Search results

The paper aims to explore the relationship between customer mindsets and customer citizenship behavior. This study used the cognitive-affective-behavioral model to examine how customer mindsets relate to customer citizenship behavior. In addition, it investigated the mediating effect of customer brand engagement and moderating role of brand trust.

The study used a self-administered online survey from 412 respondents using cellular mobile operating brands. Partial least square structural equation modeling was used to analyze the collected data.

The results revealed that growth-mindset customers directly and significantly influence customer citizenship behavior. The impact of a fixed mindset on customer citizenship behavior is indirect through customer brand engagement. The moderating findings revealed that the effect of brand trust on the relationship between customer brand engagement and customer citizenship behavior is higher than that between the fixed mindset and customer brand engagement.

The findings provide valuable insights for marketing and brand managers to design marketing campaigns considering different mindsets to generate customer citizenship behavior among customers.

This study provides new avenues in consumer psychology and behavior by unfolding the underlying mechanism through which mindsets lead to customer citizenship behavior, contributing to existing knowledge by extending the cognitive-affective-behavioral model.

Existing studies of shopping momentum effect show that an initial purchase causes the consumer to switch from a deliberative mindset to an implemental mindset, thereby leading to buy subsequent items based on Gollwitzer’s Rubicon model. Since purchase activity goes through the actional phase which has not been studied yet, the purpose of this paper is to explore the characteristics of the actional mindset compared with those of the planning and deliberative mindsets.

This study conducts three experiments to examine whether the implemental mindset can be differentiated from the actional mindset via recalls and perceptual processing measures.

The findings provide evidences that the actional mindset is different from the implemental mindset, and the planning phase is associated more with broad-mindedness, whereas the actional phase is with narrow-mindedness.

Manipulation of the actional mindset can be extended to real purchases in physical shopping spaces, and various choice objects could be tested with a larger number of participants.

To boost the shopping momentum effect, marketers should put customers into an actional mindset by leading them to show their decisions such as carrying a shopping bag and uploading their purchased items. To avoid overbuying, customers should stay in planning mindsets without verbalizing their decisions. Putting goods into virtual shopping baskets in online shopping could be a good way to avoid overbuying.

The paper empirically explores the characteristics of actional mindset in terms of cognitive and perceptual processing and suggest meaningful implication in online shopping situation.

Resource allocation is an important area of strategic planning in any organization, including higher education. In comparing two case examples of a college's efforts in shared governance in allocating budget to its five departments, the purpose of this paper is to show the importance of a college's awareness and understanding of team behavioral mindsets and contextual factors when practicing continuous improvement each time it applies shared governance.

The authors propose five models that represent five distinct behavioral mindsets. The authors examine the fit of real data based on two case examples, and then identify and compare the behavioral mindsets and possible coalition formed in each case.

The results show the type of behavioral mindset evolves over time, and the contextual factors such as changes in the macro-environment, the composition of decision makers, and their personalities, play an important role in shaping the final outcome. Continuously monitoring and learning, which leads to a more thorough understanding and awareness of the changes in contextual factors, is imperative.

Team decision making involving resource allocation is a critical problem in higher education when applying shared governance. A clear understanding of the type of behavioral mindset exhibited in the process and its causes is critical. The paper proposes a model that can help higher education administrators identify the behavioral mindset. In addition, the authors find support from established theories for the evolution of team behavioral mindsets in a college's budget allocation.

Earlier work has suggested that assumptions, values and beliefs about the importance of cooperating with competitors (a coopetition-oriented mindset) should manifest into behavioural forms of coopetition, such as resource and capability-sharing activities. Yet, limited research surrounds the complexities of this link. The purpose of this study is to unpack the relationship between a coopetition-oriented mindset and coopetition-oriented behaviours under the moderating roles of industry experience and degree of internationalization, guided by resource-based theory and the relational view.

The chosen empirical context was the Canadian wine industry because wine producers are often involved in coopetition strategies and have varying degrees of internationalisation. Preliminary interview data were collected from 18 managers to shape the operationalisations. Then survey data were collected from 195 Canadian wine producers. After checking the statistical data for all major assessments of reliability and validity (together with common method variance), the hypothesised and control paths were tested through hierarchical regression.

A coopetition-oriented mindset had a positive and significant association with coopetition-oriented behaviours. Surprisingly, this link was negatively moderated by industry experience. Additionally, degree of internationalisation yielded a positive moderation effect. These moderators highlight situations where a coopetition-oriented mindset is (and is not) likely to manifest into coopetition activities.

If firms aim to engage in behavioural forms of coopetition, they should manage assumptions, values and beliefs associated with the advantages of collaborating with their competitors. Industry experience can limit the extent to which business’ coopetition-oriented mindsets manifest into coopetition-oriented behaviours. This could be explained by decision makers possessing information that discourages them from working with certain (untrustworthy) rivals because of the potential harmful effects on their performance. Companies should use their industry experience to avoid working with rival entities that will create negative outcomes, such as tensions (e.g., conflict, power imbalances and opportunistic behaviours), lost intellectual property and diluted competitive advantages. Nonetheless, industry experience might signify that there are more risks than rewards linked with these business-to-business marketing strategies. Higher levels of internationalisation can help firms to recognise that coopetition-oriented behaviours may lead to performance-enhancing opportunities in their overseas markets.

This investigation contributes to the business-to-business marketing literature with new evidence on how organisations can foster a coopetition-oriented mindset to engage in coopetition strategies. The negative moderation effect from industry experience highlights that knowledge of competitors’ activities can limit the extent to which coopetition-oriented behaviours are implemented. Moreover, the positive interaction effect from degree of internationalisation extends the growing body of knowledge pertaining to coopetition in an international arena. Collectively, these results show that while a coopetition-oriented mindset is a critical driver of coopetition-oriented behaviours, there are certain contingencies that can strengthen or weaken this association. Finally, by integrating resource-based theory and the relational view, this paper could explore the different forms of coopetition, in terms of organisation-wide mindsets and firm-level behaviours. This paper concludes with some managerial recommendations, alongside a series of limitations and avenues for future research.

The purpose of this study is to explore how individual-level cognitive and organizational-level behavioral factors influence the level of firms’ export performance as firms adapt to the challenges of foreign expansion.

Based on the literature on dynamic capabilities (DCs) and international business, the study introduces a multi-level model of DC to internationalize and test it empirically on a sample of 93 Polish exporting firms using structural equation modeling.

The results show a strong and positive impact of the “strategy as stretch” managerial mind-set on two behavioral elements, namely, business modeling and partnering capability. Global mind-set has a strong and positive impact on business modeling and learning about foreign markets and a negative but insignificant effect on partnering capability. Only two of the three behavioral elements of the conceptualized DC have significant and positive impacts on export performance. In contrast to the expectations, the direct path coefficient from learning about foreign markets to export performance was found to be positive but insignificant.

This study contributes to the literature by offering a coherent, multi-level framework of DCs. The study goes beyond previous conceptualizations of DCs and considers various individual-level cognitive and organizational-level behavioral elements of DC for the internationalization of exporting firms. In particular, this study shows the interplay between them and their combined impact on export performance.

While there is strong agreement that globalization is spreading rapidly, there is no agreement on what globalization actually means and how it is measured. Giddens (1999) defines globalization as “the worldwide interconnection at the cultural, political, and economic level resulting from the elimination of communication and trade barriers.” He further defines it as “…a process of convergence of cultural, political, and economic aspects of life” (reported in Inkpen & Ramaswamy, 2006, p. 13). Govindarajan and Gupta (2001) define globalization as “growing economic interdependence among countries as reflected in increasing cross-border flows of three types of entities: goods and services, capital, and know-how” (p. 4).

Inherent in the meaning of global mindset is the dilemma of an appropriate level of analysis at which we define, measure, and research this construct. This chapter addresses the individual level of analysis using social cognition, which explains how the development process of global mindset helps individuals make sense of unfamiliar stimuli, broaden their cognitive capacities, adjust their behavior accordingly, and have a positive influence on others. Our recently developed core construct of positive psychological capital, or PsyCap (Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007), and the overarching process of authentic leadership development (Avolio & Luthans, 2006) are used to explicate the theoretical social cognitive framework. The “influence on others” implies a leadership process, and that is why we address the role that global mindset may have in the authentic leadership development process (Avolio & Luthans, 2006).

This paper aims to determine why so many banks do not recognize in a timely manner the inherent risks and imbalances with their risk/reward decision trade-offs, to elevate the risk conversation by embracing a more strategic and adaptive behavioral perspective and to show how an effective risk management organizational mindset is a definite solution for mitigating risk.

A direct-mail questionnaire survey was designed with the unit of analysis US community bank (under US$1.5bn in assets) and its risk performance. We used quantitative methods using previously tested scales for main constructs and FDIC bank data for performance measures. To gauge the models capacity for determining discriminatory value, results were also measured against relative peer financial performance.

The findings established that an effective risk management process that assimilates risk tolerance, risk propensity and risk practices into a managerial mindset offers a sound solution for mitigating risk. By envisioning risk as a “conceptual model of thinking” and interpreting it as a “predictable business process”, and by offering specific “decision enablers” that complement the corporate mindset, it creates a safety net against unsafe risk practices. As a result, it allows for an appreciation that current financial performance is a direct measure of management’s risk decision capabilities.

The sample size (n = 151), although adequate for our purpose was relatively small, was restricted to US community banks (less than US$1.5bn in assets) and single-informants (CEOs), thereby providing a somewhat narrow focus. Also, the survey was conducted during a slow economic period, and results may be different during a growth period. We see ripe opportunity for further research, especially related to money-center and regional banks and the next level of management as well as the behavioral influences that frame the risk/reward opportunity. Research on other industries, small businesses, etc., would be valuable because risk permeates all decisioning.

From a practitioner perspective, providing guidance on risk oversight allows for improved financial performance. The findings should be of interest to financial industry leaders, policy makers and regulators as understanding how an active orientation of risk tolerance, risk propensity and risk practices are coordinated across the organization is vital. Also, managers need to understand how characteristics of risk management manifest itself within their organization in terms of productivity and financial performance.

This paper is the first comprehensive empirical study that incorporates a conceptual approach that uses outcome history, behavioral influences and operational dimensions to identify risk management capabilities in community banks designed to increase risk/reward awareness.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the personal identity of Donald Trump in the US presidential election using the mindset agency theory framework and content analysis.

The qualitative evaluation of identity type is determined by the personality mindset agency theory (PMAT). This measures qualitatively by assigning a type to the personal identity. The methods being adopted are content analysis, and a coding frame is constructed that arises from the key words defined in PMAT.

Using PMAT, the authors determine that Trump’s personal identity is of the type hierarchical popularism (HP), from which behavioural patterns are derived, supposing that this is consistent with his public identity type measured using agency MAT (AMAT), which will be assessed in part 3 of this paper.

Appropriate image management can be used in an attempt to hide problematic purely self-interest aspects of a personality. This paper shows that it is possible to evaluate personality mindsets using content analysis. In a later paper, exploration of agency mindsets will occur that is indicative of the potential for behaviour.

Globalization has created an intense competitive environment. As a result, achieving competitive advantage has become the core argument in international management. Some scholars have argued that the development of global leaders is critical (Osland, Bird, & Mendenhall, 2006; Yukl, 2009), while others believe that the global mindset is the key to strategic advantage (Black, Morison, & Gregerson, 1999; Jeannet, 2000; Javidan, 2008). In this paper, we present a review of both literatures (i.e., global leadership and global mindset) to highlight that today's dynamic marketplace requires a shift in thinking. We conclude by drawing attention to existing gaps in these literatures, and shed light on an emerging integrative model of global leadership and mindset.