Search results

The purpose of the study is to test if it, by the use of a survey methodology, is possible to measure managers' awareness on, and specifically if there exist preconceived beliefs on, overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) results. The paper presents the design of the survey methodology as well as a test of the survey in one case company.

Actual OEE logs from a case company are collected and a survey on the data is designed and managers at the same case company are asked to answer the survey. The survey results are followed-up by an interview study in order to get deeper insights to both the results of the survey as well as the OEE strategy at the case company.

The findings show that the managers at this particular case company, on a general level, does not suffer too much from preconceived beliefs. However, it is clear that the managers have a preconceived belief that lack of material is logged as a loss much more often than what it actually is.

The test has only been performed with data from one case company within the automotive manufacturing industry and only the managers at that case company has been active in the test.

The survey methodology can be replicated and used by other companies to find out how aware their employees are on their OEE results and if possible preconceived beliefs exists.

To the authors' knowledge, this is the first attempt at measuring if preconceived beliefs on OEE results exist.

Research on employee non-/compliance to information security policies suffers from inconsistent results and there is an ongoing discussion about the dominating survey research methodology and its potential effect on these results. This study aims to add to this discussion by investigating discrepancies between what the authors claim to measure (theoretical properties of variables) and what they actually measure (respondents’ interpretations of the operationalized variables). This study asks: How well do respondents’ interpretations of variables correspond to their theoretical definitions? What are the characteristics of any discrepancies between variable definitions and respondent interpretations?

This study is based on in-depth interviews with 17 respondents from the Swedish public sector to understand how they interpret questionnaire measurement items operationalizing the variables Perceived Severity from Protection Motivation Theory and Attitude from Theory of Planned Behavior.

The authors found that respondents’ interpretations in many cases differ substantially from the theoretical definitions. Overall, the authors found four principal ways in which respondents interpreted measurement items – referred to as property contextualization, extension, alteration and oscillation – each implying more or less (dis)alignment with the intended theoretical properties of the two variables examined.

The qualitative method used proved vital to better understand respondents’ interpretations which, in turn, is key for improving self-reporting measurement instruments. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is a first step toward understanding how precise and uniform definitions of variables’ theoretical properties can be operationalized into effective measurement items.

The purpose of this study is to further validate and extend the unified model of information security policy compliance (UMISPC) developed by Moody et al. (2018).

To be able to compare the results of this study and those reported by Moody et al. (2018) (and followers), the same quantitative data collection method (questionnaire) and variable measurement instruments were used. Specifically, questionnaire data were collected from a department within a Swedish governmental organization comprising 150 employees. Of these, 90 answered the questionnaire which rendered a response rate of 60%. Following Moody et al. (2018), the collected data were analyzed by means of structural equation modeling.

This study generally provides empirical support for the original UMISPC as a large majority of the findings are in line with those reported by Moody et al. (2018). However, it also suggests important differences and boundary conditions.

This study extends the original study of Moody et al. (2018) and subsequent replication studies by testing it in a new national/organizational context. Based on their call for future research, it also develops and empirically tests the effects of a new, socially visible information system security violation scenario. Related to this, this study also revisits the role of the variable subjective norms for better understanding employee non-/compliance to information security policies by suggesting that their effects may be indirect (i.e. running through other variables in the UMISPC) rather than direct.

In recent years, the emergence of Industry 4.0 technologies as a way of increasing productivity has attracted the attention of the manufacturing industry. This study aims to investigate the relationship between Industry 4.0 technologies and lean tools (LTs) by measuring how the internalisation of LTs influences the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies and how the synergy between them helps improve productivity in European manufacturing firms.

Results from 1,298 responses were used to analyse linear regression and study the correlation between the use of LTs and Industry 4.0 technologies.

Results show that the companies analysed tend to implement more Industry 4.0 technologies when their level of lean internalisation is high.

This study provides useful information for managers of manufacturing firms by showing the correlation between LT internalisation and Industry 4.0 technologies, corroborating that optimal implementation of these technologies is preceded by a high level of LT internalisation. Furthermore, although there are studies showing the relationship between LTs and Industry 4.0 technologies, none consider the intensity of their implementation.