Menu

Individual skill

jmgmt-theory-development

0upvotes

Use when the theoretical argument is the bottleneck for a Journal of Management (JOM) manuscript — building constructs, mechanisms, boundary conditions, and a priori hypotheses (or a review's organizing framework). Constructs the theory; it does not run the analysis (jmgmt-data-analysis) or write the contribution paragraph (jmgmt-contribution-framing).

Journal-of-Management-Skills/skills/jmgmt-theory-development/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)
1,411
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

# Theory Development (jmgmt-theory-development)

## When to trigger

- Hypotheses read as bald predictions ("A is positively related to B") with no mechanism
- You have results and are tempted to write hypotheses around them (HARKing risk)
- The argument leans on one borrowed theory name (e.g., "social exchange") without using its logic
- Mediators/moderators sit in the data but are not theorized
- A meta-analysis or review needs an **organizing framework**, not just a coding scheme
- A reviewer says "the theory is thin," "underdeveloped," or "why would this be true?"

## The JOM theory bar

JOM publishes empirical, theoretical, *and* review work, but in every case the **theoretical contribution is the gate**. For an empirical paper, each hypothesis must be **derived from an articulated mechanism, before the results are known**, and a reader should finish the front end understanding *why* the effect occurs and *under what conditions* it strengthens or reverses. For a **meta-analysis**, the synthesis must be organized by theory so that moderators *adjudicate* competing accounts — JOM does not reward a coefficient census. For a **systematic review** (Review Issue), the deliverable is an integrative framework plus a forward agenda; a chronological catalogue is desk-rejected.
Back to top