JAMS Workflow Router (jams-workflow)
Overview
This is the router. It tells you which jams- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS) — the flagship journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (AMS), published by Springer (ISSN 0092-0703 print / 1552-7824 online; bimonthly). JAMS is the broad marketing-science outlet: marketing strategy, B2B/industrial marketing, services, retailing, channels, sales, branding, innovation, the marketing–finance interface, and consumer behavior. Its defining tradition is managerial relevance married to strong method — every paper is expected to advance theory and tell a manager (or policy maker) something they can act on.
Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as JAMS. Operational tells that you are at JAMS and not a sibling: submission runs through Springer Editorial Manager; review is double-anonymized (fully blinded manuscript + separate title page with ORCID); the house citation style is APA; and the contribution test is explicitly dual — theory contribution and "what should a manager do." Co-Editors-in-Chief Stephanie M. Noble and Charles H. Noble (University of Tennessee, since June 2024) lead the journal (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准). Re-verify volatile specifics on the Springer journal page (link.springer.com/journal/11747).
When to trigger
- The user asks "what should I do next?" on a JAMS-bound paper
- A draft needs its current bottleneck diagnosed
- Work is ping-ponging between framing, theory, design, evidence, exhibits, and the response letter
- A JAMS decision letter arrived and the user needs to switch into revision mode
- The team is unsure whether the paper belongs at JAMS vs. JM, JMR, Marketing Science, or JCR
Routing table
| Current symptom |
Next skill |
| Scope/outlet fit uncertain; not clearly a broad marketing-science question |
jams-topic-selection |
| The conceptual framework / mechanism is thin or borrowed |
jams-theory-development |
| Contribution vs. the marketing literature is fuzzy or oversold |
jams-literature-positioning |
| Construct validity, design, or identification need alignment to the claim |
jams-methods |
| Estimation (SEM/PLS/HLM/regression/experiment/meta) needs work |
jams-data-analysis |
| The theory and managerial "so what" are not both sharp |
jams-contribution-framing |
| Exhibits are dense; tables do not answer the question |
jams-tables-figures |
| Intro/abstract/prose bury the idea or miss the JAMS voice |
jams-writing-style |
| Editorial Manager preflight: blinding, APA, files, statements |
jams-submission |
| Want to understand the developmental review timeline / decisions |
jams-review-process |
| Received an R&R; need a response-letter strategy |
jams-rebuttal |
Default order
jams-topic-selection — lock the broad, managerially consequential marketing question
jams-theory-development — build the conceptual framework and mechanism
jams-literature-positioning — stake the contribution against the marketing canon
jams-methods — match construct validity and design to the claim
jams-data-analysis — SEM/PLS/HLM/regression/experiment/meta, done right
jams-contribution-framing — the dual theory + managerial contribution
jams-tables-figures — exhibits that answer the question
jams-writing-style — make the idea land (abstract + intro last)
jams-submission — Editorial Manager preflight (blinding, APA, statements)
jams-review-process — calibrate the developmental-review timeline
jams-rebuttal — after the R&R
jams-writing-style is late-stage polish; do not rewrite the intro before theory, design, and the managerial takeaway settle.
Routing by paper archetype
JAMS spans several genres, and the binding constraint differs by genre. Read the archetype, then enter the chain at the right link.
| Archetype |
Likely first bottleneck |
Enter at |
| Survey + SEM/PLS (strategy, B2B, services) |
construct validity, CMV, discriminant validity |
jams-methods → jams-data-analysis |
| Secondary-data econometrics (scanner, CRM, finance interface) |
causal identification / endogeneity |
jams-methods (identification) → jams-data-analysis |
| Behavioral experiment |
manipulation validity, mediation, mechanism |
jams-methods → jams-data-analysis |
| Meta-analysis |
sampling frame, coding reliability, moderators |
jams-methods → jams-data-analysis |
| Conceptual / framework paper |
a genuinely new framework, not a literature recap |
jams-theory-development → jams-contribution-framing |
Worked routing example (illustrative)
A user says: "My survey SEM fits well and all paths are significant, but a reviewer says the contribution is a new-context replication and the managerial implications are generic." That is two distinct JAMS pushbacks. The contribution challenge is owned by jams-literature-positioning (find the live gap) and jams-contribution-framing (state the dual contribution and defend against "incremental"); the generic-managerial-implication challenge is owned by jams-contribution-framing and jams-writing-style (rewrite the implications section with decisions and magnitudes). A good fit also routes through jams-data-analysis to make sure each path has a managerial magnitude to cite. Note what is not the bottleneck here: the measurement model already fits, so do not start by re-running the SEM.
Minimal decision snippet
if decision_letter_arrived: -> jams-rebuttal
elif ready_to_submit: -> jams-submission
elif exhibits_unclear: -> jams-tables-figures
elif estimation_or_validity: -> jams-data-analysis / jams-methods
elif contribution_or_positioning: -> jams-contribution-framing / jams-literature-positioning
elif theory_thin: -> jams-theory-development
else: -> jams-topic-selection
Anti-patterns
- Treating JAMS as interchangeable with JM (AMA strategy outlet), JMR (methods/measurement), Marketing Science (analytical modeling), or JCR (consumer/interpretive)
- Polishing prose before the theory, design, and managerial takeaway are stable
- Skipping the managerial contribution and submitting a "theory only" paper — JAMS reviewers ask for both
- Letting
jams-tables-figures polish exhibits while estimation is still moving
- Quoting volatile process facts (fees, limits, editors) as permanent rather than re-verifying
Output format
【Target】Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS)
【Archetype】survey-SEM / secondary-data / experiment / meta-analysis / conceptual
【Current bottleneck】fit / theory / positioning / design / evidence / exhibits / style / submission / revision
【Next skill】<one jams-* skill>
【Reason】why this step is the binding constraint
【Source check】official facts verified or marked 待核实 / 检索于 2026-06
1---2name: jams-workflow3description: Use when deciding which jams-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from question to rebuttal for a Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.4---56# JAMS Workflow Router (jams-workflow)78## Overview910This is the router. It tells you **which jams-* skill to use at the current stage** of a manuscript aimed at the *Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science* (JAMS) — the flagship journal of the **Academy of Marketing Science (AMS)**, published by **Springer** (ISSN 0092-0703 print / 1552-7824 online; bimonthly). JAMS is the broad **marketing-science** outlet: marketing strategy, B2B/industrial marketing, services, retailing, channels, sales, branding, innovation, the marketing–finance interface, and consumer behavior. Its defining tradition is **managerial relevance married to strong method** — every paper is expected to advance theory *and* tell a manager (or policy maker) something they can act on.1112Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as JAMS. Operational tells that you are at JAMS and not a sibling: submission runs through **Springer Editorial Manager**; review is **double-anonymized** (fully blinded manuscript + separate title page with ORCID); the house citation style is **APA**; and the contribution test is explicitly **dual** — theory contribution *and* "what should a manager do." Co-Editors-in-Chief Stephanie M. Noble and Charles H. Noble (University of Tennessee, since June 2024) lead the journal (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准). Re-verify volatile specifics on the Springer journal page (link.springer.com/journal/11747).1314## When to trigger1516- The user asks "what should I do next?" on a JAMS-bound paper17- A draft needs its current bottleneck diagnosed18- Work is ping-ponging between framing, theory, design, evidence, exhibits, and the response letter19- A JAMS decision letter arrived and the user needs to switch into revision mode20- The team is unsure whether the paper belongs at JAMS vs. JM, JMR, Marketing Science, or JCR2122## Routing table2324| Current symptom | Next skill |25|-----------------|------------|26| Scope/outlet fit uncertain; not clearly a broad marketing-science question | `jams-topic-selection` |27| The conceptual framework / mechanism is thin or borrowed | `jams-theory-development` |28| Contribution vs. the marketing literature is fuzzy or oversold | `jams-literature-positioning` |29| Construct validity, design, or identification need alignment to the claim | `jams-methods` |30| Estimation (SEM/PLS/HLM/regression/experiment/meta) needs work | `jams-data-analysis` |31| The theory **and** managerial "so what" are not both sharp | `jams-contribution-framing` |32| Exhibits are dense; tables do not answer the question | `jams-tables-figures` |33| Intro/abstract/prose bury the idea or miss the JAMS voice | `jams-writing-style` |34| Editorial Manager preflight: blinding, APA, files, statements | `jams-submission` |35| Want to understand the developmental review timeline / decisions | `jams-review-process` |36| Received an R&R; need a response-letter strategy | `jams-rebuttal` |3738## Default order39401. `jams-topic-selection` — lock the broad, managerially consequential marketing question412. `jams-theory-development` — build the conceptual framework and mechanism423. `jams-literature-positioning` — stake the contribution against the marketing canon434. `jams-methods` — match construct validity and design to the claim445. `jams-data-analysis` — SEM/PLS/HLM/regression/experiment/meta, done right456. `jams-contribution-framing` — the dual theory + managerial contribution467. `jams-tables-figures` — exhibits that answer the question478. `jams-writing-style` — make the idea land (abstract + intro last)489. `jams-submission` — Editorial Manager preflight (blinding, APA, statements)4910. `jams-review-process` — calibrate the developmental-review timeline5011. `jams-rebuttal` — after the R&R5152> `jams-writing-style` is late-stage polish; do not rewrite the intro before theory, design, and the managerial takeaway settle.5354## Routing by paper archetype5556JAMS spans several genres, and the binding constraint differs by genre. Read the archetype, then enter the chain at the right link.5758| Archetype | Likely first bottleneck | Enter at |59|-----------|-------------------------|----------|60| Survey + SEM/PLS (strategy, B2B, services) | construct validity, CMV, discriminant validity | `jams-methods` → `jams-data-analysis` |61| Secondary-data econometrics (scanner, CRM, finance interface) | causal identification / endogeneity | `jams-methods` (identification) → `jams-data-analysis` |62| Behavioral experiment | manipulation validity, mediation, mechanism | `jams-methods` → `jams-data-analysis` |63| Meta-analysis | sampling frame, coding reliability, moderators | `jams-methods` → `jams-data-analysis` |64| Conceptual / framework paper | a genuinely new framework, not a literature recap | `jams-theory-development` → `jams-contribution-framing` |6566## Worked routing example (illustrative)6768A user says: "My survey SEM fits well and all paths are significant, but a reviewer says the contribution is a new-context replication and the managerial implications are generic." That is two distinct JAMS pushbacks. The contribution challenge is owned by `jams-literature-positioning` (find the live gap) and `jams-contribution-framing` (state the dual contribution and defend against "incremental"); the generic-managerial-implication challenge is owned by `jams-contribution-framing` and `jams-writing-style` (rewrite the implications section with decisions and magnitudes). A good fit also routes through `jams-data-analysis` to make sure each path has a managerial magnitude to cite. Note what is *not* the bottleneck here: the measurement model already fits, so do not start by re-running the SEM.6970## Minimal decision snippet7172```73if decision_letter_arrived: -> jams-rebuttal74elif ready_to_submit: -> jams-submission75elif exhibits_unclear: -> jams-tables-figures76elif estimation_or_validity: -> jams-data-analysis / jams-methods77elif contribution_or_positioning: -> jams-contribution-framing / jams-literature-positioning78elif theory_thin: -> jams-theory-development79else: -> jams-topic-selection80```8182## Anti-patterns8384- Treating JAMS as interchangeable with JM (AMA strategy outlet), JMR (methods/measurement), Marketing Science (analytical modeling), or JCR (consumer/interpretive)85- Polishing prose before the theory, design, and managerial takeaway are stable86- Skipping the managerial contribution and submitting a "theory only" paper — JAMS reviewers ask for both87- Letting `jams-tables-figures` polish exhibits while estimation is still moving88- Quoting volatile process facts (fees, limits, editors) as permanent rather than re-verifying8990## Output format9192```text93【Target】Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS)94【Archetype】survey-SEM / secondary-data / experiment / meta-analysis / conceptual95【Current bottleneck】fit / theory / positioning / design / evidence / exhibits / style / submission / revision96【Next skill】<one jams-* skill>97【Reason】why this step is the binding constraint98【Source check】official facts verified or marked 待核实 / 检索于 2026-0699```