jibs-workflow

Journal of International Business Studies Workflow (jibs-workflow)

Overview

This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill; it tells you **which jibs- skill to use right now* for your JIBS manuscript.

Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as JIBS — the flagship, top-ranked international-business journal, established 1970, published by Palgrave Macmillan (Springer Nature) on behalf of the Academy of International Business (AIB), of which it is the official journal. JIBS studies cross-border, multi-country, and multilevel phenomena: MNEs, internationalization, cross-cultural management, international strategy/finance/economics, and global political economy, with country and culture treated as explicit levels of analysis. The non-negotiable bar: a manuscript must address a real-world international-business phenomenon, problem, or puzzle and state explicitly what it contributes to IB theory — incremental single-country extensions are discouraged. JIBS is paradigmatically and methodologically pluralistic (quantitative, qualitative, mixed, theory); rigor and a clear IB theoretical contribution are the gatekeepers, not any one method.

> Editorial team context: Rosalie L. Tung (Simon Fraser University) is the current Editor in Chief on the Springer journal home and editorial-board page, with Anne Hoekman listed as Managing Editor. The submission route is the JIBS online tool at mc.manuscriptcentral.com; optional gold open access is priced on the Springer "How to publish with us" page.

When to trigger

• "What should I do next?" with a half-built JIBS manuscript
• You have cross-country data and a result but no clear IB theoretical story
• A reviewer/editor pushes on "phenomenon" or "contribution to IB theory"
• You received a JIBS decision letter (R&R or reject) and need to switch into response mode
• You keep bouncing between theory, cross-national measurement, and writing without a plan

Routing table

| Current symptom | Next skill |

|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|

| Idea is vague; not sure it is a real IB phenomenon or JIBS-fit | jibs-topic-selection |

| Hypotheses ignore country/culture levels or lack an IB mechanism | jibs-theory-development |

| Front end reads as gap-spotting; the IB conversation is not engaged | jibs-literature-positioning|

| Design may not match a cross-country/multilevel claim | jibs-methods |

| Have data; unsure about measurement equivalence, CMV, endogeneity, models | jibs-data-analysis |

| Results exist but the "so what for IB theory" is thin | jibs-contribution-framing |

| Exhibits not self-explanatory or off the JIBS Style Guide | jibs-tables-figures |

| Prose buries the phenomenon or the contribution | jibs-writing-style |

| Ready to submit; need the Springer Nature / DART preflight | jibs-submission |

| Want to understand JIBS double-blind review/decisions before/after submit | jibs-review-process |

| Received an R&R; need to plan and draft the response | jibs-rebuttal |

Default order

1. jibs-topic-selection — lock a phenomenon-driven, JIBS-fit question
2. jibs-theory-development — build the cross-level IB mechanism and derive hypotheses
3. jibs-literature-positioning — engage the IB conversation; state what you join
4. jibs-methods — match a cross-country/multilevel design to the question
5. jibs-data-analysis — measurement equivalence, CMV, endogeneity, the right estimator
6. jibs-contribution-framing — turn results into an explicit IB theoretical contribution
7. jibs-tables-figures — finalize main exhibits per the JIBS Style Guide
8. jibs-writing-style — full-manuscript prose polish (phenomenon-forward, author-date)
9. jibs-submission — Springer Nature preflight (anonymization, DART/DAS, format, files)
10. jibs-review-process — set expectations for the double-blind, multi-round process
11. jibs-rebuttal — after an R&R, plan revisions then draft the response letter

> jibs-tables-figures and jibs-writing-style are late-stage polish. Do not invoke them while the phenomenon, IB contribution, or identification is still unsettled.

Routing log

Copy this log into your project notes and update it at the end of each session; the topmost unchecked item is the skill to open next, subject to the two gates.

### JIBS manuscript routing log — <working title>, session of <date>
- [ ] 1. IB phenomenon named; JIBS fit over AMJ/SMJ argued .... jibs-topic-selection
- [ ] 2. Cross-level mechanism built; hypotheses derived
        with country/culture as explicit levels ............... jibs-theory-development
- [ ] 3. IB conversation joined (no "no one has studied X
        in country Y" gap-spotting) ........................... jibs-literature-positioning
- [ ] 4. Design matches the cross-country/multilevel claim .... jibs-methods
- [ ] 5. Measurement equivalence, CMV, endogeneity handled;
        estimator defensible .................................. jibs-data-analysis
- [ ] 6. Contribution to IB theory stated explicitly .......... jibs-contribution-framing
- [ ] 7. Exhibits self-explanatory per JIBS Style Guide ....... jibs-tables-figures
- [ ] 8. Prose phenomenon-forward, author-date clean .......... jibs-writing-style
- [ ] 9. mc.manuscriptcentral.com preflight: anonymization,
        DART/DAS statement, file formats ...................... jibs-submission

**Gate A (polish):** items 7-8 stay closed until 1-6 are all checked.
**Gate B (response):** after a decision letter, read jibs-review-process,
revise the manuscript itself, and only then open jibs-rebuttal.

Decision shortcuts

• "I have a finding but no IB theory story" → jibs-topic-selection then jibs-theory-development
• "My intro says 'no one has studied X in country Y'" (gap-spotting) → jibs-literature-positioning
• "Single-country sample" → jibs-topic-selection (is this really IB?) then jibs-methods
• "Same-respondent survey across countries" → jibs-data-analysis (CMV + measurement equivalence)
• "Internationalization-as-process, regressor may be endogenous" → jibs-methods then jibs-data-analysis
• "Reviewer cites a 'From the Editors' methods editorial" → jibs-data-analysis
• "Submitting this week" → jibs-submission
• "Got an R&R with area editor + reviewers" → jibs-review-process then jibs-rebuttal

Difference vs. AMJ / SMJ / IB-adjacent stacks

• JIBS: international business — the contribution must be to IB theory and engage cross-border/multilevel phenomena; AIB's official journal; methodologically pluralistic; DART transparency regime.
• AMJ: general empirical management (often single-country); empirical and theoretical contribution; AOM journal.
• SMJ: strategy/performance questions; not specifically cross-border or culture-as-level.
• JWB / Management International Review / GSJ: IB-adjacent, but JIBS sets the field's bar for phenomenon-based rigor and cross-national validity.

If your study has no genuine cross-border, multi-country, or culture/country-as-level dimension, JIBS is likely the wrong venue.

Anti-patterns

• Do not skip jibs-theory-development and jump to analysis — JIBS rejects atheoretical, phenomenon-free work.
• Do not treat a single-country convenience sample as "international" without theorizing country/culture.
• Do not let jibs-tables-figures beautify exhibits before the model and contribution are settled.
• Do not let jibs-rebuttal draft a response letter before you have actually revised the manuscript.