---

name: jbes-workflow description: Use when deciding which jbes-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing methods-paper work from topic selection through rebuttal for a Journal of Business & Economic Statistics (JBES) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.

JBES Workflow Router (jbes-workflow)

Overview

This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill. It tells you which jbes- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at the Journal of Business & Economic Statistics.

Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as JBES — a methodological econometrics-and-statistics journal published by Taylor & Francis on behalf of the American Statistical Association (ASA). JBES's defining demand is methods-with-empirics: a new or improved statistical/econometric method (machine-learning and data-science adaptations and computational improvements explicitly welcomed) that has clear empirical relevance and usually a substantive empirical application. Pure theory without empirical motivation, or pure applications without methodological novelty, are off-scope. The journal runs on a rotating Joint Editor model with no single Editor-in-Chief; current Joint Editors are Yingying Fan, Michael Kolesár, and Dacheng Xiu per the official T&F search snippet. Submission-only details still require opening the live T&F author instructions.

When to trigger

• The user asks "what should I do next?" on a methods manuscript
• The user hands over a draft and needs the current bottleneck diagnosed
• Work is ping-ponging between theory, simulations, the application, and writing
• A JBES decision letter arrived and the user needs to switch into revision mode

Routing table

Current symptom	Next skill
Unsure the method is novel enough, or it has no empirical relevance / application	jbes-topic-selection
Contribution vs. prior econometrics/statistics methods is fuzzy	jbes-literature-positioning
The "what's new and why it matters" claim is not crisp	jbes-contribution-framing
Regularity conditions / asymptotics / Monte Carlo design are the bottleneck	jbes-identification-strategy
The empirical application or simulation evidence is thin	jbes-data-analysis
Simulation tables are dense; size/power not legible	jbes-tables-figures
Prose buries the method or theorem statements are unclear	jbes-writing-style
Data/code supplement and data availability statement not assembled	jbes-replication-and-data-policy
Want to understand peer review / discussion-paper handling here	jbes-review-process
Ready to submit; need a preflight checklist	jbes-submission
Received an R&R; need a response-letter strategy	jbes-rebuttal

Default order

1. jbes-topic-selection — confirm method novelty + empirical relevance fit
2. jbes-literature-positioning — stake the method against prior art
3. jbes-contribution-framing — sharpen the one-sentence methodological contribution
4. jbes-identification-strategy — assumptions, asymptotics, Monte Carlo design
5. jbes-data-analysis — Monte Carlo evidence + the substantive application
6. jbes-tables-figures — make size/power/coverage legible
7. jbes-writing-style — polish prose, theorem statements, abstract (late stage)
8. jbes-replication-and-data-policy — assemble the reproducible supplement
9. jbes-review-process — understand the multi-Co-Editor review path
10. jbes-submission — preflight
11. jbes-rebuttal — after the R&R

jbes-writing-style is a late-stage polish. Do not rewrite the introduction before the theory and simulation evidence are settled.

Differences vs. economics / pure-statistics stacks

A pure economics finding with no methodological novelty fits a general-interest economics journal better; pure theorem-proving with no empirical motivation fits a theoretical statistics journal better. JBES sits in between, and because it is ASA-owned it follows ASA editorial/ethics and data-sharing policy rather than the AEA Data Editor / mandatory-pre-publication-replication regime. Operational tells you are at JBES: methods-with-empirics scope, multi-Co-Editor model, ASA supplementary-material expectation, Open Select hybrid OA, and a discussion-paper tradition.

Worked vignette: routing one manuscript end-to-end

A hypothetical JBES manuscript — a dependence-robust forecast-comparison test on FRED-MD inflation (path illustrative) — moves through the stack as follows. The author runs jbes-topic-selection (novelty + a real macro application → in-scope), then jbes-literature-positioning, then jbes-contribution-framing (a HAC-robust test fixing over-rejection). When the limiting null is the bottleneck, route to jbes-identification-strategy; when simulation and application are thin, jbes-data-analysis; then jbes-tables-figures, late-stage jbes-writing-style, the supplement, review, and submission. An R&R routes to jbes-rebuttal, which re-dispatches into the same skills.

Routing as a decision block

【Stage】topic / positioning / framing / method / evidence / exhibits / prose / supplement / submit / rebuttal
【Symptom】the current bottleneck in one phrase
【Route to】the single jbes-* skill that owns it
【Scope gate】novelty AND empirical relevance present? [Y/N] — if N, topic-selection first
【Live-T&F preflight needed】submission-only fact could change route? [Y/N]
【Next】the skill to invoke now

Calibration anchor (hedged): the spine is methods-with-empirics — a method with no application is desk-rejected, and exhibits wait until the asymptotics settle. Submission-specific rules are live-page preflight items.

Anti-patterns

• Do not skip jbes-topic-selection — a method with no empirical relevance is desk-rejected as off-scope
• Do not polish exhibits while the asymptotic theory is still unsettled
• Do not treat the empirical application as optional — at JBES it is part of scope
• Do not let jbes-rebuttal draft a response letter before the revised manuscript exists