Search results

This paper aims to describe how a fuzzy qualitative comparative analysis can be used to describe which combinations of academic factors are most influential for achieving success in college‐level mathematics. Using a fuzzy qualitative comparative analysis allows for the comparison of all possible combinations for a collection of predictor variables, as well as strategies for determining which configurations of these sets of variables are the most consistent with success in college‐level mathematics. Recent advances in fuzzy qualitative comparative analysis techniques have now integrated traditional qualitative comparative analysis strategies with formal statistical tests, thus allowing for the analysis and comparison of complex relationships that are difficult to describe with more traditional statistical methods such as regression analysis.

Data were collected from 259 full‐time, first‐time freshmen at a large state university in the USA. They were analysed using fuzzy‐set qualitative comparative analysis (FQCA).

Findings from this study suggest that the most parsimonious configuration of college remediation status, spending less time away from mathematics, and doing better in high school mathematics are key to success in college‐level mathematics.

Although numerous studies have made great progress in describing the complex relationship between prior mathematics exposure in high school with success in college‐level mathematics, one limitation of many studies is that they rely on analytic methods that only estimate the net effect of a single predictor variable, or a very small collection of predictor variables. This study utilises fuzzy‐set qualitative comparative analysis (FQCA) which can be used to analyze more complex interrelationships among a collection of predictor variables.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the configuration of factors affecting the accuracy of triage decision-making. The contribution of the work is twofold: first, it develops a protocol for applying a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) in the context of triage decision-making, and second, it studies, through two pilot cases, the interplay between individual and organizational factors in determining the emergence of errors in different decisional situations.

The methodology adopted in this paper is the qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). The fuzzy-set variant of QCA (fsQCA) is implemented. The data set has been collected during field research carried out in the Emergency Departments (EDs) of two Italian public hospitals.

The results of this study show that the interplay between individual and contextual/organizational factors determines the emergence of errors in triage assessment. Furthermore, there are some regularities in the patterns discovered in each of the investigated organizational contexts. These findings suggest that we should avoid isolating individual factors from the context in which nurses make their decisions.

Previous research on triage has mainly explored the impact of homogeneous groups of factors on the accuracy of the triage process, without considering the complexity of the phenomenon under investigation. This study outlines the need to consider the not-linear relationships among different factors in the study of triage’s decision-making. The definition and implementation of a protocol to apply fsQCA to the triage process in EDs further contributes to the originality of the research.

The purpose of this paper is to provide meaningful information about sponsorship management in state-owned enterprises.

Qualitative and quantitative data from Germany are analyzed in a case study approach using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (Fs/QCA)—an analytic method relevant for describing configurational patterns of causal factors.

The case study of sponsorships from state-owned enterprises in Germany reveals four alternative configurations of top-management support, sponsee prominence, standardized processes, and sponsorship leverage explaining sponsor satisfaction.

The paper combines two underrepresented but important aspects of sponsorship research, i.e. sponsorship management in state-owned enterprises, in an empirical study. Further, present study adds to sponsorship literature by pointing to fuzzy-set Fs/QCA as a relatively novel method that can capture the phenomenon of complex causality.

This study aims to propose guidelines for the joint use of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to combine symmetric and asymmetric perspectives in model evaluation, in the hospitality and tourism field.

This study discusses PLS-SEM as a symmetric approach and fsQCA as an asymmetric approach to analyze structural and configurational models. It presents guidelines to conduct an fsQCA based on latent construct scores drawn from PLS-SEM, to assess how configurations of exogenous constructs produce a specific outcome in an endogenous construct.

This research highlights the advantages of combining PLS-SEM and fsQCA to analyze the causal effects of antecedents (i.e., exogenous constructs) on outcomes (i.e., endogenous constructs). The construct scores extracted from the PLS-SEM analysis of a nomological network of constructs provide accurate input for performing fsQCA to identify the sufficient configurations required to predict the outcome(s). Complementing the assessment of the model’s explanatory and predictive power, the fsQCA generates more fine-grained insights into variable relationships, thereby offering the means to reach better managerial conclusions.

The application of PLS-SEM and fsQCA as separate prediction-oriented methods has increased notably in recent years. However, in the absence of clear guidelines, studies applied the methods inconsistently, giving researchers little direction on how to best apply PLS-SEM and fsQCA in tandem. To address this concern, this study provides guidelines for the joint use of PLS-SEM and fsQCA.

Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is a promising, powerful method that is increasingly used for IS research. However, the Information Systems (IS) discipline still lacks a shared understanding of how to conduct and report QCA. This paper introduces the fundamental concepts of QCA, summarizes the status quo, and derives recommendations for future research.

A descriptive literature review in major IS outlets summarizes how and why QCA has been used in the IS discipline, critically evaluates the status quo, and derives recommendations for future QCA studies.

The literature review reveals 32 empirical research articles in major IS journals that have used the QCA method. Articles applied QCA to a broad range of research topics at the individual and organizational levels, mainly as a standalone analysis for theory development, elaboration and testing. The authors also provide evidence that most published IS research articles do not take full advantage of the potential QCA, such as analyzing necessary causal conditions or testing the robustness of QCA results. The authors provide seven actionable recommendations for future IS research using QCA.

The literature review assesses the status quo of QCA’s application in the IS discipline and provides specific recommendations on how IS researchers can leverage the full potential of QCA.

The purpose of this research is to examine why communities facing the same disaster recover differentially and determine pathways to successful disaster recovery in the research setting of New Orleans neighborhoods affected by Hurricane Katrina. While previous studies suggest that there are a variety of pathways to recovery, a broader cross-case comparison is necessary to generalize these pathways into a recovery framework. Specifically, this study seeks to determine what pre-disaster and post-disaster causal factors, alone or in combination, were important to recovery following Hurricane Katrina.

This paper presents a cross-case comparative study of neighborhood-level recovery. Based on prior work, which used the Delphi method to determine hypothesized causal factors and indicators of recovery, data was collected through publically available sources, including the US Census, the Greater New Orleans Community Data Center and previously completed studies for 18 damaged neighborhoods. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis was used due to its ability to analyze both quantitative and qualitative data for smaller case studies.

The results show that there are multiple pathways combining pre-disaster community factors and post-disaster actions that led to recovery, as measured by population return. For example, economic capacity is nearly sufficient for recovery, but a combination of low social vulnerability, post-disaster community participation, a high proportion of pre-World War II housing stock and high amounts of post-disaster funds also led to recovery.

This research uses a novel method to link pre-disaster measures of resilience and vulnerability to recovery outcomes and, through cross-case comparison, generates results that will enable researchers to develop a theory of sustainable community recovery.

The alienation of megaproject environmental responsibility (MER) behavior is destructive, but its mechanism has not been clearly depicted. Based on fraud triangle theory and the fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) method, this study explored the combined effect of antecedent factors on alienation of MER behavior.

Based on the fraud triangle theory and literature review, eight influencing factors associated with the alienation of MER behavior were first identified. Subsequently, the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis was used in this study to reveal configurations influencing alienation of MER behavior.

The study found nine configurations of MER behavioral alienation antecedent factors, integrated into three types of driving modes, i.e. “economic pressure + learning effect,” “institutional defect + moral rejection,” and “information asymmetry + economic pressure + expectation pressure.”

By analyzing the configuration effects of various induced conditions, this study puts forward a comprehensive analysis framework to solve the alienation of MER behavior in the megaprojects and a practical strategy to control alienation of MER behavior.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate what drives people to show a willingness to mitigate the effects of climate change. To accomplish this goal, this research uses the theory of planned behaviour to examine whether attitude towards climate change, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control are potential determinants of a pro-environmental intention and thus a pro-environmental behaviour.

This explanatory paper applies a Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis to identify the key drivers of pro-environmental intention and behaviour. A non-probability convenience sample of 481 Egyptian respondents was collected.

This study finds that awareness combined with a willingness to pay to mitigate climate change are key drivers of pro-environmental intention. Moreover, personal responsibility and confidence in the ability to mitigate climate change also trigger climate-friendly intentions. Finally, it is found that societal engagement and willingness to take action increase the propensity to exhibit pro-environmental behaviour.

The results of our analysis cannot be generalized to the Egyptian population as a whole as our sample only comprises a sample of Egyptian students.

This paper is novel as it is the first that applies Qualitative Comparative Analysis to the Theory of Planned Behaviour. By doing so, the paper sheds light on the understanding of key cognitive, social-psychological and behavioural factors which lead to environmental actions. Hence, it provides policy-makers with a framework to support a more sustainable society.

Drawing upon the importance of research and development (R&D) alliances in driving firm innovation performance, extant research has analyzed individually the impact of R&D alliance partner attributes on firm innovation performance. Despite such analyzes, research has generally underestimated the configurations of partner attributes leading to firm innovation performance. This research gap is interesting to explore, as firms involved in R&D alliances usually face a combination of partner attributes. Moreover, gaining a better understanding of how R&D partner attributes tie into configurations is an issue that is attracting particular interest in coopetition research and alliance literature. This paper aims to obtain a better knowledge of this underrated, but important, aspect of alliances by exploring what configurations of R&D alliance partner attributes lead firms involved in R&D alliances to achieve high innovation performance. To tackle this question, first, this study reviews the extant literature on R&D alliances by relying on the knowledge-based view of alliances to identify the most impactful partner attributes on firms’ innovation performance. This paper then applies a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to explore the configurations of R&D alliance partner attributes that lead firms involved in R&D alliances to achieve high innovation performance.

This study selects 27 R&D alliances formed worldwide in the telecom industry. This paper explores the multiple configurations of partner attributes of these alliances by conducting a fsQCA.

The findings of the fsQCA show that the two alternate configurations of partner attributes guided the firms involved in these alliances to achieve high innovation performance: a configuration with extensive partner technological relatedness and coopetition, but no experience; and a configuration with extensive partner experience and competition, but no technological relatedness.

The research highlights the importance of how partner attributes (i.e. partner technological relatedness, partner competitive overlap, partner experience and partner relative size) tie, with regard to the firms’ access to external knowledge and consequently to their willingness to achieve high innovation performance. Moreover, this paper reveals the beneficial effect of competition on the innovation performance of the firms involved in R&D alliances when some of the other knowledge-based partner attributes are considered. Despite these insights for alliance and coopetition literature, some limitations are to be noted. First, some of the partners’ attributes considered could be further disentangled into sub-partner attributes. Second, other indicators might be used to measure firms’ innovation performance. Third, as anticipated this study applies fsQCA to explore the combinatory effects of partner attributes in the specific context of R&D alliances in the telecom industry worldwide and in a specific time window. This condition may question the extensibility of the results to other industries and times.

This study also bears two interesting implications for alliance managers. First, the paper suggests that R&D alliance managers need to be aware that potential alliance partners have multiple attributes leading to firm innovation performance. In this regard, partner competitive overlap is particularly important for gaining a better understanding of firm innovation performance. When looking for strategic partners, managers should try to ally with highly competitive enterprises so as to access their more innovative knowledge. Second, the results also highlight that this beneficial effect of coopetition in R&D alliances can be amplified in two ways. On the one hand, when the partners involved in the alliance have not yet developed experience in forming alliances. Partners without previous experience supply ideal stimuli to unlock more knowledge in the alliance because new approaches to access and develop knowledge in the alliance could be explored. On the other hand, this paper detects the situation when the allied partners are developing technologies and products in different areas. When partnering with firms coming from different technological areas, the knowledge diversity that can be leveraged in the alliances could drive alliance managers to generate synergies and economies of scope within the coopetitive alliance.

Extant research has analyzed individually the impact of R&D alliance partner attributes on firm innovation performance but has concurrently underestimated the configurations of partner attributes leading to firm innovation performance. Therefore, this paper differs from previous studies, as it provides an understanding of the specific configurations of R&D alliance partner attributes leading firms involved in R&D alliances to achieve high innovation performance.

This empirical study aims to explore sufficiency conditions for patient loyalty to a hospital.

The study collected 645 self-administered questionnaires from patients in a major medical center in Taiwan and applied fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fs/QCA) to explore the sufficiency conditions for patient loyalty.

The findings support the conclusion that the three conditions (patient satisfaction, patient participation in the process of diagnosis, and patient participation in treatment decision-making) in combination are sufficient for high patient loyalty to the hospital but high patient satisfaction alone is insufficient. While the three conditions in configural algorithm are sufficient, this expression is not necessary, which means the findings do not reject possible alternative conditions for high patient loyalty.

The study applies a relatively new method, fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fs/QCA) to test the sufficiency proposition of the theory. This method enables researchers to focus on examining sufficient conditions without worrying about various confounding factors and informs this study ' s conclusion that patients exhibiting high scores in all three conditions mentioned above constitute a near-perfect subset of highly loyal patients. Hospitals thus should provide their satisfied patients opportunities to share a role in the process of diagnosis and treatment decision-making.

Along with patient satisfaction, this study clearly identifies two important stages of patient participation (i.e., participation in the process of diagnosis and treatment decision-making) that are important in forming patient loyalty to a hospital. Prior studies do not present empirical evidence to this proposition.