Individual skill
asq-literature-positioning
Use when situating an Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ) manuscript within organization-theory conversations and sharpening the gap/tension it addresses. Positions the argument; it does not develop the core theory or write the methods.
Administrative-Science-Quarterly-Skills/skills/asq-literature-positioning/SKILL.md
Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- Yes
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Network or broad shell
- 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)
- 1,404
- Repository last updated
- Sep 27, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- academic-writing Repository topic
- agent-skills Repository topic
- journal Repository topic
- academic-research Repository topic
- ai-agents Repository topic
- anthropic Repository topic
- awesome-list Repository topic
- claude Repository topic
- claude-code Repository topic
- economics Repository topic
- research Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 4,606 bytes
Read excerpt
# Literature Positioning (asq-literature-positioning)
## When to trigger
- Your literature section reads as an annotated list rather than an argument
- You cite many works but are in *dialogue* with none of them
- You cannot name the specific scholarly conversation you are joining
- Reviewers say you "missed the relevant literature" or "misframed the contribution"
## Join a conversation, don't survey a field
ASQ readers are organization theorists. They expect you to enter a **specific, identifiable conversation** and advance it. The literature section is an *argument that creates the space* for your contribution — not a comprehensive survey.
Steps: