Search results

The purpose of this study is twofold. First, this study proposes to investigate the impact of inter-functional value co-creation (VCC) in a manufacturing firm’s value chain on supply chain performance, considering the moderating role of external integration. Second, this study proposes to validate a modified version of the VCC considering the inter-functional interaction context.

Quantitative data were collected using survey approach from 129 managers from 51 departments of 22 manufacturing firms performing roles in several areas, such as procurement, logistics, sales, marketing and production. This study uses a PLS-SEM to analyze the model measurement, through confirmatory factor analysis.

The empirical data supported the proposition of this study that the VCC degree (i.e. value co-production/value in use) between functions of the firm has significant positive effects on the performance of the supply chain, in customer service and flexibility.

This study could be exceedingly useful for practitioners suggesting them to improve inter-functional integration by adopting VCC practices grounded on “value co-production” and “value in use.” Such practices may help to maximize supply chain performance.

The coordination theory was useful to deepen the analysis of its quadrant named “participatory design,” considering the relationship between VCC and inter-functional integration. This paper extended the knowledge about the relationship between the participatory design quadrant and the quadrant referring to organizational structures and processes.

Due to the current volatile environment and fierce competition, manufacturing firms (MFs) must improve their performance to survive. In this regard, checking and monitoring the suppliers' risk should significantly improve the performance of MFs. In addition, a relation based on not being an opportunist, confidence and reliance are influential factors in reducing the supplier defaults on his/her supply obligations and improving supply chain performance (SCP). Besides, the moderator function of supplier involvement (SI) in the relationship between quality of the relationship (QoR) and supply risk mitigation (SRM) is undeniable.

Based on the survey of 148 samples from small to large-sized MFs in Jordan, Turkey and Egypt, empirical evidence has been conducted to support a majority of the authors’ hypotheses. This paper provides a theoretical review of buyer–supplier relationships and supply risk. Hypotheses were tested by using structural equation modeling (SEM)/Smart PLS-4.

According to the results, confidence and reliance have statistically significant and positive impacts on SRM, resulting in better SCP. Moreover, the findings show that SI positively affects and moderates the relationship between confidence (C) and SRM, while it has no statistically significant influence on the relationship between reliance (R) and SRM.

This study provides necessary material for managers and decision-makers in MFs to confirm the importance and understanding of the QoR in building relationships and business dealings with partners in the SC, in addition to limiting and mitigating the risks of an interruption in supply in particular. Therefore, building a high-quality relationship as a practice based on trust and reliability with suppliers positively affects the performance of the SCs of MFs.

This research paper offers empirical evidence for using QoR within SRM resources of MFs' context for enhancing their supply chain performance. This study is one of few studies that examine the QoR and SRM that contribute to enhancing SCP in MFs in developing countries, which also can serve as a reference for many SC managers and practitioners.

While known by many names, qualifying exams function as gatekeepers to graduate student advancement to PhD candidacy, yet there has been little formal study on best qualifying exam practices particularly in biomedical and related STEM PhD programs. The purpose of this study is to examine the current state of qualifying exams through an examination of the literature and exploration of university-wide policies.

The authors conducted a literature review of studies on qualifying exams and completed an external evaluation of peer institutions’ and internal institutional qualifying exam requirements to inform our discussion of qualifying exams practices in PhD training at a research-intensive US institutions.

This study identified the need for more research on qualifying exams to establish evidence-based best practices. The authors found a wide variety of qualifying exam formats, with little evidence in support for specific formats. The authors also found little evidence that student expectations are made clear. The lack of evidence-based best practices coupled with insufficient clarity for students has a real potential to disadvantage PhD students, particularly first generation, underrepresented minority, international and/or other trainees who are not privileged or socialized to navigate training environments with vague landmarks such as the qualifying exams.

There are very few studies that evaluate qualifying exams in US doctoral education, particularly in STEM fields, and to the authors’ knowledge, there has been no analysis of campus-wide policies on qualifying exams reported. The lack of evidence for best practices and the need for to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of qualifying exams are discussed.