From jom-skills
Guides the screening and routing of operations management research questions for JOM, testing operational fit, empirical mandate, theory contribution, and relevance, then assigning to one of 12 departments.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/jom-skills:jom-topic-selectionThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- You have an OM or supply-chain idea but are unsure it fits JOM rather than an analytical OM journal
JOM publishes original, empirical operations management research with academic and practical relevance, where operations are at the heart of the research question, not just in the context. Apply four screens before investing:
JOM routes every submission to one of 12 Departments, each with its own mission and Department Editors: Healthcare Operations; Innovation and Project Management; Inter-organizational Operations; Intervention Based Research; Operational Systems; Operations Interfaces; Public Policy and Industry Studies; Social Impact; Strategy and Organization; Sustainable Operations; Technology Management; and Empirical Research Methods. Decide early — at submission you must name two Departments, one preferred — because the Department frames who evaluates the contribution and which conversation you must join.
Run every candidate question through all four screens before investing. The gate below operationalizes JOM's stated scope; confirm Department fit against the current mission statements.
| Screen | Passes | Fails — and where it belongs instead |
|---|---|---|
| Operations-as-heart | Focal phenomenon is operations/supply-chain and the claim depends on it | Operations is backdrop → generic management/marketing outlet |
| Empirical mandate | Design observes data (survey/archival/field/case/experiment/IBR) | Pure model/optimization → operations research or analytical OM |
| Theory contribution | Engages and advances OM-relevant theory | Phenomenon-only description → needs a theory hook before submission |
| Practical relevance | Matters to managers of for-profit or nonprofit operations | No practitioner stake → reframe toward an operational decision |
A researcher wonders whether supplier sustainability audits reduce downstream disruptions (illustrative). Screen 1: the focal phenomenon is supply-chain disruption and the lever is an operational practice (audits) — operations is the heart, not context. Screen 2: it is observable via an archival panel of audit records and disruption events, so the empirical mandate is met. Screen 3: it can advance theory by testing whether audits work through capability-building or through deterrence — a mechanism contribution, not just an effect. Screen 4: managers decide audit frequency, so practical relevance is direct. Department routing: Sustainable Operations preferred, Inter-organizational Operations alternate. The idea clears all four screens, so it is JOM-fit; an optimization model of audit scheduling would not be.
【Operations-as-heart?】yes/no — focal OM phenomenon is ...
【Empirical?】design will observe ... (survey/archival/field/case/experiment/IBR)
【Theory hook】advances ...
【Practical relevance】matters because ...
【Department routing】preferred: ...; alternate: ...
【Verdict】JOM-fit / redirect to analytical OM venue / reframe
【Next step】jom-theory-development
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin jom-skillsGuides shaping and stress-testing a research question for M&SOM journal fit, including identifying the operations decision, choosing analytical vs. empirical lane, and matching to an editorial department.
Helps shape and stress-test research questions for Management Science (INFORMS) by confirming decision-relevance, selecting the correct Department, and checking fit against sister journals to avoid desk rejection.
Helps determine whether an empirical/survey-based/behavioral operations manuscript fits Journal of Operations Management, covering scope, method bar, house style, and desk-reject risks.