mw-workflow

Management World Workflow (mw-workflow)

Overview

This is a router; it does not replace any specialized Skill. It tells youwhich mw-* skill should be used at the current stage。

Default assumption: unless the user explicitly states that the target journal is not 《管理世界》, handle it according to the editorial board tastes of CSSCI / Peking University Core Tier 1 《管理世界》.

Trigger Timing

The user asks "What should I do next?"
The user sends over a draft, and the current bottleneck needs to be determined
Empirical work, writing, and responses keep switching back and forth, and the state is chaotic
External review comments from 《管理世界》 have been received, and it is necessary to switch to rebuttal mode

Routing Table

Current Symptom	Next Skill
The topic idea is vague, and it is uncertain whether it can aim for 《管理世界》	`mw-topic-selection`
The literature review does not know how to balance Chinese and international citations	`mw-literature-review`
The policy background is not explained clearly, and the perspective for overseas readers is insufficient	`mw-institutional-background`
The empirical work only has OLS, and there is concern that the identification strategy will not pass	`mw-identification`
The main results are available, but mechanisms / heterogeneity splits are missing	`mw-mechanism-heterogeneity`
Tables have too many columns / notes are not standardized / it does not look like 《管理世界》 style	`mw-tables-figures`
There are no policy implications at the end, or the policy recommendations are too empty	`mw-policy-implication`
Preparing to submit, and a checklist is needed	`mw-submission`
An R&R has been received, and a response letter needs to be written	`mw-rebuttal`
After conditional acceptance, a data and code replication package must be submitted	`mw-replication`

Default Order

For most empirical manuscripts submitted to 《管理世界》, follow this order:

mw-topic-selection — First lock down the "Chinese context + marginal contribution" sentence pattern
mw-literature-review — Give equal weight to Chinese and English literature reviews
mw-institutional-background — Policy / institutional section
mw-identification — Quasi-experimental identification
mw-mechanism-heterogeneity — Mechanisms + heterogeneity
mw-tables-figures — Finalize the main tables / main figures
mw-policy-implication — Layer the policy implications
mw-submission — Preflight before submission
mw-rebuttal — After external review
mw-replication — After conditional acceptance, submit the data and code package to the editorial office

Decision Mnemonics

Want to publish but cannot clearly explain "where the Chinese story is" → mw-topic-selection
The review is all English literature → mw-literature-review
The policy timeline is covered in only one sentence → mw-institutional-background
DID uses TWFE but does not respond to heterogeneous treatment → mw-identification
The mechanism only says "we believe it may be because..." → mw-mechanism-heterogeneity
The main table has 8 or more columns → mw-tables-figures
The policy recommendations only say "the government should pay attention" → mw-policy-implication
It must be submitted tomorrow → mw-submission
3 review comments have been received → mw-rebuttal
An acceptance notice has been received, and the editorial office wants data and code → mw-replication

Journal Routing Decision Table

《管理世界》 is sponsored by the Development Research Center of the State Council. It is a CSSCI authoritative top-tier comprehensive journal that gives equal weight to management and economics and serves major national strategies. When routing, in addition to determining the "current bottleneck," it is also necessary at each stage to ask whether it still serves the national strategic orientation and whether it maintains the Chinese context and policy anchor. The table below anchors the stage diagnosis signals in the context of this journal:

Stage Symptom (in this journal's context)	Routing Conclusion	Journal-Specific Gatekeeping Point
The topic cannot clearly state "which national strategy it serves"	`mw-topic-selection`	Four sentences on strategic relevance + marginal contribution
Absence of a review of domestic top-journal literature	`mw-literature-review`	Proportion of Chinese-language literature and dialogical engagement
Policy timeline mentioned in one sentence	`mw-institutional-background`	Institutional background as an independent section
Staggered DID without bias diagnosis	`mw-identification`	Heterogeneous treatment bias
Only saying "effective" without saying "why/for whom it is effective"	`mw-mechanism-heterogeneity`	Mechanism + stratified heterogeneity
Policy recommendations reduced to "recommend the government pay attention"	`mw-policy-implication`	Stratification + strategic alignment

Common rejection patterns (process level)

Rushing to beautify tables while the identification strategy is not yet established—putting the cart before the horse
Skipping institutional background and going straight to empirical work—this is one of the biggest differences between this journal and overseas journals
Writing the response letter before revising the main text, causing promises to diverge from the main text
Never linking back to national strategy and policy footholds throughout the process, ultimately making policy implications vague and empty

Mini walkthrough example: the routing of a first draft on digital transformation

A fictional user sends in a first draft, walked through according to the routing logic:

Current state: There are OLS main results + control variables, the institutional background is only one paragraph, there is no mechanism, and the policy recommendations are one sentence.
First diagnosis: The identification strategy is the weakest (OLS) → prioritize mw-identification, converting the "enterprise cloud adoption" pilot into a staggered DID.
Second diagnosis: The institutional background is not independent → mw-institutional-background add policy document numbers and a timeline table.
Third diagnosis: Missing mechanism → mw-mechanism-heterogeneity add the "digitalization→TFP" mediation and three-dimensional heterogeneity.
Fourth diagnosis: Policy recommendations are empty → mw-policy-implication rewrite the stratified recommendations and align them with the "Digital China" strategy.
Wrap-up：mw-tables-figures Finalize the main tables → mw-submission double-blind and plagiarism-check preflight.

【当前阶段】识别策略薄弱（仅 OLS）
【建议路由】mw-identification → mw-institutional-background → mw-mechanism-heterogeneity
【本刊把关】国家战略相关性 ✓ / 中国情境 ✓ / 政策落点 待补
【下一步】先立识别，再回扣政策含义

Reviewer follow-up patterns + revision methods in this journal's context

Follow-up: "Why does your process identify first and then produce tables and figures?" → In this journal's context: tables and figures are the presentation layer of conclusions; if identification is not established, the tables and figures are meaningless, so the routing enforces identification first.
Follow-up: "Why emphasize so strongly that the institutional background must be an independent section?" → Revision method: The institutional background is the foundation of this journal's identification strategy and the first signal of whether the research is solid; the router inserts this step before the empirical work by default.
Follow-up: "How does the end of the process ensure that the policy implications are not empty?" → Revision method: At the end of each routing round, link back to "does it serve the national strategy + can department-executable recommendations be derived"; if not up to standard, route back to mw-policy-implication。

Calibration anchors

The completion paths of empirical papers already published in this journal generally follow "topic selection (strategy + contribution) → literature review (balanced attention to Chinese and foreign work) → institutional background (independent section) → identification (quasi-experiment + bias diagnosis) → mechanism and heterogeneity → tables and figures → policy implications (stratification + strategic alignment) → submission". The specific thresholds of each skill and this journal's annual requirements are subject to the editorial office's latest manuscript guidelines.

Anti-patterns

Do notjump directly to mw-tables-figures beautifying tables if the identification strategy is not yet established
Do notskip mw-institutional-background and go straight to empirical work — this is the biggest difference between Management World and AER
Do notlet mw-rebuttal Generate a response letter before you revise the main text