Search results

Logistics and supply chain management has been elevated to a strategic level whereby firms can simultaneously achieve differentiation and low cost for sustained competitive advantage. Empirical studies have often concentrated on logistics management in developed Western countries, displaying a bias towards the USA. This study applies the competency approach to explore logistics in Taiwan. A survey of 1,200 manufacturing firms was undertaken in order to examine the relationships between logistics competency, logistics performance, and financial performance, using exploratory factor analysis and the structural equation modelling technique. Four logistics competencies, namely, integration and knowledge competency, customer focused logistics competency, measurement competency, and agility competency were identified. The research findings revealed that (1) logistics competency was significantly related to logistics performance but not significantly associated with financial performance, and (2) logistics performance was positively associated with financial performance. These findings also implied that logistics competency has an indirect effect on financial performance through logistics performance. This finding confirmed the “world-class” logistics competencies (i.e. positioning, integration, agility, and measurement) as identified by MSUGLRT (1995). In addition, it suggests that logistics competency in a huge geographic area such as America can have the same effect in a smaller geographic area such as Taiwan.

Work-life flexibility policies (e.g., flextime, telework, part-time, right-to-disconnect, and leaves) are increasingly important to employers as productivity and well-being strategies. However, policies have not lived up to their potential. In this chapter, the authors argue for increased research attention to implementation and work-life intersectionality considerations influencing effectiveness. Drawing on a typology that conceptualizes flexibility policies as offering employees control across five dimensions of the work role boundary (temporal, spatial, size, permeability, and continuity), the authors develop a model identifying the multilevel moderators and mechanisms of boundary control shaping relationships between using flexibility and work and home performance. Next, the authors review this model with an intersectional lens. The authors direct scholars’ attention to growing workforce diversity and increased variation in flexibility policy experiences, particularly for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality, which is defined as having multiple intersecting identities (e.g., gender, caregiving, and race), that are stigmatized, and link to having less access to and/or benefits from societal resources to support managing the work-life interface in a social context. Such an intersectional focus would address the important need to shift work-life and flexibility research from variable to person-centered approaches. The authors identify six research considerations on work-life intersectionality in order to illuminate how traditionally assumed work-life relationships need to be revisited to address growing variation in: access, needs, and preferences for work-life flexibility; work and nonwork experiences; and benefits from using flexibility policies. The authors hope that this chapter will spur a conversation on how the work-life interface and flexibility policy processes and outcomes may increasingly differ for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality compared to those with lower work-life intersectionality in the context of organizational and social systems that may perpetuate growing work-life and job inequality.

Neuroleptic non-compliance remains a serious challenge for the treatment of psychosis. Non-compliance is predominantly attributed to side effects, lack of illness insight, reduced well-being or poor therapeutic alliance. However, other still neglected factors may also play a role. Further, little is known about whether psychiatric patients without psychosis who are increasingly prescribed neuroleptics differ in terms of medication compliance or about reasons for non-compliance by psychosis patients. As direct questioning is notoriously prone to social desirability biases, we conducted an anonymous survey. After a strict selection process blind to results, 95 psychiatric patients were retained for the final analyses (69 participants with a presumed diagnosis of schizophrenia psychosis, 26 without psychosis). Self-reported neuroleptic non-compliance was more prevalent in psychosis patients than non-psychosis patients. Apart from side effects and illness insight, main reasons for non-compliance in both groups were forgetfulness, distrust in therapist, and no subjective need for treatment. Other notable reasons were stigma and advice of relatives/acquaintances against neuroleptic medication. Gain from illness was a reason for non-compliance in 11-18% of the psychosis patients. Only 9% of all patients reported no side effects and full compliance and at the same time acknowledged that neuroleptics worked well for them. While pills were preferred over depot injections by the majority of patients, depot was judged as an alternative by a substantial subgroup. Although many patients acknowledge the need and benefits of neuroleptic medication, non-compliance was the norm rather than the exception in our samples.