| name | jim-topic-selection |
| description | Use when choosing or auditing a research question for a Journal of International Marketing (JIM) manuscript — testing whether the international dimension is the theoretical core and whether JIM beats sibling outlets. It vets the question; jim-theory-development builds the mechanism. |
Topic Selection (jim-topic-selection)
When to trigger
- An idea exists but nobody has tested whether it is internationally interesting or merely set abroad
- The dataset covers several countries and the temptation is to let the data pick the question
- A domestic finding is being considered for "extension" to new markets
- The team cannot decide among JIM, JIBS, IMR, JWB, and Journal of Marketing
The JIM gate: the border must do theoretical work
JIM's editorial identity is built around one test. Ask it before anything else:
If this study were run inside a single country, would the research question still make sense?
If yes, the paper is not yet a JIM paper. The cross-national element — differences in culture, institutions, market development, regulation, consumer sophistication, or firm resources across borders — must be what generates the prediction, not what decorates the sample. Three acceptable shapes:
- Cross-national variation as moderator. A marketing mechanism is theorized to strengthen, weaken, or reverse across countries for reasons stated before seeing the data (e.g., trust-based appeals working differently under weak contract enforcement).
- Cross-border phenomena as the object. Exporting, entry-mode choice, global brand architecture, international channel governance, cross-border e-commerce, global segmentation — phenomena that only exist because borders exist.
- Global-local tension. Perceived brand globalness vs. local iconness, standardization vs. adaptation, global consumer culture vs. ethnocentrism — questions where the global and the local pull in opposite directions.
Stress tests before committing
- The relabel test. Delete every country name from the pitch. If the sentence still describes the contribution, the international dimension is cosmetic.
- The two-country test. Can you name at least two countries where theory predicts different outcomes, and say why? "We collected data in the U.S. and China" is a sampling fact, not a prediction.
- The manager test. Which decision of a firm operating across borders changes if the answer flips — market selection, adaptation depth, partner choice, brand positioning, resource allocation across subsidiaries?
- The conversation test. Point to an active thread in JIM's last five volumes (or a JIM call for papers — e.g., the 2025–2026 calls on global sustainability and on AI in international marketing) that this paper would extend or correct.
- The feasibility test. Multi-country primary data, matched secondary panels, or a credible cross-cultural experiment must be attainable; a JIM question without JIM-grade data is a trap.
Domains where JIM currently lives
International marketing strategy (standardization/adaptation, global segmentation, marketing-mix decisions across markets); exporting and international entrepreneurship (export performance, born globals, SME internationalization); entry modes and international channels; global branding and country-of-origin; cross-cultural consumer behavior (values, ethnocentrism, animosity, xenocentrism, global consumer culture); emerging markets and institutional voids; digital and platform-based internationalization. A topic outside these threads is not banned — but the burden of proving relevance to international marketing (not international business generally) rises sharply.
Sibling boundary — say why JIM and not…
| Outlet | Its center of gravity | Choose JIM instead when |
|---|
| JIBS | firm internationalization, IB theory broadly | the mechanism is a marketing mechanism (brands, customers, channels) |
| Journal of Marketing | broad marketing strategy, mostly context-free | cross-national variation is the engine, not a robustness note |
| International Marketing Review | earlier-stage, broader empirical bar | evidence meets top-tier standards (invariance, identification, multi-study) |
| Journal of World Business | management/strategy of MNEs | the outcome is a marketing outcome, not an org-level one |
| JCR / JCP | consumer psychology per se | the cultural comparison, not the psychological process alone, carries the paper |
Write the one-sentence boundary claim now; the cover letter and introduction will reuse it verbatim.
Checklist
Anti-patterns
- "Prior work studied X in the West; we study X in country Y" — new-context replication, JIM's most common desk reject
- Choosing countries by data convenience and inventing the cultural story afterwards
- Framing an international business question (FDI, governance, HQ-subsidiary politics) with a thin marketing veneer
- A 40-country secondary dataset with no theory about why country membership matters
- Pitching a topic no JIM issue has touched in a decade without explaining why it is due for revival
Output format
【Candidate question】one sentence, no country names
【International engine】moderator / cross-border phenomenon / global-local tension
【Two-country prediction】country A → outcome; country B → different outcome; because …
【Managerial hinge】the cross-border decision that flips with the answer
【Sibling boundary】why JIM over JIBS / JM / IMR / JWB (one sentence)
【Verdict】proceed / reshape / retarget outlet
【Next skill】jim-theory-development
