Menu

Individual skill

humrel-literature-positioning

0upvotes

Use when staking a Human Relations (HR) manuscript's contribution against the relevant scholarly conversation and adjacent journals. Positions the paper; it does not develop the theory or run analysis.

Human-Relations-Skills/skills/humrel-literature-positioning/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
No
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
Yes
Observed behavior
Not checked yet
Last checked
Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
1,413
Repository last updated
Sep 27, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# Literature Positioning (humrel-literature-positioning)

## When to trigger

- The theory exists (from `humrel-theory-development`) but its novelty *relative to the conversation* is fuzzy
- Your literature review is an annotated bibliography, not an argument that creates a gap
- A reviewer says "this has been done," or cannot tell what is new versus prior work
- The paper could plausibly be read as an OS, JMS, AMJ, WES, or Organization paper and you must show why it is HR

## Position against a *conversation*, not a topic pile

HR expects the literature to be marshalled into an **argument that earns the contribution**. The journal's own guidance is to "review recent issues to ensure that you are connecting to any relevant works in ways that take the conversation forward." So:

- Identify the **specific conversation** (e.g., identity work under precarity; algorithmic control; emotion and care work; institutional maintenance) and its **current settled view**.
Back to top