Menu

Individual skill

amann-workflow

0upvotes

Use when deciding which amann-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a comprehensive review article from topic selection through revision for an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.

Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-workflow/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)
1,410
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

# Annals Workflow Router (amann-workflow)

## Overview

This is the router. It tells you **which amann-* skill to use at the current stage** of a **comprehensive, integrative review article** aimed at the *Academy of Management Annals* (Annals) — the Academy of Management's **review-of-the-field journal**, published with Taylor & Francis. Annals does **not** publish original empirical research or stand-alone new theory; it publishes **authoritative, theory-advancing reviews** that synthesize a management/organization literature. Its mission is "up-to-date, in-depth and integrative reviews of research advances in management," and its house identity is **"reviews with an attitude"**: a review must take a critical, integrative stance and set an agenda, not merely catalog papers (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).

So the lifecycle is not "design → identify → estimate → defend." It is **judge whether a literature is Annals-scale → write the ≤5-page proposal (the gate) → if invited, read the whole literature → impose a novel organizing framework → appraise the evidence even-handedly → build synthesis exhibits → land the Annals voice → develop the full review through the editor-only process.** The single binding constraint at every step is the same: **does this review create a new way of seeing the field?** A review that summarizes accurately but reorganizes nothing is the canonical Annals reject.

Default assumption: unless told otherwise, treat the target as Annals and the artefact as a **comprehensive review**, not a primary paper. Tells that you are at Annals and not a sibling: the work **synthesizes other people's research** rather than reporting your own; the first deliverable is a **short proposal under a twice-yearly deadline**, not a full draft; there is **no hypothesis test or dataset of your own** — you appraise the studies you cover; the contribution is an **integrative map and agenda for a field**. If the user has original theory, route to **AMR**; original data, route to **AMJ** — say so.

## When to trigger

- The user asks "what should I do next?" on a review article
- A review draft reads like an annotated bibliography and needs an organizing spine
Back to top