Search results

Inspired by the “responsibility turn” in the broader organization/management literature, the overarching aim of this article is to help scholars working at the gender × entrepreneurship intersection produce research with a higher likelihood of being accessed, appreciated and acted upon by policy- practitioners. Consistent with this aim, we hope that our paper contributes to an increased use of academic-practitioner collaborations as a means of producing such research.

We selected Cunliffe and Pavlovich’s (2022) recently formulated “public organization/management studies” (public OMS) approach as our guiding methodology. We implemented this approach by forming a co-authorship team comprised of a policy professional and an entrepreneurship scholar and then engaging in a democratic, collaborative and mutually respectful process of knowledge cogeneration.

Our paper is comprised of four distinct sets of ideas. We start by describing who policy-practitioners are and what they want from academic research in general. We follow this with a comprehensive set of priorities for policy-oriented research at the gender × entrepreneurship nexus, accompanied by references to academic studies that offer initial insight into the identified priorities. We then offer suggestions for the separate and joint actions that scholars and policy-practitioners can take to increase policy-relevant research on gender and entrepreneurship. We end with a description and critical reflection on our application of the public OMS approach.

The ideas presented in our article offer an original response to recent work that has critiqued the policy implications (or lack thereof) within prior research at the gender × entrepreneurship nexus (Foss et al., 2019). Our ideas also complement and extend existing recommendations for strengthening the practical contributions of academic scholarship at this intersection (Nelson, 2020). An especially unique aspect is our description of – and critical reflection upon – how we applied the public OMS approach to bridge the academic-policy divide.

The COVID-19 epidemic caused significant disruptions to numerous supply chains. In order to enhance the resilience of supply chains, Collaboration (CO), Information Alignment (IA), and Big Data Analytics Capability (BDAC) have emerged as contemporary strategies within the humanitarian context. This study was conducted to explore the mechanism via which the effect of BDAC, IA and CO on Humanitarian Supply Chain Resilience (HSCR) in the humanitarian space could be optimized through Organizational Flexibility (OF).

A model of six hypotheses was developed based on the Organizational Information Processing Theory (OIPT). Data from 127 supply chain managers in humanitarian organizations were used to test the hypotheses. The analysis employed both descriptive and inferential statistics using SPSS version 26 and Smart-PLS version 3.

The study revealed that BDAC, IA, and CO individually influence supply chain resilience in the humanitarian setting while OF did not moderate the relationship between BDAC, IA, CO, and HSCR.

It is essential that humanitarian stakeholders prioritize factors that could increase supply chain resilience by employing contemporary BDA technologies, effective information flow, and collaborative strategies to set up a robust humanitarian SC system that could help lessen the impact of disasters.

This presents interesting insights that advance theoretical debates on how CO, IA, and BDAC under varying levels of OF could influence SCR in the humanitarian context. The paper further offers some useful guidance to managers in relief organizations who desire to build resilient supply chains by leveraging BDAC, collaboration and information alignment. Finally, the paper may also provoke future humanitarian scholars to replicate the study using different approaches.