Amy E. Boren and Sarahi Morales
The purpose of this study was to explore how team members identify the social loafers on their teams and how they explain and manage social loafers’ behavior. The participants…
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore how team members identify the social loafers on their teams and how they explain and manage social loafers’ behavior. The participants (n=49) in the study included members of student teams participating in a service project as a part of their coursework. We collected multiple sources of information: in-depth interviews, reflection journals, peer evaluations, and observations of team members interacting. Using attribution theory and status characteristics theory we describe how team members identify social loafer and explain the causes of their behavior. We also explore how those attributions affect team members’ interactions with the social loafers. The status of social loafers in the eyes of their teammates affects teammates’ willingness to accommodate or reject the social loafer. We identify strategies used by team members to manage the behavior of social loafers. We conclude with recommendations for practice and future research on social loafing.
Rolando Gonzales and Jonathan Wareham
In this study, three models were empirically compared, the DeLone and McLean model, the Seddon model and the Modified Seddon model, by measuring the impact of a business…
Abstract
Purpose
In this study, three models were empirically compared, the DeLone and McLean model, the Seddon model and the Modified Seddon model, by measuring the impact of a business intelligence system (BIS) in companies in Peru. After that, the mediators and dependent constructs were analysed to determine if they were behaving properly (a good level of variance explanation and significant relations with others constructs). The study used a sample of 104 users of the BIS, from companies in several important economic sectors, in a quasi-voluntary context and with six constructs: information quality, system quality, service quality, system dependence (system use), user satisfaction and perceived usefulness (individual impact).
Design/methodology/approach
To interpret the results, the authors used structural equations. The idea was to look for the best fit and explanations for the outcomes. The main difference in these models is that the DeLone and McLean model considers system dependence (system use) as a part of information system success, but in the Seddon model, it is a consequence of it.
Findings
The Seddon model seems to show the best fit and explanation for the outcomes. After that, a review of the system use construct was realised, because of its limited variance explained and the few significant relations with other constructs, to improve its explanation power in future research.
Research limitations/implications
It is estimated that the sample includes more than 15 per cent of all the companies that use a BISs in Peru, so the size of the sample is adequate, but it is not entirely random and therefore limits the generalizability of outcomes. Besides that, a sample size that is bigger could be better for the sake of making a more detailed analysis, permitting the use of some items with less power, or the use of another statistical procedure for structural equations such as the Asymptotical Distribution Free, permitting a more detailed analysis (Hair et al., 2006).
Originality/value
Business intelligence (BI), one of the most important components of information systems (IS), is playing a very relevant role in business in this time of high competition, high amounts of data and new technology. Currently, companies feel pressured to respond quickly to change and complicated conditions in the market, needing to make the correct tactical, operational and strategic decisions (Chugh and Grandhi, 2013). BI is one of the most important drivers of the decade (Gartner, 2013). Big companies of IS are creating special units specialised in BI, helping companies become more efficient and effective in daily operations.
Details
Keywords
Xiying Zhang, Dirk Pieter van Donk, Chengyong Xiao and Madeleine Pullman
This study aims to develop an in-depth understanding of how supplier selection helps social enterprises achieve their social missions while maintaining commercial viability.
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to develop an in-depth understanding of how supplier selection helps social enterprises achieve their social missions while maintaining commercial viability.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper applies a multiple-case design to study the supplier selection processes of 15 Dutch social enterprises.
Findings
Social enterprises tend to build supply relationships through existing networks and evaluate suppliers based on value alignment, relationship commitment, resource complementarity, and cost. Depending on the possibility of social value creation in supplier selection, the importance of these criteria varies across different social enterprise models and between key and non-key suppliers. Moreover, suppliers’ long-term relationship commitment can help reconcile tensions between the social and commercial logic of a social enterprise and facilitate impact creation.
Research limitations/implications
Data collection is limited to the perspectives of buyers – the social enterprises. Future research could collect supplier-side data to explore how they engage with social enterprises during the selection process.
Practical implications
Managers of social enterprises can use our research findings as guidance for selecting the most suitable suppliers, while organizations that want to collaborate with social enterprises should actively build network ties to be identified.
Originality/value
We contribute to the cross-sector collaboration literature by showing the underlying reasons for the preference for network reinforcing and indirect networking in supplier identification. We contribute to the social impact supply chain literature by revealing the critical role of supplier selection in shaping collaboration outcomes.
Details
Keywords
Grace McQuilten, Deborah Warr, Kim Humphery and Amy Spiers
The purpose of this paper is to consider the social turn in contemporary capitalism and contemporary art through the lens of art-based social enterprises (ASEs) that aim to create…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to consider the social turn in contemporary capitalism and contemporary art through the lens of art-based social enterprises (ASEs) that aim to create positive social benefits for young people experiencing forms of marginalisation, and which trade creative products or services to help fulfil that mission. A growth in ASEs demonstrates a growing interest in how the arts can support social and economic development, and the ways new economic models can generate employment for individuals excluded from the labour market; extend opportunities for more people to participate in art markets; and challenge dominant market models of cultural production and consumption.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper considers a number of challenges and complexities faced by ASEs that embrace a co-dependence of three goals, which are often in tension and competition – artistic practice, social purpose and economic activity. It does so by analysing interviews from staff working with 12 ASE organisation’s across Australia.
Findings
While the external forces that shape ASEs – including government policy, markets, investors and philanthropy – are interested in the “self-sufficient” economic potential of ASEs, those working in ASEs tend to prioritise social values and ethical business over large financial returns and are often ambivalent about their roles as entrepreneurs. This ambivalence is symptomatic of a position that is simultaneously critical and affirmative, of the conditions of contemporary capitalism and neoliberalism.
Originality/value
This paper addresses a gap in social enterprise literature presenting empirical research focussing on the lived experience of those managing and leading ASEs in Australia.