Search results

This paper tests whether Bayesian A/B testing yields better decisions that traditional Neyman-Pearson hypothesis testing. It proposes a model and tests it using a large, multiyear Google Analytics (GA) dataset.

This paper is an empirical study. Competing A/B testing models were used to analyze a large, multiyear dataset of GA dataset for a firm that relies entirely on their website and online transactions for customer engagement and sales.

Bayesian A/B tests of the data not only yielded a clear delineation of the timing and impact of the intellectual property fraud, but calculated the loss of sales dollars, traffic and time on the firm’s website, with precise confidence limits. Frequentist A/B testing identified fraud in bounce rate at 5% significance, and bounces at 10% significance, but was unable to ascertain fraud at the standard significance cutoffs for scientific studies.

None within the scope of the research plan.

Bayesian A/B tests of the data not only yielded a clear delineation of the timing and impact of the IP fraud, but calculated the loss of sales dollars, traffic and time on the firm’s website, with precise confidence limits.

Bayesian A/B testing can derive economically meaningful statistics, whereas frequentist A/B testing only provide p-value’s whose meaning may be hard to grasp, and where misuse is widespread and has been a major topic in metascience. While misuse of p-values in scholarly articles may simply be grist for academic debate, the uncertainty surrounding the meaning of p-values in business analytics actually can cost firms money.

There is very little empirical research in e-commerce that uses Bayesian A/B testing. Almost all corporate testing is done via frequentist Neyman-Pearson methods.

Despite the growing interest in blockchain technology (BCT) applications in the agri-food industry, evidence of their economic and strategic implications remains scarce. This study aims to contribute to filling this gap by jointly investigating how BCT adoption affects transactional relationships, and how it contributes to the firm’s strategic resources.

An explanatory case study is conducted based on a theoretical framework grounded on transaction cost economics and the resource-based-dynamic capabilities view. Six BCT implementations by agri-food firms are studied. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and analysed using thematic analysis.

Findings reveal that BCT benefits depend on how companies integrate technology across their supply chains. In fact, the results suggest that overall transaction efficiency within the supply chain is enhanced only for those firms prioritising stakeholder engagement during technology implementation and leveraging existing trust relationships with economic agents. Moreover, the results suggest that BCT is not yet perceived as a strategic resource, but rather that it has the potential to enhance firms’ operational-adaptive, absorptive and innovative capabilities. When all supply chain actors clearly understand blockchain’s functionality and value, the development of these capabilities becomes more pronounced.

The study identifies two BCT adoption configurations. One primarily focuses on enhancing supply chain efficiency and transparency (dynamic BCT), while the other uses BCT mainly for marketing purposes (static BCT). These configurations lead to varied possibilities for leveraging BCT’s potential advantages. Furthermore, they show how a mismatch between a strategic approach and its chosen configuration could work against any positive impact and lead to disillusionment with the BCT. Thus, managers should assess carefully the impact of such different configuration choices on performance.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to attempt to analyse the economic implications of adopting BCT in the food sector from both a firm and supply chain perspective. Additionally, it shows how interpreting these impacts is contingent on the diverse modalities for embedding BCT into existing supply chains.