Search results

The vulnerability of the tourism industry to an array of risks, encompassing family-related, small- and medium-sized enterprise-specific, strategic, tourism-specific and external factors, highlights the landscape within which small and medium family enterprises (SMFEs) operate. Although SMFEs are an important stakeholder in the dynamic tourism sector, they are not one homogenous group of firms, but have different strategic orientations. This study aims to investigate the interplay between strategic orientation and risk perception to better understand SMFEs risk perception as it is impacting their decision-making processes, resilience and long-term survival. The authors investigate how different strategic orientations contribute to different perspectives on risk among owner-managers.

Based on a qualitative data corpus of 119 face-to-face interviews, the authors apply various coding rounds to better understand the relationship between strategic orientations and the perceptions of risks. Firstly, the authors analysed the owner–manager interviews and identified three groups of different strategic orientations: proactive and sustainability-oriented SMFE, destination-affirmative and resilience-oriented SMFE and passive SMFE. Secondly, the authors coded the interviews for different risks identified. The authors identified that the three groups show differences in the risk perceptions.

The data unveil that the three groups of SMFEs have several differences in how they perceive risks. Proactive and sustainability-oriented SMFEs prioritize business risks, demonstrating a penchant for innovation and sustainability. Destination-affirmative and resilience-oriented SMFEs perceive a broader range of risks, tying their investments to destination development, emphasizing family and health risks and navigating competitive pressures. Passive SMFEs, primarily concerned with external risks, exhibit limited awareness of internal and strategic risks, resist change and often defer decision-making to successors. The findings underscore how different strategic orientations influence risk perceptions and decision-making processes within SMFEs in the tourism industry.

The authors contribute to existing knowledge include offering a comprehensive status quo of perceived risks for different strategic orientations, a notably underexplored area. In addition, the differences with respect to risk perception shown in the paper suggest that simplified models ignoring risk perception may be insufficient for policy recommendations and for understanding the dynamics of the tourism sector. For future research, the authors propose to focus on exploring the possible directions in which strategic orientation and risk perception influence one another, which might be a limitation of this study due to its qualitative nature.

Varying strategic orientations and risk perceptions highlight the diversity within the stakeholder group of SMFE. Recognizing differences allows for more targeted interventions that address the unique concerns and opportunities of each group and can thus improve the firm’s resilience (Memili et al., 2023) and therefore leading to sustainability destinations development. The authors suggest practical support for destination management organizations and regional policymakers, aimed especially at enhancing the risk management of passive SMFEs. Proactive SMFE could be encouraged to perceive more family risks.

Viewing tourism destinations as a complex stakeholder network, unveiling distinct risk landscapes for various strategic orientations of one stakeholder has the potential to benefit the overall destination development. The proactive and sustainability-oriented SMFEs are highly pertinent as they might lead destinations to further development and create competitive advantage through innovative business models. Passive SMFEs might hinder the further development of the destination, e.g. through missing innovation efforts or succession.

Although different studies explore business risks (Forgacs and Dimanche, 2016), risks from climate change (Demiroglu et al., 2019), natural disasters (Zhang et al., 2023) or shocks such as COVID-19 (Teeroovengadum et al., 2021), this study shows that it does not imply that SMFE as active stakeholder perceive such risk. Rather, different strategic orientations are in relation to perceiving risks differently. The authors therefore open up an interesting new field for further studies, as risk perception influences the decision-making of tourism actors, and therefore resilience.

This study aims to analyze the relationship of mass versus niche brand coolness on consumers’ brand loyalty, mediated by attitude toward the brand and moderated by conspicuous consumption; test the moderating role of conspicuous consumption and the mediating role of attitude between mass versus niche cool brand and brand love; and analyze whether results are stable when categorizing the luxury brands as niche versus mass cool brand.

Study 1 uses a panel sample to establish the mediating role of attitude toward the brand between perceptions of brand coolness and brand loyalty. Study 2 is an experimental survey study to describe the moderating role of conspicuous consumption on the relationship between mass/niche brand coolness and brand love and between mass/niche coolness and attitude toward the brand. Study 3 is a conjoint analysis that delineates the distinct factors that consumers attribute to mass versus niche cool brands in the luxury fashion arena.

This study demonstrates that attitudes mediate the relationship between brand coolness and brand loyalty. Conspicuous consumption only moderates the relationship between brand coolness and attitudes in the case of niche cool brands. In a realistic field experiment, the authors confirm the mediating impact of attitude and the moderating influence of conspicuous consumption. The authors also attempt to provide coolness dimensions that tend to be more associated with mass luxury brands and those more related to niche luxury brands.

These studies provide a fresh look at the concept of brand coolness, mass and niche cool brands in the context of luxury fashion brands.

Esta investigación pretende (1) analizar la relación entre el atractivo de las marcas de nicho y de masas y la lealtad a la marca de los consumidores, mediada por la actitud hacia la marca y moderada por el consumo conspicuo, (2) comprobar el papel moderador del consumo conspicuo y el papel mediador de la actitud entre el atractivo de las marcas de nicho y de masas y el amor por la marca y (3) analizar si los resultados son estables al categorizar las marcas de lujo como de nicho o de masas.

Demostramos que las actitudes median en la relación entre el “coolness” y la fidelidad a una marca. El consumo ostentoso sólo modera la relación entre el “coolness” de la marca y las actitudes en el caso de las marcas “cool” de nicho. En un experimento de campo realista, confirmamos el efecto mediador de la actitud y la influencia moderadora del consumo ostentoso. También intentamos proporcionar las dimensiones del coolness que tienden a asociarse más con las marcas de lujo de masas y las que están más relacionadas con las marcas de lujo de nicho.

El primer estudio utiliza una muestra de panel para establecer el papel mediador de la actitud hacia la marca entre las percepciones del atractivo de la marca y la fidelidad a la misma. El segundo es un estudio experimental que describe el papel moderador del consumo ostentoso en la relación entre el atractivo de las marcas de masas/nicho y el amor por la marca, y entre el atractivo de las marcas de masas/nicho y la actitud hacia la marca. El último estudio es un análisis conjunto que delinea los distintos factores que los consumidores atribuyen a las marcas de moda de masas frente a las de nicho en el ámbito de la moda de lujo.

Estos estudios aportan una nueva mirada al concepto de “coolness” de marca, marcas “cool” de masas y marcas “cool” de nicho en el contexto de las marcas de moda de lujo.

本研究旨在：（1）分析大众品牌酷与小众品牌酷对消费者品牌忠诚度的关系, 以对品牌的态度为中介, 以显性消费为调节; （2）检验显性消费的调节作用以及态度在大众品牌酷与小众品牌酷与品牌喜爱之间的中介作用; （3）分析将奢侈品牌分为小众品牌酷与大众品牌酷时, 结果是否稳定。

第一项研究使用小组样本, 以确定对品牌的态度在品牌酷感和品牌忠诚度之间的中介作用。第二项研究是一项实验性调查研究, 目的是描述显性消费对大众/小众品牌酷感与品牌喜爱之间以及大众/小众品牌酷感与品牌态度之间关系的调节作用。最后一项研究是一项联合分析, 旨在界定消费者对奢侈时尚领域中大众与小众酷品牌的不同评价因素。

研究结果 我们证明, 态度是品牌酷感与品牌忠诚度之间关系的中介。只有在小众酷品牌的情况下, 显性消费才会调节品牌酷度与态度之间的关系。在一个真实的现场实验中, 我们证实了态度的中介作用和显性消费的调节作用。我们还试图提供与大众奢侈品牌更相关的酷感维度, 以及与小众奢侈品牌更相关的酷感维度。

这些研究以奢侈时尚品牌为背景, 重新审视了品牌酷度、大众和小众酷度品牌的概念。

The purpose of this article is to discuss how the mastery of resilience in operations and supply chains plays a significant role in the transition to a more sustainable future. Furthermore, it is supposed to propose avenues for future research on operational and supply chain resilience, interacting with the sustainability literature in our field.

A conceptual review of resilience and sustainability themes within operations and supply chain management research is conducted. Reflections on the topic are informed by relevant literature published over the last decade.

The major conceptual contributions are threefold: (1) This article elaborates on the understanding of operational resilience and supply chain resilience concepts and reviews their respective primary research streams. (2) It proposes resilience as the missing element in the pursuit of excellence in organizations that want to contribute to a more sustainable future. (3) The article offers a research framework that provides a future research agenda at the intersection of resilience and sustainability in operations and supply chain management research.

The article highlights gaps in current research and illustrates further areas of research that need to be addressed to maximize the contribution of operations and supply chain management research in supporting practitioners to achieve a more sustainable future.

The purpose of this study is to extend Bippus and Young’s (2005) study and examine the effectiveness of the “I-you,” “I,” “You,” “We,” “But” and Question-based “Why” statements from Winer’s (2021) verbal coding program of conflict management using Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory (SLT).

Mixed methods were used using 175 university students from Texas and New York. A cross-sectional convenience sampling approach was conducted. Survey data was collected using Qualtrics.

Descriptive results demonstrated that the “We” statement was the most passive, the “I-you” statement was the most assertive and the “But,” “I,” “You” and Question statements were perceived to be aggressive. In addition, assertive “I-You” statements were perceived to be more effective in resolving the conflict and maintaining a relationship, whereas aggressive statements were less likely to resolve the conflict and maintain the relationship. Qualitative themes also support the “I-You” statement as the most assertive, while the “But,” “You” and “I” statements were found to be the most aggressive statements.

Implications and applications are discussed to stimulate future research among researchers and practitioners when addressing conflict. Being aware of the verbal statements that de-escalate conflict may be helpful in solving conflict in interpersonal, family and professional relationships. Future trainings can adopt effective verbal statements to resolve conflict when experiencing anger issues. Future research can continue to investigate verbal communication statements using SLT to help practitioners and managers address conflict in interpersonal relationships.

This study examines verbal statements in relation to communication styles and conflict management.

This chapter analyzes the link between the digital divide, infrastructure regulation, and disaster planning and relief through a case study of the flood in San Jose, California triggered by the Anderson dam’s overtopping in February 2017 and an examination of communication failures during the 2018 wildfire in Paradise, California. This chapter theorizes that regulatory decisions construct social and disaster vulnerability. Rooted in the Whole Community approach to disaster planning and relief espoused by the United Nations and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, this chapter calls for leadership to end the digital divide. It highlights the imperative of understanding community information needs and argues for linking strategies to close the digital divide with infrastructure and emergency planning. As the Internet’s integration into society increases, the digital divide diminishes access to societal resources including disaster aid, and exacerbates wildfire, flood, pandemic, and other risks. To mitigate climate change, climate-induced disaster, protect access to social services and the economy, and safeguard democracy, it argues for digital inclusion strategies as a centerpiece of community-centered infrastructure regulation and disaster relief.