jim-writing-style

Writing in the JIM Voice (jim-writing-style)

When to trigger

• The abstract exceeds 200 words or reads like a table of contents
• The introduction takes three pages to reach the research question
• Drafts slip into country stereotypes or use "culture" as an all-purpose noun
• The paper is written for methodologists when JIM's readership includes global marketing executives

The abstract: 200 words, third person, decision-forward

JIM caps the abstract at 200 words, written in third person (per the AMA/SAGE guidelines — re-check current wording before submission). Structure that works: one sentence of tension (what the field believed or disputed), one of approach (countries, data, design — numbers included), two or three of findings (directions and the cross-national pattern), one of the managerial rule. Kill throat-clearing ("This paper aims to explore…") and write findings as findings: "brand globalness lifts preference in emerging markets but not developed ones," not "the relationship between globalness and preference is examined."

Introduction architecture (≤ 2 pages)

1. The cross-border tension, concretely. Open with the phenomenon a global marketer faces — divergent campaign results across markets, an entry decision, a standardization dilemma — or the theoretical inconsistency across country studies. Not with "Globalization has increased…" (the most deleted first sentence in the field).
2. Why existing answers fail across borders. Two or three moves: the domestic canon assumed universality; international evidence conflicts; the mechanism was never taken across an institutional boundary.
3. What this paper does. Question, countries and design in one breath, and the answer — JIM readers get the finding in the introduction, not a mystery novel.
4. Contribution preview. The ledger rows from jim-contribution-framing, compressed to a sentence each.

Precision rules for writing about countries and cultures

• Nation ≠ culture. Write "consumers in our Japanese sample," not "the Japanese"; attribute differences to the measured dimension, not to nationality as essence.
• Dimension language over stereotype language. "In high uncertainty-avoidance markets" is a claim; "in cautious cultures like Germany" is a stereotype wearing a citation.
• Anchor direction words. "Higher collectivism" than what? Name the comparison explicitly the first time.
• Home/host discipline. Fix the perspective (whose home?) in the first use and never rotate it silently.
• Translation transparency. When quoting items or respondents, state the language of administration; italicize emic terms and gloss them once.
• No development euphemism drift. Pick one taxonomy (emerging vs. developed; income bands) and hold it; "third-world," never.

Sentence-level moves that read as JIM

• Verbs carry the theory: mechanisms amplify, suppress, substitute, signal — they do not "play a role."
• One idea per sentence in the hypothesis build-up; the "because" clause gets its own sentence when the logic is subtle.
• Numbers in prose keep their context: "a 12% adaptation premium in weak-IP markets," not "a significant positive effect."
• Present tense for what the paper does and what theory says; past tense for what the data showed.
• Headings that assert ("Globalness Pays Only Where Institutions Are Weak") beat labels ("Results") where the template allows.
• Prune the double qualifier ("may potentially suggest") — one hedge per claim, chosen deliberately.

AMA-journal surface conventions

Author–date citations in AMA marketing-journal style — e.g., (Katsikeas, Leonidou, and Morgan 2000); "and" spelled out, no ampersand in text; references formatted per the current JIM guidelines (re-check the SAGE author instructions rather than trusting a reference manager's "AMA" preset, which is the medical AMA style — a classic trap). First-person plural is acceptable and often cleaner than passive voice. Define each acronym at first use; CET, PBG, and MNE are not universal knowledge even here.

Checklist

• [ ] Abstract ≤ 200 words, third person, findings and managerial rule explicit
• [ ] Introduction reaches the question within two paragraphs, answer disclosed
• [ ] Every country difference in prose attributed to a dimension, not a nationality
• [ ] Home/host perspective and development taxonomy consistent throughout
• [ ] Hypothesis prose: one idea per sentence, explicit because-clauses
• [ ] Citations in marketing-AMA author–date form, not medical-AMA numeric
• [ ] No "globalization has increased" opener; no role-playing verbs

Anti-patterns

• Stereotype shorthand ("collectivist consumers like the Chinese") passing as cultural theory
• The mystery-novel structure that withholds findings until page 30
• Abstract listing topics covered instead of results found
• Reference list auto-formatted in numeric medical-AMA style
• Hedging stacked three deep until the claim disappears
• Translationese from a non-English drafting language left unedited — recruit a native-level pass before submission

Output format

【Abstract】word count / third person / findings + managerial rule present: pass/fix
【Intro】tension → failed answers → question + answer → contributions: pass/fix
【Culture language】dimension-attributed, stereotype-free: pass/fix
【Consistency】home-host, taxonomy, acronyms: pass/fix
【Citations】marketing-AMA author–date verified: pass/fix
【Next skill】jim-submission