From amj-skills
Designs the causal research design for AMJ-management manuscripts — matching method (archival, survey, experiment, multi-method) to theoretical questions. Addresses common-method bias, endogeneity, and measurement threats before data collection.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/amj-skills:amj-methodsThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- The design may not match the theory's level, timing, or causal claim
AMJ explicitly welcomes all empirical methods — qualitative, quantitative, field, laboratory, meta-analytic, and mixed. The bar is fit and rigor, not a single preferred method, and qualitative designs are held to an equally demanding standard (the Eisenhardt multiple-case approach and the Gioia methodology for grounded qualitative rigor are the field's reference points).
| Theoretical claim | Design that earns it |
|---|---|
| Causal effect of a manipulable cause | Experiment (lab/field/online), or natural experiment |
| Process unfolding over time | Multi-wave panel; longitudinal/lagged design |
| Firm/strategy outcomes from archival cause | Panel archival with fixed effects + endogeneity strategy |
| Cross-level mechanism (e.g., team→indiv.) | Multilevel/nested data with HLM-appropriate structure |
| Rich, novel, or contested phenomenon | Qualitative or multi-method (often paired with a study 2) |
A two-study design (e.g., field study for generalizability + experiment for causal mechanism) is a common AMJ strength — it answers both internal and external validity.
State the level for theory, measurement, and analysis, and keep them aligned. If theory is at the team level but data are individual, justify aggregation; if effects are cross-level, the analysis must model the nesting (do not run OLS on nested data).
【Design】experiment / panel-archival / multilevel survey / qualitative / multi-method
【Hypothesis-design fit】each H testable? notes ...
【CMB plan】procedural remedies ...
【Endogeneity strategy】(if archival) instrument / NE / FE / DiD / matching ...
【Measures】validated? new (piloted)? CFA planned?
【Levels】theory / measurement / analysis aligned? aggregation justification ...
【Power & sampling】frame, N, power for interactions ...
【Next step】amj-data-analysis
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin amj-skillsDesigns Journal of Management Studies manuscripts by matching research design (qualitative case/ethnography, process/longitudinal, survey, archival, experiment, multi-method) to theoretical questions, with first-class qualitative rigor.
Helps match research design to theoretical claims for JOM manuscripts — construct validity, common-method bias, endogeneity, multilevel structure, and meta-analysis coding protocols.
Runs and reports statistical analysis for AMJ manuscripts: measurement validity (CFA, reliability), estimator selection (HLM, SEM, panel, experiments), common-method bias, endogeneity, and robustness checks.