Ting Chi and Peter P.D. Kilduff
This study aims to quantitatively identify the impact of major economic and political factors on the US apparel imports from its 15 major trading partners between 1995 and 2006.
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to quantitatively identify the impact of major economic and political factors on the US apparel imports from its 15 major trading partners between 1995 and 2006.
Design/methodology/approach
Ordinary‐least‐square (OLS) regression under a gravity model framework was utilized to construct the analysis. The determinants of US apparel imports were determined and their significance and direction of change over the period were quantified.
Findings
First, the growths of GDP and population both in the USA and within its trading partners have been drivers of US apparel import growth, while greater geographic distance between a trading partner and the USA significantly impedes its exports to the USA. Second, the positive impact on the US apparel imports from the supplying country's infrastructure development, literacy rate and its language commonality with the USA shows that these factors are pivotal to being a competitive US apparel supplier. Finally, preferential market access is proven to be crucial for suppliers to increase apparel exports to the USA.
Research limitations/implications
In future work, the impact of these factors on disaggregated apparel categories could be investigated. Some emerging issues such as non‐tariff barriers could be exploited.
Practical implications
The findings reveal that the US apparel sourcing decisions are made on the basis of many different costs, not only labour cost, but also economic condition, government policy, infrastructure, transport time and cost, language/culture commonality etc.
Originality/value
The study provides a springboard for empirically analyzing the US apparel imports under a gravity model framework. The conclusions are drawn based on solid quantitative evidence.
Details
Keywords
Ting Chi, Peter P.D. Kilduff and Vidyaranya B. Gargeya
This paper aims to analyze the relationships between four constructs – business environment characteristics, competitive priorities, supply chain structures, and firm business…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to analyze the relationships between four constructs – business environment characteristics, competitive priorities, supply chain structures, and firm business performance.
Design/methodology/approach
By establishing a conceptual model and conducting structural equation modeling analysis using collected industrial survey data, the study provides a systemic understanding of the relationships between the individual business environment characteristics, the individual competitive priorities and supply chain structures, and the impact of alignment between these elements on firm business performance.
Findings
Results of the study reveal that the differences in both strategic and supply chain responses to business environment between high‐ and low‐performing firms in the US textile manufacturing industry are striking. The findings provide evidence to corroborate the impact of the alignment between business environment characteristics, competitive priorities, and supply chain structures on firm business performance.
Originality/value
A conceptual model linking business environment characteristics, competitive priorities, supply chain structures, and firm business performance is first proposed and empirically investigated. The appropriate strategic responses and supply chain structures designed to the specific business environment characteristics are quantitatively identified. The nature of these relationships and the effect of alignment are revealed.
Details
Keywords
Tyler N. A. Fezzey and R. Gabrielle Swab
Competitiveness is an important personality trait that has been studied in various disciplines and has been shown to predict critical work outcomes at the individual level…
Abstract
Competitiveness is an important personality trait that has been studied in various disciplines and has been shown to predict critical work outcomes at the individual level. Despite this, the role of competitiveness in groups and teams has received scant attention amongst organizational researchers. Aiming to promote future research on the role of competitiveness as both an adaptive and maladaptive trait – particularly in the context of work – the authors review competitiveness and its effects on individual and team stress and Well-Being, giving special attention to the processes of cohesion and conflict and situational moderators. The authors illustrate a dynamic multilevel model of individual and team difference factors, competitive processes, and individual and team outcomes to highlight competitiveness as a consequential occupational stressor. Furthermore, the authors discuss the feedback loops that inform the different factors, highlight important avenues for future research, and offer practical solutions for managers to reduce unhealthy competition.
Details
Keywords
Alyssa Birnbaum and M. Gloria González-Morales
There are often relational interactions in teams that lead to and drive the spread of work engagement. Despite the potential social impacts on work engagement, such as coworker…
Abstract
There are often relational interactions in teams that lead to and drive the spread of work engagement. Despite the potential social impacts on work engagement, such as coworker support and organizational citizenship behaviors within teams, they have rarely been studied from a social perspective using social network analysis (SNA). This review draws on the crossover model and conservation of resources theory to suggest that the effects of social diffusion and the exchange of resources can impact Well-Being, specifically work engagement, in teams and that SNA can help measure those social interactions. Linking several network concepts – closeness centrality, density, degree centrality, and tie strength – to work engagement propositions related to the spread of work engagement as well as the number and quality of network ties, this review elucidates the potential for integrating SNA methodology to the field of Well-Being for teams.
Details
Keywords
Stephen P. Borgatti, Daniel J. Brass and Daniel S. Halgin
Is social network analysis just measures and methods with no theory? We attempt to clarify some confusions, address some previous critiques and controversies surrounding the…
Abstract
Is social network analysis just measures and methods with no theory? We attempt to clarify some confusions, address some previous critiques and controversies surrounding the issues of structure, human agency, endogeneity, tie content, network change, and context, and add a few critiques of our own. We use these issues as an opportunity to discuss the fundamental characteristics of network theory and to provide our thoughts on opportunities for future research in social network analysis.
Details
Keywords
This chapter examines key drivers of variation in adaptive capacity of project network organizations (PNOs). PNOs are defined as strategically coordinated sets of longer-term, yet…
Abstract
This chapter examines key drivers of variation in adaptive capacity of project network organizations (PNOs). PNOs are defined as strategically coordinated sets of longer-term, yet project-based relationships, which provide for both stability and change in volatile project businesses. While prior research has emphasized the adaptive role of flexible structures and agency, the author focuses on the role of project variety and contextual embedding and disembedding in building adaptive capacity. Comparing two PNOs in TV movie production, the author argues that differences in adaptive capacity are a function of inter-context connectivity, that is, the level of task and team linkages among diverse project contexts, and the degree to which network ties and relational practices have “dual quality” in being valuable both within and beyond specific project contexts. Findings have important implications for project, network, and organization research.
Details
Keywords
Julie E. Ferguson, Peter Groenewegen, Christine Moser, Stephen P. Borgatti and John W. Mohr
Thomas Greckhamer and Sebnem Cilesiz
Purpose – In this chapter we highlight the potential of critical and poststructural paradigms and associated qualitative research approaches for future research in strategy. In…
Abstract
Purpose – In this chapter we highlight the potential of critical and poststructural paradigms and associated qualitative research approaches for future research in strategy. In addition, we aim to contribute to the proliferation of applications of qualitative methodologies as well as to facilitate the diversity of qualitative inquiry approaches in the strategy field.
Methodology/Approach – Building on insights from standpoint theory, we discuss the importance and necessity of cultivating critical and poststructural paradigms in strategy. Furthermore, we review three related qualitative inquiry approaches (i.e., discourse analysis, deconstruction, and genealogy) and develop suggestions for their utilization in future strategy research on emerging market economies.
Findings – We highlight key concepts of critical and poststructural paradigms as well as of the selected approaches and provide a variety of examples relevant to strategy research to illustrate potential applications and analytic considerations.
Originality/Value of chapter – Critical and poststructural paradigms and related research methodologies are underutilized in strategy research; however, they are important contributions to paradigmatic and methodological diversity in the field generally and necessary approaches for developing our understanding of strategy phenomena in the context of emerging market economies specifically.
Details
Keywords
Ginka Toegel and Karsten Jonsen
This chapter is about how leaders attempt to move from traditional to shared leadership and why they often cannot. We develop a new theoretical framework to examine whether…
Abstract
This chapter is about how leaders attempt to move from traditional to shared leadership and why they often cannot. We develop a new theoretical framework to examine whether leaders are willing to shift control from themselves to their followers and thus promote shared leadership in their teams. We argue that control shifts, while necessary for shared leadership, are particularly difficult for leaders to enact. This is because leadership is often closely bound with power and status in the organization, a reality of organizational life that is often overlooked in the quest for new forms of leadership, such as shared leadership. Our contribution lies in examining leaders’ ability to enact shared leadership through the lenses of primary and secondary control, and situating control shift in the context of global leadership including selected cultural dimensions, complexity, and paradoxes.