| name | orgsci-theory-development |
| description | Use when building or sharpening the theory for an Organization Science manuscript — articulating the organizational mechanism, bridging micro-macro levels, and deciding between a priori deductive theorizing and inductive grounded theory building. Develops the theory; it does not frame the contribution statement (orgsci-contribution-framing) or run the analysis (orgsci-data-analysis). |
Theory Development (orgsci-theory-development)
When to trigger
- Your hypotheses or propositions are descriptive ("A relates to B") with no organizational mechanism
- You have rich inductive data and need to build, not test, theory
- A reviewer says "what is the theoretical engine?" or "the levels are conflated"
- You need to bridge micro behavior and macro structure explicitly
Two legitimate modes — pick deliberately
Organization Science is theory-driven but methodologically eclectic, so theory can be built two ways and the journal respects both:
- Deductive / a priori. State the organizational construct relationships, derive the mechanism from organization theory, and articulate testable propositions or hypotheses before the data. Make the mediating mechanism and the boundary conditions explicit.
- Inductive / grounded. When the contribution is a new process or construct, build theory up from data. Aim for an abstracted process model or a grounded set of propositions — not a description. The journal's signature openness to qualitative and inductive work means this is a first-class path, not a fallback.
Build the mechanism, not just the relationship
- Name the organizational mechanism. Routines, sensemaking, identity work, learning, search, selection, legitimation, coordination, power — say which engine drives the effect and why it is organizational, not merely psychological or economic.
- Specify the level(s) and any cross-level bridge. Be explicit about whether the construct lives at the individual/team (micro), organization (meso), or field/population (macro) level. If you cross levels, state the bridging logic (emergence, composition, top-down constraint) — conflating levels is a common reject signal.
- State boundary conditions. When does the mechanism operate, and when does it break? Boundary conditions are part of the theory, not a limitations afterthought.
- Theorize, do not gap-spot. A "no one has studied X" framing is not theory. The contribution can come from a new mechanism, a new setting that tests generalizability, or a reframing — novelty alone is "neither necessary nor sufficient."
Anti-patterns
- Hypotheses with no mechanism; mediation labeled but never theorized.
- Inductive findings written as thick description with no abstracted model.
- Level conflation (individual data, organizational claims) with no composition logic.
- Borrowing a discipline's theory wholesale without an organizational translation.
Theory pass for Organization Science
Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock a level map, a mechanism paragraph, and the cover-letter contribution statement; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: interdisciplinary organization reviewers who ask whether the mechanism travels across levels of analysis.
- Do the pass: Name the construct, mechanism, boundary condition, and falsifiable implication separately; do not let a literature summary masquerade as theory.
- Return a ledger: give
claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location rows, so the next agent can edit rather than rediscover the issue.
- Sibling guard: compare against AMJ for empirical management framing, ASQ for organization-theory depth, Management Science for formal/quantitative operations; if a sibling owns the contribution, recommend re-routing before polishing format.
- Submission-ready gate: do not give final advice until the pack's
resources/official-source-map.md has been checked for upload-week rules and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.
Output format
【Mode】deductive a priori / inductive grounded
【Mechanism】the organizational engine driving the effect
【Level(s)】micro / meso / macro / cross-level bridge logic
【Propositions/Hypotheses】or grounded process model
【Boundary conditions】when it holds / breaks
【Next step】orgsci-literature-positioning or orgsci-methods
