Stats
Actions
Tags
From msom-skills
Explains M&SOM's review process: department routing, DE/AE/referee chain, double-anonymous review, special tracks (OM Forum, Practice Platform, Grand Challenges), and reading decision letters.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/msom-skills:msom-review-processThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- You want to set realistic expectations before submitting to M&SOM
M&SOM uses an author-driven version of departmental routing. You choose a primary Department and name two preferred Department Editors; the manuscript is then handled by a Department Editor (DE), who assigns an Associate Editor (AE), who recruits referees. The stable routing frame is organized around Manufacturing & Supply Chain Operations, Services/Platforms/Revenue Management, Environment/Health/Society, Operational Innovation, Analytics in OM, and Practice Platform; the current editorial-board page also lists AI in Operations and Outreach groups. Because routing is by department, matching the right department is as consequential as the paper's quality — a misrouted paper meets the wrong expertise.
Review is double-anonymous: authors and referees are blind to each other. Author identities are known only to the Editor-in-Chief, the DE, the AE, and editorial staff, and remain confidential to referees. This is why anonymization (see msom-submission) is strictly enforced.
Decisions weigh importance, originality, clarity, validity, and relevance, gated by the operations-centrality requirement. Beyond standard research articles, M&SOM institutionalizes practice and perspective:
Editor context: Georgia Perakis (MIT) is listed as Editor-in-Chief on the 2026-06-20 M&SOM pages; INFORMS announced that her final term expires 31 December 2026 and that the search committee aims to propose a successor by 1 July 2026. Check the editorial-board page before naming current DEs or AEs in a submission plan.
A desk reject on "fit" usually means the operations decision is a backdrop; an "incremental" reject means structure was proven but no managerial insight attached; an "identification" reject means endogenous operations were treated as exogenous; a perspective piece judged as a research article was on the wrong track (it belongs in OM Forum). M&SOM is the INFORMS MSOM-Society journal for the operations management of manufacturing and service systems, so a contribution a practitioner can use is the bar.
Vignette: a paper on warehouse pick-path optimization is submitted to "Analytics in OM." Two referees split: one praises the method, the other notes the warehouse layout is treated as fixed when it is in fact a managed decision. The AE flags layout endogeneity as the binding item and asks for a clearer takeaway. Reading the letter correctly means treating the AE's items — not the referee's praise — as the contract, then switching into msom-rebuttal.
【Department / role chain】DE → AE → referees ...
【Review model】double-anonymous; anonymization OK? ...
【Track】standard / OM Forum / Practice Platform / Grand Challenges ...
【Decision parsed】DE-AE priorities vs. referee points ...
【Next step】on R&R → msom-rebuttal
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin msom-skillsRoutes manuscript work for Manufacturing & Service Operations Management (M&SOM) submissions by directing to the appropriate sub-skill based on current stage or bottleneck.
Explains the Management Science (INFORMS) review pipeline: desk screening, double-anonymous refereeing, cross-department fit standards, turnaround targets, and how to interpret decision letters.
Explains Production and Operations Management (POM) journal review process: department editor screening, double-blind review, rigor-and-practice evaluation, and the no-resubmission-after-rejection rule.