Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› journal-of-operations-management
journal-of-operations-management
GitHub用于评估操作与供应链管理实证论文是否适合投稿JOM期刊。提供选题匹配、理论贡献构建、方法论严谨性审查（问卷/档案/行为实验）、写作规范及拒稿风险预警，辅助作者进行投稿决策与稿件重构。
Trigger Scenarios
作者明确指定目标期刊为Journal of Operations Management (JOM)
需判断实证型运营管理或供应链研究是否符合该顶级实证期刊定位
建模或描述性论文需重构为具备实证理论贡献的稿件
提交前需了解JOM的拒稿陷阱并获取替代期刊建议
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill journal-of-operations-management -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "journal-of-operations-management",
"description": "Use when targeting Journal of Operations Management (JOM) or deciding whether an empirical \/ survey-based \/ behavioral operations-and-supply-chain manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, method-and-evidence bar, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics."
}
Journal of Operations Management (journal-of-operations-management)
Journal positioning
The Journal of Operations Management (JOM) is a leading empirical home for operations and supply-chain management research, with a long tradition of survey-based, behavioral, and theory-driven empirical work. It is OM's empirical flagship in the way M&SOM anchors analytical OM: JOM rewards papers that test or build operations theory with strong primary or secondary data, and it takes construct measurement and research design seriously. This is the OM "JOM" — distinct from the management Journal of Management. The readership is the empirical OM and SCM community.
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 publisher's JOM site and the editorial submission system.
When to trigger
- The author names JOM (the operations-management journal, not the management Journal of Management) as the venue.
- An empirical, survey-based, behavioral, or theory-testing OM/SCM paper needs an empirical OM flagship.
- A modeling-heavy or descriptive operations paper needs re-framing around an empirical theoretical contribution.
- The author needs JOM's desk-reject risks and a credible OM / MS alternative list before submitting.
Scope & topic fit
- Empirical operations and supply-chain management: sourcing, supplier relationships, operations strategy, quality, and process management.
- Survey-based research with rigorous construct development and measurement.
- Behavioral operations: experiments and field studies on operational decision-making.
- Theory-driven empirical work using secondary/archival data, with identification appropriate to the operations question.
Method & evidence bar
- Theory-driven empirics: the paper must develop and test operations theory, not just report associations; hypotheses (or an inductive model) follow explicit logic.
- Survey work needs validated constructs, attention to common-method bias, reliability/validity evidence, and a defensible sampling frame.
- Archival/secondary-data work needs credible identification (DiD/IV/RDD/experiments) and robustness.
- Behavioral studies need adequate power, sound design, and replicability; measurement and manipulation checks must be reported.
Structure & house style
- The front end frames an operations theoretical gap and develops hypotheses or a grounded model with explicit logic.
- Methods sections are transparent about constructs, measurement, sampling, and identification; appendices carry scales and robustness.
- Results report operational magnitudes and effect sizes, not only significance; the discussion cashes in the theoretical and managerial contribution.
- Writing emphasizes the contribution to OM theory and practice.
Official-submission checklist
- Before giving submission-ready advice, read
../../resources/source-basis.mdand../../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 "Journal of Operations Management author guidelines / information for authors" and follow the current publisher version.
- Re-check word/length limits, abstract format, anonymization for double-blind review, reference style, and structured-abstract requirements if any.
- Re-check the current open-science, data/code availability, 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 operations-management theory.
- Hypotheses (or the inductive model) follow from explicit theoretical logic.
- Constructs are validated; common-method bias and identification concerns are addressed to current standards.
- Results report operational magnitudes; the discussion states theory and practice contributions.
- Length, abstract, anonymization, references, and open-science policy match the current JOM guide.
Common desk-reject triggers
- An atheoretical empirical study ("a survey of practice X in industry Y") with no OM theoretical contribution.
- Weak construct validity, unaddressed common-method bias, or no identification for causal claims.
- A purely analytical / optimization paper with no empirical OM contribution.
- Confusing JOM (operations) with the management Journal of Management in scope and framing.
Re-routing decision
- Analytical OM theory and models (supply chain, inventory, service, revenue management) →
manufacturing-and-service-operations-management. - Broad OM with society audience, sustainability/healthcare operations, analytical or empirical →
production-and-operations-management. - Broad management insight or empirics across subfields →
management-science(choose the right department). - OR methodology / optimization for its own sake →
operations-research; computational →informs-journal-on-computing.
Output format
[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] Journal of Operations Management
[Topic tags] <2–3 closest topics>
[Method/evidence] <does the theory-driven empirical design clear JOM's bar?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <submission system / length / blinding / open-science / data-code>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 13:10
