Search results

The purpose of this paper is to disentangle the role of the source and recipient of knowledge in supply chain collaboration by providing evidence that the distributive capabilities of a source, working in conjunction with the absorptive capacity (AC) of a recipient, have direct and significant effects on levels of collaborative engagement between supply chain partners and indirect and significant effects on collaborative operational outcomes.

This study utilises 310 surveys and structural equations modelling to provide empirical evidence to support the significance of the source of knowledge in collaborative activities.

The study provides evidence for source-based knowledge transfer constructs (distributive capabilities) in supply chain collaboration. Further, this research supports these capabilities working in conjunction with recipient AC both as necessary but insufficient requirements for successful knowledge transfer.

Firm interdependence within supply chains continues to grow. In today’s environment of outsourcing and increasing levels of inter-firm activities, this research provides a parsimonious model of collaboration that allows firms to understand knowledge transfer better and how to more aptly manage these types of activities and complex relationships.

Earlier research in this domain has focussed on the abilities of a recipient firm to absorb knowledge in order to understand successful collaborative knowledge transfer. By solely focussing on the recipient firm, the role of the source of knowledge has been largely overlooked in this stream of research.

The purpose of this article is to examine disaster justice for people with disabilities (PWD).

Drawing on the capability approach, the article explores distributive injustice that PWD face in dealing with disasters. It discusses procedural justice with a focus on the agency of PWD and their participation in decision-making processes concerning disaster risk reduction.

It argues that disaster injustice faced by PWD can be construed as the inequalities of capabilities that they experience in coping with disasters. Furthermore, although social structures play an important role in creating and perpetuating disaster injustice, PWD, as agents of change, have power to transform social structures that, in turn, bring about justice for themselves.

The article raises the need for considering the equality of capabilities and human agency in achieving disaster justice for PWD.

Central to Martha Nussbaum's development of the capability approach into a theory of social and global justice is her addition of the notion of a capability threshold below which no dignified human life can be lived. This capability threshold identifies a standard for distributive justice that any decent political order must secure for all citizens. It is this threshold that is the intended focus of this paper.

Examining her most recent statement of the capability approach, Nussbaum's arguments that the threshold should be locally set by each nation in accordance with their history and traditions, and that all nations currently fail to satisfy the threshold condition, are assessed.

This paper shows that if Nussbaum's arguments are accepted, then the central function of a threshold as a tool of discrimination is undermined. If all nations fail to meet their locally set threshold, then there is no clear basis for the global redistribution that Nussbaum regards as necessary. Indeed, what basis there is could even justify counter‐intuitive redistribution from poorer to richer nations.

This paper concludes that if the capability approach is to be developed into a theory of social justice, then, rather than being set locally at different levels, the capability threshold may need to be a genuinely global one. Only then can the threshold discriminate between unjust political orders and those that are at least minimally just.

Despite the large literature base associated with dyadic collaboration, its knowledge-based antecedents are still not well understood. The purpose of this paper is to better understand those antecedents and to explore why the supply chain (SC) literature has found mixed results regarding knowledge transfer and absorptive capacity in dyadic collaboration research.

The critical incident technique (CIT) was utilized, using qualitative semi-structured interviews to refine a proposed research model. In total, 43 executives were interviewed each providing a description of both a successful and an unsuccessful SC dyadic collaboration. The interviews were analyzed to better understand the knowledge-based antecedents of buyer–supplier collaboration.

This study suggests that dyadic collaboration and subsequent outcomes are improved by successful knowledge transfer. Additionally, knowledge transfer requires both distributive and absorptive capacities in each participant. The research also uncovered new evidence to support the need for a collaborative orientation to support successful knowledge transfer.

The interviews conducted using the CIT provided a wealth of information and executive experiences in SC collaboration. However, the interviews only provide a single perspective of collaborative engagements. Multiple perspectives of each collaboration would add value to this research.

SC collaboration and knowledge transfer have been well studied across disciplines. This research introduces new knowledge-related variables that can contribute to successful collaboration: distributive capability and SC collaborative orientation.

This chapter emphasizes the importance of potential and realized capabilities in building and sustaining social innovations. We present an assessment of the drivers and barriers to the development of social innovation ecosystems through the use of internal (absorptive capacities) and external organizational capabilities (open social innovation). A particular emphasis is placed on social innovation outcomes and impacts. The capability approach is particularly useful for measuring social innovation impacts and investigating the “micro-meso-macro” of linkages that underlie the process of social innovation.

Our methodological approach measures social innovations’ outcomes and impact through an aggregative model, which takes into consideration different forms of capabilities that are engendered in the process of or as a result of social innovation. This methodology highlights the importance of social innovation drivers and contexts in which knowledge exploration and exploitation lead to the creation of capabilities that help social innovators to respond to unfulfilled social needs.

The research presented in this chapter provides a new perspective on how the capability approach can be used to assess and measure individual and collective actions when facing social challenges.

Our research supports and complements the findings of the EU project SIMPACT an acronym for “Boosting the Impact of SI in Europe through Economic Underpinnings,” by highlighting the processes and outcomes and SI impact measurement.

The measurement of social innovation outcomes and impact has gained importance for policy makers and constitutes a strategic tool for designing policies in support of social entrepreneurs, social investors, and private and public organizations which participate in cocreating and implementing innovative projects.

The research presented in this chapter sheds light on the “micro-meso-macro” linkages that foster social innovation ecosystems, and offer valuable tools and guidelines to researchers, practitioners, and policymaker in the field of innovation in general and social innovation in particular.

A sustainability reporting framework must demonstrate that resources are fairly bought and used to support diverse life on earth within habitable ranges. The purpose of this paper is to propose a principle-based sustainability reporting framework that measures, audits and reports based on sustainability outcomes and impacts as part of the corporate reporting framework.

This paper draws on the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) and targets for preparing a reporting framework. It uses Gaia Theory and the Theory of Distributive Justice constructs that align with sustainable development principles to delineate a reporting approach.

Frameworks that promote sustainability reporting have increasingly embraced UN SDGs but overly focus on performance promoting inter-firm comparisons. This framework introduces principle-based sustainability reporting where firms demonstrate their chosen contribution to sustainable development using 17 UN SDGs as goal posts.

This conceptual paper presents theoretical constructs that future research can empirically validate to enhance sustainability reporting.

This principle-based sustainability reporting framework is implementable for corporate reporting, where sustainability reporting integrates with the financial and economic intellectual capital reporting frameworks.

This framework highlights the importance of acquiring and using resources to distribute justice and fairness. It is a joint project between firms and stakeholders.

This framework promotes integrated thinking for firms to engage in principle-based sustainability reporting and provides a roadmap for sustainability reporting using the SDG Compass logic model.

Massive increases in international trade and investment extend industries beyond national borders, so states and enterprises have become the two critical players in the boundary of industries. The purpose of this paper is to provide a new conceptual framework to analyze the role of states and enterprises in enhancing the industrial international competitiveness (IIC).

Being a research‐based paper, the topic is approached by theoretical analysis and conceptual development. The paper reviews IIC literature and argues for a rational study ICC in the context of global value chain. Next, the paper puts forward a two‐dimensional governance model and five typical governance systems of the industries of developing countries. Examples of typical governance system are given based the practice of Chinese industries, such as appeal, rare earths, automotive, etc.

This paper constructs an industrial two‐dimensional governance model of the developing countries in the context of global value chain based on the interaction between industry governance and market governance, and also presents five typical governance systems – free to market, public governance, industrial governance, joint governance and network governance. Different governance system reflects different roles of states and enterprises played in the global value chains and result in different IIC in the end.

The limitation is based primarily on methodology. The two‐dimensional governance model provides target‐oriented guidance for foresting international competitiveness of different types of industries. Future studies should include more in‐depth case studies on different governance system.

The paper presents a framework of the industrial two‐dimensional governance model, which emphasizes the important role of both states and enterprise in the IIC in the context of global value chain.

This paper aims to advance research in the challenging area of achieving competitiveness through supply chain flexibility fit and trust development.

A structured survey questionnaire was administered to a potential list of 773 participants resulting in 348 valid responses. An empirical study was conducted on these responses.

Leveraging of flexibility in supply chain access structures and improving of trust relationships can ensure significant performance improvement.

The research relies on the use of cross sectional data instead of longitudinal data, thereby limiting the generalisibility of the findings.

The strong evidence of relationship between improved performance and capability of supply chain linkages provides Chinese business managers with practical guidelines for improving competitive edge.

The value of the paper lies in the originality of the data and context‐relevant findings. No previous study of this nature had been undertaken in China.

This article posits a paradigm of levels of success for strategic decision outcomes. A high level of strategic decision success is normally preceded by a positive strategic gap in which the strengths of the organization clearly outweigh its weaknesses. Three comprehensive cases are set forth as practical applications to illustrate and confirm the paradigm of levels of strategic decision success. Philip Morris’s decision in 1984 to diversify into the food processing industry is proffered as the epitome of a highly successful strategic choice. General Motors’ decision in 1978 to reinvent the corporation is advanced as a hallmark of a marginally successful strategic outcome. And Walt Disney’s decision in 1996 to acquire Capital Cities/ABC is cited as an example of a strategic choice with an indeterminately successful outcome. The conclusions in all three cases are supported by current research findings.

While the significance of organizational resources and capabilities is widely discussed, little is known about their interrelationships as well as benefits for firms that are involved in coopetitive relationships. Against this backdrop, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the performance effects of entrepreneurial orientation, strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity as well as their complementarity effects on operational and innovation performance for firms involved in horizontal coopetitive relationships.

Drawing upon the resource-based-view, dynamic capabilities and the relational view theories, this study forwards numerous hypotheses between the constructs of interest. The proposed hypotheses are tested utilizing survey data collected from 313 horizontal coopetitive relationships.

The results clearly suggest that entrepreneurial orientation, strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity could positively impact innovation and operational performance outcomes independently. In addition, the authors also find strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity to have differential moderating effects on the relationships between entrepreneurial orientation and the performance outcomes.

The findings suggest that although strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity could lead to performance benefits independently, when it comes to coopetitive relationships, the use of both these capabilities may not substantially increase the positive impact of entrepreneurial orientation on performance outcomes. Specifically, given that these capabilities could intensify competitiveness as well as hostility between partners, they seem to affect the firm's performance differently.