Search results

Equitable risk allocation is important for the effective management of inevitable risks in International Construction Joint Venture (ICJV) projects. Previous studies have documented risks facing ICJV projects. However, there is a dearth of studies on the risk allocation preferences that take into consideration the opinions of both the local and foreign partners. This study aims to fill this gap by ascertaining the risk allocation preferences of the partners of ICJV projects for effective risk management.

Through a survey, data on risk allocation preferences were collected from both local and foreign partners of ICJV projects using a comprehensive register of 74 risks.

Following analysis, six risks were allocated to the local partner, 11 were allocated to the foreign partner, 51 risks were shared, four were allocated to a third party and two were to be negotiated based on the specific circumstances of the project. Practically, the study’s findings will help ICJV partners in drafting their ICJV contracts to adequately allocate risks and reduce contract negotiation time considerably.

The findings from this study will help partners in drafting their joint venture contract agreement and also reduce the period for contract negotiation. Knowledge of the preferred risk allocation is important in allocating risks in the contract agreement to the relevant partner for effective management.

This study, to the best knowledge of the authors, is one of the early studies to ascertain the risk allocation preferences of ICJV project partners in the Ghanaian construction industry – a departure from previous studies which focused on the identification and evaluation of risks. This study is also different from previous studies by considering the allocation preferences of both partners of the ICJV. The collection of data from both partners of the ICJV helped to consider their perceptions on risk allocation and evaluation, essentially leading to cross-cultural and optimal risk allocation preferences.

The present study aims to investigate the impact of internal control effectiveness on supply chain management efficiency (SCME) and capital allocation efficiency for companies listed in the Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE). In addition, it investigates the mediating role of supply chain management efficiency in the relationship between internal controls and capital allocation efficiency.

The data about 191 companies in 2014–2022 were examined. The sales per inventory ratio was used to calculate SCME. The present study also applied the Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) for endogeneity concerns.

The results showed that internal control effectiveness has a significant positive effect on SCME. Moreover, internal control effectiveness and SCME significantly positively affect capital allocation efficiency. SCME has a mediating role in the relationship between internal control effectiveness and capital allocation efficiency. These findings remained robust even after several robustness tests. In addition, this study tested the results' robustness by dividing data into the pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 years. The previous results were also confirmed according to the robustness test of COVID-19.

Challenges in the supply chain often hinder capital allocation efficiency. In addition, enterprises should try to establish strong internal controls to ensure SCME. Therefore, the relationship between internal control effectiveness, SCME and capital allocation efficiency is complex and underscores the importance of robust internal controls in optimizing resource allocation within organizations. Interestingly, this topic has not been extensively researched in accounting and business research, and there is a lack of empirical evidence on these effects. Consequently, this study aims to fill the gap and identify potential opportunities for new research directions.

The basic assumption in strategic management is that consistently high performing companies are able to adapt effectively to external shocks. While adaptation of allocation of resources and its constraints have been investigated, it is important to also consider the allocation of attention. Therefore, this study seeks to examine the differences in the patterns in the allocation of resources and attention in a comparative case study with focus on Southwest Airlines. This study illustrates that the comparison of the patterns of allocation of resource and attention is very promising for the explanation of consistent superior performance.

This paper analyzes Federal Aviation Administration and American Transport Association data in order to determine actual resource allocation. Moreover, textual analysis of annual reports serves as basis for examining the patterns of allocation of attention.

The results of this paper reveal a striking divergence of allocation of resources and attention (particularly attention to differentiation) for Southwest Airlines – the consistently high performing firm in the US airline industry.

The major limitation of the current study is the fact that it is a single industry study. It would be very interesting to replicate this study in other industries.

This study shows the importance of allocation of attention for firm performance. This is particularly relevant for resource intensive industries such as the airline industry where organizational inertia makes it hard to move resources fast. Yet, attention appears to have a great potential for firm performance and can be changed more easily.

Despite great interest in allocation of resources and attention in strategy research, authors rarely combine these two perspectives. Nadkarni and Barr present a notable exception. Yet, the latter authors focus on one specific aspect of adaptation of strategic actions, i.e. the timeliness of response. The present study takes a more comprehensive view of adaptation, e.g. the respective changes in slopes of adaptation.

This study aims to develop an optimal tolerance allocation strategy involves integrating the unique transfer (UT) approach and the difficulty coefficient evaluation (DCE) routine in an interactive hybrid method. This method combines the strengths of both UT and DCE, ensuring simultaneous utilization for enhanced performance. The proposed tolerancing model manifests an integrated computer-aided design (CAD) tool.

By combining UT and DCE based on failure mode, effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) tool and the Ishikawa diagram, the proposed collaborative hybrid tool ensures an efficient and optimal tolerance allocation approach. The integration of these methodologies not only addresses specific transfer challenges through UT but also conducts a thorough evaluation of difficulty coefficients via DCE routine using reliability analysis tools as FMECA tool and the Ishikawa diagram. This comprehensive framework contributes to a robust and informed decision-making process in tolerance allocation, ultimately optimizing the design and manufacturing processes.

The presented methodology is implemented with the aim of generating allocated tolerances that align with specific difficulty requirements, facilitating the creation of a mechanical assembly characterized by high quality and low cost. To substantiate and validate the conceptual framework and methods, an integrated tool has been developed, featuring a graphical user interface (GUI) designed in MATLAB. This interface serves as a platform to showcase various interactive and integrated tolerance allocation approaches that adhere to both functional and manufacturing prerequisites. The proposed integrated tool, designed with a GUI in MATLAB, offers the capability to execute various examples that effectively demonstrate the benefits of the developed tolerance transfer and allocation methodology.

The originality of the proposed approach is the twining between the UT and DCE simultaneous in an integrated and concurrent tolerance transfer and allocation model. Therefore, the proposed approach is named an integrated CAD/tolerance model based on the manufacturing difficulty tool. The obtained results underscore the tangible advantages stemming from the integration of this innovative tolerance transfer and allocation approach. These benefits include a notable reduction in total cost and a concurrent enhancement in product quality.

This paper examines binding multi-round commitments (MRCs) to the group account in a repeated voluntary contributions mechanism (VCM) game. Before each five-round interval, subjects in a four-person group are given the option to commit a portion of their endowments to the group account for each of the next five rounds. Decision rounds proceed, with each subject's commitment acting as the binding minimum of his group-account allocation for each round. The opportunity to make MRCs does not increase mean allocations to the group account relative to a control treatment. However, commitments do have implications for reciprocal behavior within groups, leading to higher outcome variances across groups in the MRCs treatment.

Allocation of individuals' resources among multiple goals is an increasingly prominent theoretical and practical issue. Despite several theoretical perspectives that highlight the potential role of affect in this resource allocation process, empirical work on the topic is quite limited with little focus on the activation dimension of affect. This study aimed to provide further insight into this issue.

The current research explored the role of the activation dimension of affect in a multiple-goal environment. Specifically, 118 individuals participated in a 21-day longitudinal study in which they reported on affect and resource allocation related to two real-life goals.

Multilevel-modeling analyses indicated that activation positively relates to allocation of resources (effort, intended effort, and intended time devoted to a goal). The results also illustrate that task-related negative valence is a significant predictor for two of the three indicators of resource allocation (intended effort was the exception).

This research informs theory and practice at the intersection of emotion and work motivation by investigating a relatively understudied dimension of affect and provides results that help clarify the role of affect during the pursuit of multiple, competing goals.

We compare allocation rules in uniform price divisible-good auctions. Theoretically, a “standard allocation rule (STANDARD)” and a “uniform allocation rule (UNIFORM)” admit different types of low-price equilibria, which are eliminated by a “hybrid allocation rule (HYBRID).” We use a controlled laboratory experiment to compare the empirical performances of these allocation rules.

We conduct three-bidder uniform price divisible-good auctions varying the different allocation rules (standard, uniform, or hybrid) and whether or not explicit communication between bidders is allowed. For the case where explicit communication is allowed we also study six-bidder auctions.

We find that prices are similar across allocation rules. Under all three allocation rules, prices are competitive when bidders cannot explicitly communicate. With explicit communication, prices are collusive, and we observe collusive prices even when collusive agreements are broken. Collusive agreements are particularly fragile when the gain from a unilateral deviation is larger, and an implication of this is that collusive agreements are more robust under STANDARD.

We do not find conclusive evidence of differences in performance among allocation rules. However, there is suggestive evidence that STANDARD may be more vulnerable to collusion.

Divisible-good uniform price auctions are used in financial markets, but it is not possible to use naturally occurring data to test how alternatives to the standard format would perform. Using laboratory methods we provide an initial test of alternative allocation rules.

It is widely believed that contrary to standard asset allocation theory, employees irrationally hold concentrated investments in company stock in their 401(k) plans thus bearing firm-specific risk that could otherwise have been diversified away (see e.g., Benartzi, 2001). However, in measuring any such lack of diversification costs, a unique tax benefit associated with such investments (available to those who choose the Net Unrealized Appreciation (NUA) strategy) has been hitherto ignored. We analyze an employee's optimal allocation of retirement assets among alternative investments, including company stock, in the presence of the NUA tax benefit. The employee has a standard power utility function and seeks to maximize expected utility from her after-tax wealth upon retirement. Based on simulations, we find that, even when company stock is stochastically dominated by investments in the market index, the employee will allocate a non-trivial part of her retirement funds to company stock for a wide range of parameter values. Consistent with empirical evidence, the allocation to company stock is greater for employees closer to retirement and when the company's stock has experienced substantial gain in value.

To determine the role of status information conveyance in a negative reward allocation setting.

Using previously published experimental data, we test the relative effects of status information conveyed by expressive and indicative status cues on the allocation of a negative reward. Further, we construct an alternative graph theoretic model of expectation advantage which is also tested to determine its model fit relative to the classic model of Reward Expectations Theory.

Results provide strong support for the conclusion that status information conveyed by expressive status cues influences reward allocations more than information conveyed by indicative cues. We also find evidence that our alternative graph theoretic model of expectation advantage improves model fit.

This research is the first to test the relative impact of expressive versus indicative status cues on the allocation of negative rewards and shows that status characteristics can have differential impacts on these allocations contingent on how characteristics are conveyed. Furthermore, the research suggests a graph theoretic model that allows for this differentiation based on information conveyance and provides empirical support for its structure in a negative reward allocation environment.

Future research is required to validate the results in positive reward situations.

The results show that an individual’s expectations are altered by varying the manner in which status information is presented, thereby influencing the construction and maintenance of status hierarchies and the inequalities those structures generate. Thus, this research has implications for any group or evaluative task where status processes are relevant.

Innovation management in the healthcare sector has undergone significant evolutions over the last decades. These evolutions have been investigated from a variety of perspectives: clusters, ecosystems of innovation, digital ecosystems and regional ecosystems, but the dynamics of networks have seldom been analyzed under the lenses of entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs). As identified by Cao and Shi (2020), the literature is silent about the organization of resource allocation systems for network orchestration in EEs. This article investigates these elements in the healthcare sector. It discusses the strategic role played by entrepreneurial support organizations (ESOs) in resource allocation and elaborates on the distinction between sponsored and nonsponsored ESOs in EEs. ESOs are active in network orchestration. The literature explains that ESOs lift organizational, institutional and cultural barriers, and support entrepreneurs' access to cognitive and technological resources. However, allocation models are not yet discussed. Therefore, our research questions are as follows: What is the resource allocation model in healthcare-related EEs? What is the role played by sponsored and nonsponsored ESOs as regards resource allocation to support the emergence and development of EEs in the healthcare sector?

The article offers an explanatory, exploratory, and theory-building investigation. The research design offers an abductive research protocol and multi-level analysis of seven (sponsored and nonsponsored) ESOs active in French healthcare ecosystems. Field research elaborates on semi-structured interviews collected between 2016 and 2022.

This article shows explicit complementarities between top-down and bottom-up resource allocation approaches supported by ESOs in the healthcare sector. Despite explicit originalities in each approach, no network orchestration model prevails. Multi-polar coordination is the rule. Entrepreneurs' access to critical technological and cognitive resources is based on resource allocation modalities that differ for sponsored versus nonsponsored ESOs. Emerging from field research, this research also shows that sponsored and nonsponsored ESOs manage their roles in different ways because they confront original issues about organizational legitimacy.

Beyond the results listed above, the main originalities of the paper relate to the instantiation of multi-level analysis operated during field research and to the confrontation between sponsored versus nonsponsored ESOs in the domain of healthcare-related innovation management. This research shows that ESOs have practical relevance because they build original routes for resource allocation and network orchestration in EEs. Each ESO category (sponsored versus nonsponsored) provides original support for resource allocation. The ESO's legitimacy is inferred either from the sponsor or the services delivered to end-users. This research leads to propositions for future research and recommendations for practitioners: ESO managers, entrepreneurs, and policymakers.