Search results

With its presence, which can create inefficiencies, uncertainties and risks, information asymmetry poses a significant challenge to successfully managing the agri-food supply chain (AFSC). Understanding the variables that influence information asymmetry is crucial for devising more effective strategies to mitigate it. This study, therefore, explores the variables that influence information asymmetry in the AFSC.

A qualitative analysis was conducted, relying on semi-structured interviews with 17 experts representing different actors in the AFSC (e.g. seed producers, retailers, etc.) in Germany. The collected data was analysed using the GABEK® method.

The study confirms that the influencing variables derived from the existing theory, such as price performance, digitalisation, environmental, process and quality measures, contribute to information asymmetry. It further reveals new variables that associate with information asymmetry, including documentation requirements, increasing regulation, consumer behaviour, incorrect data within the company as well as crises, political conflicts and supplier–buyer conflicts. Furthermore, the study shows that supply chain actors counteract asymmetry by focusing on social behaviour and monitoring suppliers through key performance indicators, employees and social aspects.

The study was limited to the universal influence of the variables on information asymmetry in the AFSC, making the magnitude of the influence and its context-specific nature unexplained.

This study is one of the very few that examines information asymmetry across the AFSC from the perspective of different actors, providing a more overarching and deeper understanding of information asymmetry.

The purpose of this chapter is to investigate the question of whether corporate social responsibility (CSR) can be used as a link of trust between business and society, and which role CSR plays in recovering distrust in businesses. It uses a mixed methods study of processes of moving businesses within the Danish water sector from a general trust-breakdown to trust recovery from 2003 to 2013.

Trust recovery is found to depend on stakeholders’ mutual engagement with each other and their willingness to share knowledge and learn from each other’s professional and institutional cultures and languages. An alignment of vocabularies of motives between regulation and voluntary CSR is found to be useful for building trust between conflicting parties. Furthermore the findings shows that the more stakeholders’ languages, motives and logics can coexist, the more trust can be recovered.

The research is limited by a study of one business sector in one country and the findings have implications greater than the local contexts of which it is researched, because it is usable in other sectors that suffer from severe trust-breakdowns such as government systems in both the public and private sectors.

This chapter suggests a theoretical extension of Bogenschneider and Corbett’s (2010) Community Dissonance Theory to embrace multiple stakeholders each having their own complex and unique culture and communication modus based on their institutional, professional or individual comprehensive language universes. This includes knowledge-sharing and educative diffusion of the stakeholders’ language universes’ vocabularies including its important nouns, verbs, terminologies, semantics, taxonomies and axioms as well as the stakeholders’ motives and logics implemented into these universes.

The German institutional setting of skill formation is supposed to enable young people smooth and structured transitions into the labor market. For decades, the large majority of graduates of the “dual system” of vocational education experienced good chances to immediately access appropriate job positions. However, labor market entry has become less stable in the last two decades. In this paper, we examine the changing transition from vocational training to the first job in Germany. We analyze the consequences of inter-firm mobility and unemployment after finishing vocational education for the transition to the first job. Our results show that leaving the training firm, and especially unemployment, strongly enhance occupational shifts at labor market entry. In addition, not keeping one’s trained occupation negatively affects the chances to enter skilled job positions.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the factors that affect knowledge sharing in a public sector organization.

The paper is based on quantitative research. The data were gathered through questionnaires and analyzed using multiple regression.

Community‐related considerations, normative considerations and personal benefits were three motivators found to have a unique contribution to the variance in knowledge sharing. The following enablers had a significant main effect on knowledge sharing: social interaction, rewards, and organizational support. Two barriers, degree of courage and degree of empathy, which measured organizational climate, were found to have a significant main effect on knowledge sharing. The interaction of normative consideration with social interaction, personal benefit with organizational support, and normative considerations with degree of courage, had a moderating effect on the relationship between motivating factors and knowledge sharing.

The study was conducted in a single public sector organization, which limits the generalizability of the findings to other settings. Another limitation is that attitudes toward knowledge sharing, and knowledge‐sharing behaviors, vary across cultures. Finally, self‐reported data are subject to response bias.

Identifying factors that influence knowledge sharing could help practitioners create a knowledge‐sharing culture that is needed to support knowledge sharing and knowledge management within public sector organizations.

This empirical study will contribute to the theoretical knowledge on knowledge sharing in the public sector, which has been neglected in knowledge‐sharing research.

To deepen our understanding about the development of team performance, the purpose of this paper is to develop a model that explains how ambidexterity and ethical leadership affect knowledge sharing and team performance through within-team competition.

This study demonstrates the applicability of ambidexterity and within-team competition by surveying 78 teams from the high-tech and banking industries. This study further presents a three-way interaction among ambidexterity, politics and job complexity.

This study finds that both ambidexterity and ethical leadership are positively related to knowledge sharing and team performance through the mediation of team development competition.

This study confirms that ambidexterity and ethical leadership play critical factors for improving knowledge sharing and team performance through the mediation of team development competition. Furthermore, the moderating effects of politics and job complexity are also confirmed in the research.