Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present a conceptual framework on resilience types in supply chain networks.

Using a complex adaptive systems perspective as an organizing framework, the paper explores three forms of resilience: engineering, ecological and evolutionary and their antecedents and links these to four phases of supply chain resilience (SCRES): readiness, response, recovery, growth and renewal.

Resilient supply chains need all three forms of resilience. Efficiency and system optimization approaches may promote quick recovery after a disruption. However, system-level response requires adaptive capabilities and transformational behaviors may be needed to move supply chains to new fitness levels after a disruption. The three resilience types discussed are not mutually exclusive, but rather complement each other and there are synergies and tradeoffs among these resilience types.

The empirical validation of the theoretical propositions will open up new vistas for supply chain research. Possibilities exist for analyzing and assessing SCRES in multiple and more comprehensive ways.

The findings of the research can help managers refine their approaches to managing supply chain networks. A more balanced approach to supply chain management can reduce the risks and vulnerabilities associated with supply chain disruptions.

This study is unique as it conceptualizes SCRES in multiple ways, thereby extending our understanding of supply chain stability.

The purpose of this research is to examine leadership in an intermediary organization whose mission is to facilitate collaboration between large corporations and their smaller suppliers, a bridging organization.

A qualitative approach using a single case revelatory method was adopted. Data were collected from a bridge leader as well as 20 executives of companies involved in the collaboration.

The analysis revealed that the successful bridge leader tended: to build personal relations and goodwill as a way of creating personal obligations on the part of the stakeholders he led; championed the cause of the stakeholders and made their mission his/her own; created opportunities for individual and collective goal achievement; relied on symbolic behavior and ceremonies to reify the bridge mission; and engaged in frequent communication with a liberal use of humor and playfulness to make goals embraceable by the stakeholders in the collaboration.

This is a single case study and that limits the generalization of these findings. However, the findings provide some preliminary evidence to show that a lack of control of resources need not be a reason for leader non‐performance.

A bridge leader may substitute other influence strategies to compensate for the lack of direct positional power.

This study is one of the few that explicitly examines leadership in bridging organizations. The paper's understanding of this phenomenon is important because of the importance of bridging organizations to business and social innovation.

Greater resilience at individual, group and organizational levels better positions firms to counter threats to supply chain efficiency posed by sudden crisis or disruption. Focusing on engineering, ecological and evolutionary resilience types can help strengthen overall resilience by countering deficiencies within each form and exploiting potential synergies.

In this study we focus on how conditions of uncertainty shape the entrepreneurial action that underlies opportunity creation. We utilize the basic structure of economic exchange in the context of opportunity creation theory to further investigate the conditions under which an entrepreneur might be expected to act to bring an opportunity into existence. Specifically, we suggest that uncertainty, that is manifest as relational uncertainty and resource uncertainty, shapes the entrepreneurial actions that underlie the creation of opportunities. In a laboratory experiment we test this hypothesis by observing 56 three-person groups engaged in an opportunity creation-focused exchange task. The results of the experiment support the hypothesis that variability in the conditions of uncertainty (relational uncertainty and resource uncertainty) affects the entrepreneurial action that results in opportunity creation. These results lead us then to propose that there exists a theoretically specifiable set of key entrepreneurial actions (one that is others-focused and another that is works-focused). From this analysis we suggest potential directions for future research in the areas of entrepreneurial action and opportunity creation.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and empirically test a conceptualization of competitive aggressiveness (CA), a dimension of entrepreneurial orientation.

Structural equation modeling and hierarchical regression are employed on responses from 182 banks in the southwestern US Performance data on the banks are drawn from the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's (FDIC's) Call reports.

The results indicate awareness, motivation and capability are antecedents of CA, which itself is positively related to increased market share and, in more dense markets, profitability.

Aggressive firms exhibit certain routines that can lead to competitive actions, which assists performance in some contexts. Managers who wish to increase (or decrease) their firms' overall competitive posture can encourage (or discourage) employees from performing competitive routines such as monitoring their rivals or talking about their rivals' strategies.

By developing CA' conceptualization, the study advances the understanding of the antecedents of competitive behavior and makes it easier to study competition in smaller firms.

Our chapter discusses the myriad ways in which Frank H. Knight’s Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit (RUP) has been incorporated by different streams of scholarship dedicated to institutional analysis since 1990, when bibliometric evidence indicates a revival of interest in his classic work. Using citation analysis, the authors identify clusters of scholarship that build on Knight’s contributions, assessing which of his insights were absorbed by different subfields and how these have been connected to recent topics and concerns. The authors then qualitatively explore these results to throw new light on the recent history of institutional economics, using Knight’s RUP as a window into the evolution of (and inter-relations between) different research traditions that currently populate the field, including new economic sociology, comparative politics, evolutionary economics, entrepreneurial studies, environmental social sciences, international political economy, and the anthropology of finance. The authors conclude that Knight’s legacy remains unsettled, with different groups selectively absorbing a subset of his ideas and developing them in relative isolation from research conducted elsewhere. Nevertheless, boundary work connecting these separate areas reveals possible spaces for collaboration among scholars who study institutions building explicitly on Knightian insights.

Introduces librarians to popular culture studies and emphasizes the importance of collection development of popular culture materials, both primary and secondary. Provides strategies and identifies resources that can facilitate such collection development.

Most of us believe that entrepreneurs are special. We do this because both scholars and practitioners tell us so.