40-page budget, anonymized for
                        double-blind review?                             FAIL → smj-submission
ALL PASS → submit; then smj-review-process, and smj-rebuttal when the decision arrives

Differences vs. AMJ / ASQ / AMR stacks

If the paper's center of gravity is general organizational behavior, HRM, or micro-OB, the Academy of Management Journal stack fits better. If the contribution is purely conceptual with no data, use an AMR theory-only stack. SMJ's distinctive bar: the dependent construct should connect to firm performance or competitive advantage, and the empirics must survive an endogeneity interrogation.

Anti-patterns

• Do not skip smj-theory-development and jump to estimation — SMJ reviewers read theory first.
• Do not let smj-tables-figures polish exhibits before the identification strategy holds.
• Do not let smj-rebuttal draft a response letter before you have actually revised the manuscript.
• Do not treat this as a generic management workflow; every stage must reconnect to strategy.
• Do not forget SMJ's dual-abstract / 5-keyword / APA requirements until submission day, or route an SEJ/GSJ-shaped paper to SMJ.

Templates & resources

• ../../resources/official-source-map.md — SMJ scope, Co-Editors, dual-abstract/keyword/reference rules, and the SMS journal family
• ../../resources/external_tools.md — strategy data sources and analysis packages across the pipeline