Search results

Existing supply chain literature provides examples of countermeasures that firms can adopt to mitigate abnormal or catastrophic supply chain disruptions. However, none address reducing interactive complexity prior to adopting countermeasures to mitigate everyday or normal supply chain disruptions. Most mitigation strategies focus on adding capabilities or resources to protect an organization. Here, the authors aim to consider an alternative strategy of examining current processes to determine whether processes can be simplified by using the normal accident theory and its constructs of interactive complexity and coupling as a theoretical basis.

The authors develop a model based on the normal accident theory and use logistic regression to test their propositions in the context of a steel processing plant and its customers.

The findings show the importance of reducing interactive complexity to mitigate supply chain disruptions. However, high inventory is not considered a significant countermeasure, and high inventory levels may increase the likelihood of causing a disruption downstream. These findings support the lean management approach of operating under low inventory levels while eliminating complexity to make problems more visible, causing fewer disruptions.

While others have examined the impact of mitigation strategies conceptually, no study has captured information from actual supply chain disruptions to assess how interactive complexity and inventory levels affect disruption potential at downstream customers' facilities. Capturing information from supply chain disruptions enables managers to assess the situation as the disruption is occurring. The authors suggest a strategy in which countermeasures that increase slack in the system should be considered only after the system is sufficiently simplified to mitigate disruptions.

The purpose of this paper is to use a longitudinal analysis of the zone of tolerance to reconcile the growing divide between the acceptance of the theoretical model and the lack of empirical support for it.

A combination of simple linear regression and piece‐wise regression is used on a data set of 699 observations of a training program from the telecommunications industry.

This study demonstrates that the zone of tolerance model is a significantly better predictor of changes in customer satisfaction than the traditional linear model. Furthermore, the study supports early zone of tolerance propositions regarding the effect of negative quality perceptions.

The findings of this study resolve the apparent disconnect between the acceptance of the zone of tolerance theory and the lack of empirical research support for it.

By demonstrating that customers are willing to accept some heterogeneity in service delivery, this research demonstrates to practicing managers that they do not need to micro‐manage service delivery. Furthermore, by validating an early zone of tolerance proposition regarding the relative magnitude of the effect of poor service quality, this research shows the importance of preventing service failures.

This research is the first to use a longitudinal methodology to investigate a growing research stream, namely, the zone of tolerance theory. This unique methodology allows us to explain the apparent divide between the conceptual theory and previous academic research.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the contingency effects that contextual factors of a networked service environment have on the phased Lean Six Sigma (LSS) implementation frameworks.

This paper employs the critical realism (CR) case study research methodology to examine the contingent and causal relationships between contextual configurations of business networks, the DMAIC or PDCA phases in an LSS implementation agenda, and business management functions. The authors conducted a single case study on the basis of challenges they met in kicking off lean transportation in the Port of Houston.

The key finding from the study is a mid-range theory regarding the contingency effects of contextual factors of service business networks on the phased LSS implementation frameworks. The authors found that when there are complexity and dynamics of contextual factors at the field layer, management should focus more on tasks in early LSS phases to emphasize influencing. When there is no centralized authority in the network and the value-system is loosely coupled, management needs to execute more tasks as described in the define, measure and analyze phases with the purpose of both influencing and orchestrating. When individual actors have goals not aligned well with the goal of the business network and have unmatched operations capabilities, these factors should be considered as early as possible in these LSS phases. When a business network has complicated business processes with high unpredictability and uncertainty and individual actors’ value-creation systems are not well embedded in the entire value-creation system, PDCA will be the preferred core structure of an LSS implementation agenda.

This study contributes to the LSS research stream by introducing a causal/contingency model that prescribes the contingency effects of three contextual configurations on LSS implementation. It also contributes to the emerging discipline, business network management, regarding how to use LSS frameworks in strategic planning. It also contributes to the CR school of problem-driven case study by using a strategic initiative framework as a platform and each phase in the framework as a unit. This conceptualization of the entity of interest helps explore the interactions among three theoretical constructs: contextual configurations, phased LSS implementation agenda and management functions.

Managerial implications of this study are twofold. One is the procedure of analyzing the impacts of contextual factors on the causal relationships between LSS implementation phases and network management functions. The entire procedure represents the agenda-setting process of LSS implementation, the most daunting and challenging managerial task in LSS projects. Another one is the guideline on how to determine whether DMAIC or PDCA is appropriate for the LSS agenda when used in a networked environment.

This paper would serve as an excellent resource for both academicians and LSS practitioners in initiating, orchestrating and managing an LSS project in a networked service environment. This study represents the first effort to explore the impact of contextual factors of business networks on lean transformation.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate provider outcomes in response to two modes of suicide prevention training (e-learning and in-person) and a control group. The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) was adapted for e-learning delivery to US Veterans Administration mental health providers. Outcomes include: self-evaluated beliefs, ability, and self-efficacy in managing suicidal patients.

This study used a multicenter, randomized, cluster design to test the effectiveness of e-learning vs in-person conditions CAMS for changes in provider outcomes.

Survey scores showed significant improvements for both the e-learning vs control and the in-person vs control between pre-intervention and post-intervention; however, the e-learning and in-person conditions were not significantly different from each other.

Limitations of the study include that there were drop-outs over the study period and the survey questions may not have captured all of the aspects of the CAMS training.

Results suggest that e-learning training modules can provide comparable outcomes to in-person training for suicide prevention.

More providers may have accessible training materials for managing suicidal patients.

Currently practicing providers now can choose between two equivalent training modalities for improving the management of suicidality in their patients.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether fun in the workplace inadvertently leads to greater incidences of unwanted sexual attention. Specifically, this research examined the relationship between three dimensions of fun and unwanted sexual attention – fun activities, coworker socializing and manager support for fun.

Multiple regression was used to analyze survey data from three Qualtrics business panels.

Fun activities were related to greater incidences of unwanted sexual attention, while manager support for fun was related to fewer instances. With respect to fun activities, mandatory attendance and holding the activities on nights and weekends were associated with further increased unwanted sexual attention. The presence of non-employees during activities was associated with fewer incidences.

The data on fun in the workplace and unwanted sexual attention were obtained at one point in time. Future research would be valuable that obtains data collected at multiple points in time to more fully substantiate cause-and-effect relationships.

Employers may seek to foster a climate in which managers encourage employees to have fun on the job as well as one that explicitly focuses on preventing sexual harassment. Curbing unwanted sexual attention during fun activities may be facilitated by involving non-employees, refraining from holding activities at night and on weekends and keeping employee participation voluntary.

From the perspective of fun in the workplace, this research has demonstrated fun activities may have unintended, adverse consequences. From the perspective of sexual harassment, this research has identified antecedents not typically be considered to be contributing factors of unwanted sexual attention.

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).

With an increasingly fierce competition of the shipbuilding industry, advanced technologies and excellent management philosophies in the manufacturing industry are gradually introduced to domestic shipyards. The purpose of this study is to promote the lean management of Chinese ship outfitting plants by lean production strategy.

To promote the lean implementation of Chinese shipyards, the lean practice of ship-pipe part production is highlighted by lot-sizing optimization and strategic CONWIP (constant work-in-process) control. A nonlinear programming model is formulated to minimize the total cost of ship-pipe part manufacturing and the particle swarm optimization (PSO)-based algorithm is designed to resolve the established model. Besides, the pull-from-the-bottleneck (PFB) strategy is used to control ship-pipe part production, verified by Simulink simulation.

Results show that the proposed lean strategy of the programming model and strategic PFB control could assist Chinese ship outfitting plants to leverage competitive advantage by waste reduction and lean achievement. Specifically, the PFB double-loop control strategy shows better performance when there is high productivity and the PFB single-loop control outperforms at lower productivity scenarios.

To verify the effectiveness of the proposed lean strategy, a case study is performed to validate the formulated model. Also, simulation experiments realized by FlexSim software are conducted to testify results obtained by the constructed programming model.

Lean production management practice of the shipyard building industry is performed by the proposed lean production strategy through lot-sizing optimization and strategic PFB control in terms of ship-pipe part manufacturing.

The purpose of this paper is to examine investors’ propensity to litigate when harmful events occur subsequent to accounting choices. Consistent with Culpable Control Theory, the authors find that investors are more likely to pursue litigation against management when managers are perceived to have more financial reporting flexibility, such as when they apply imprecise, principles-based accounting guidance. Investors are more likely to pursue litigation when they find management more responsible for harmful events, and they find management more responsible for those events when they perceive management to have more reporting flexibility. To provide additional insight, the authors investigate how the relationship between reporting flexibility and assessed manager responsibility is mediated by investors’ perceptions of management’s self-interested behavior. The authors consider monetary and non-monetary motivations for litigation against management such as recouping financial losses and punishing management. The results suggest that recouping financial losses is not the sole motivation for litigation. The authors provide evidence that punishing management is an important non-monetary component of the litigation decision. The results contribute to the limited literature on investor litigation decisions and inform the debate surrounding the potential effects of more principles-based accounting standards.

The authors test the hypotheses using an experiment with a 2×1 between-subjects design in which the authors manipulate reporting flexibility at two levels by varying the precision of accounting guidance and measure all other variables of interest. Participants are 82 part-time executive MBA program students at a major public university in the USA. Most participants work full-time (94 percent), own or have owned stocks either directly or through retirement plans (84 percent), indicate general investment knowledge (97 percent), and report high levels of familiarity with corporate financial statements, including balance sheets and income statements (92 percent). Thus, the authors conclude that these executive MBA students are reasonable surrogates for investors.

Consistent with the predictions, perceived management reporting flexibility affects investors’ propensity to pursue litigation against management. The authors find that the assignment of responsibility to management for harmful events such as investor losses, employee job losses, and economic losses suffered by a community mediates the relationship between reporting flexibility and investors’ intention to litigate. The authors also find that the relationship between reporting flexibility and assignment of responsibility to management for harmful events is not direct but instead works through the effect of reporting flexibility on perceived management self-interested behavior. As predicted, assessed management responsibility for the harmful event is positively related to investors’ propensity to litigate against management, and this relation is only partially mediated by investors’ perceptions that the litigation will be successful. This result suggests that the litigation decision is driven at least in part by corporate governance goals such as the desire for retribution or punishment of management. The second experiment provides additional support for the theory that the desire to punish management is an important component of investors’ litigation decisions.

The research makes important contributions to the literature on investor litigation and to the ongoing debate regarding principles- vs rules-based accounting standards. While some archival research addresses the conditions under which securities litigation occurs, little empirical research has directly addressed the investor decision to litigate. The paper provides additional evidence to address the question of why investors litigate. By doing so, the authors add to the debate on the desirability of shifting from more rules-based to more principles-based accounting standards.

The theory tested in this study could be used to design mechanisms to mitigate the differential propensity for investors to litigate under differing accounting regimes. As standard setters discuss a move to more principles-based standards in the USA, some observers have expressed concern that investor litigation will increase. The theory suggests that if the standard-setting body can control perceptions of management reporting flexibility such that investors believe principles-based standards provide no more flexibility than rules-based standards, they can limit an increase in the amount of investor litigation.

The authors contribute to theory by providing evidence regarding why investors desire to pursue litigation against management. The authors find that the assignment of responsibility to management for harmful events mediates the relationship between reporting flexibility and investors’ intention to litigate. The authors also find that the relationship between reporting flexibility and assignment of responsibility to management for harmful events is not direct but instead works through the effect of reporting flexibility on perceived management self-interested behavior. Furthermore, assessed management responsibility for the harmful event is positively related to investors’ propensity to litigate against management, and this relation is only partially mediated by investors’ perceptions that the litigation will be successful. Those findings provide theoretical contributions to the literature.