The Experts below are selected from a list of 149391 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
T L C M Groot - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
collaborative performance management in interfirm relationships
Social Science Research Network, 2016Co-Authors: Henri C. Dekker, Rong Ding, T L C M GrootAbstract:In this study we examine how firms’ collaborative objectives influence their use of performance management practices in interfirm relationships. We conceptualize collaborative performance management to include three interrelated practices: measurement of interfirm performance, information sharing, and interaction between boundary spanners of partner firms. Prior research has related firms’ interfirm control choices to transaction risk as proxied by ‘given’ transaction characteristics. We hypothesize that transaction characteristics are determined by the Strategic Importance of the collaboration (manifested by the Importance of firms’ collaborative objectives), and in turn influence the use of firms’ performance management practices. Analysis of survey data supports our hypotheses that Strategic Importance of the collaboration is associated with transaction characteristics (i.e., with asset specificity, transaction scope, task interdependencies and environmental variability), which characteristics in turn mediate the influence of collaborative objectives on the use of performance management practices. We also find that performance measurement, information sharing and boundary spanner interaction are used as complementary practices in the management of interfirm relationships.
-
collaborative performance management in interfirm relationships
Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2016Co-Authors: Henri C. Dekker, Rong Ding, T L C M GrootAbstract:ABSTRACT In this study, we examine how firms' collaborative objectives influence their use of performance management practices in interfirm relationships. We conceptualize collaborative performance management to include three interrelated practices: measurement of interfirm performance, information sharing, and interaction between boundary spanners of partner firms. Prior research has related firms' interfirm control choices to transaction risk as proxied by “given” transaction characteristics. We hypothesize that transaction characteristics are determined by the Strategic Importance of the collaboration (manifested by the Importance of firms' collaborative objectives) and, in turn, influence the use of firms' performance management practices. Analysis of survey data supports our hypotheses that Strategic Importance of the collaboration is associated with transaction characteristics (i.e., with asset specificity, transaction scope, task interdependencies, and environmental variability), which, in turn, me...
Elena Revilla - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
is top management team supply chain manager interaction the missing link an analysis of risk bearing antecedents for supply chain managers
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 2018Co-Authors: Veronica H. Villena, Luis R Gomezmejia, Elena RevillaAbstract:Supply chain managers (SC managers) may make less than optimal decisions for the firm when facing compensation and employment risks. The purpose of this paper is to study two relevant factors (target setting and Strategic Importance of the supply chain function) that may drive SC managers to perceive more or less risk to their welfare.,The study combines survey data from 133 firms with secondary data in order to reduce source bias and enhance the validity of results. The authors also conducted interviews with supply chain and human resources managers.,The results show that top managers can alter SC managers’ perceived risks. Ambitious targets drive compensation risk but not employment risk. The supply chain function’s Strategic Importance, on the other hand, decreases employment risk but increases compensation risk.,The authors emphasize two ways that the top management team (TMT) influences SC managers’ perceived personal welfare but acknowledge that there may be others factors. Due to the topic sensitivity, the authors could not collect data on all variables (e.g. individual characteristics) that may affect risk perception. The findings are based on Spanish firms and may not be generalized to other contexts.,This research proposes three suggestions. First, compensation and employment risks should be considered separately when designing compensation and evaluation systems. Second, appropriate performance targets may put compensation risk in a reasonable range that is neither too high to prevent risky-yet-beneficial decisions nor too low to allow nonfeasance. Third, escalating the supply chain’s Strategic Importance effectively offsets employment risk.,Scholars have repeatedly shown the negative outcomes of SC managers’ perceived compensation and employment risks. Yet, little attention has been given to their antecedents. The study explores two relevant antecedents and provides integrative empirical evidence regarding actions top leaders can take to manage SC managers’ perceived risk and subsequently enhance firm performance.
-
is top management team supply chain manager interaction the missing link an analysis of risk bearing antecedents for supply chain managers
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Veronica H. Villena, Luis R Gomezmejia, Elena RevillaAbstract:Purpose – Supply chain managers (SC managers) may make less than optimal decisions for the firm when facing compensation and employment risks. The purpose of this paper is to study two relevant factors (target setting and Strategic Importance of the supply chain function) that may drive SC managers to perceive more or less risk to their welfare. Design/methodology/approach – The study combines survey data from 133 firms with secondary data in order to reduce source bias and enhance the validity of results. The authors also conducted interviews with supply chain and human resources managers. Findings – The results show that top managers can alter SC managers’ perceived risks. Ambitious targets drive compensation risk but not employment risk. The supply chain function’s Strategic Importance, on the other hand, decreases employment risk but increases compensation risk. Research limitations/implications – The authors emphasize two ways that the top management team (TMT) influences SC managers’ perceived personal welfare but acknowledge that there may be others factors. Due to the topic sensitivity, the authors could not collect data on all variables (e.g. individual characteristics) that may affect risk perception. The findings are based on Spanish firms and may not be generalized to other contexts. Practical implications – This research proposes three suggestions. First, compensation and employment risks should be considered separately when designing compensation and evaluation systems. Second, appropriate performance targets may put compensation risk in a reasonable range that is neither too high to prevent risky-yet-beneficial decisions nor too low to allow nonfeasance. Third, escalating the supply chain’s Strategic Importance effectively offsets employment risk. Originality/value – Scholars have repeatedly shown the negative outcomes of SC managers’ perceived compensation and employment risks. Yet, little attention has been given to their antecedents. The study explores two relevant antecedents and provides integrative empirical evidence regarding actions top leaders can take to manage SC managers’ perceived risk and subsequently enhance firm performance.
-
ambitious goals supply chain function s Strategic Importance and supply chain managers behavior
Academy of Management Proceedings, 2014Co-Authors: Veronica H. Villena, Luis R Gomezmejia, Elena RevillaAbstract:To understand how key supply chain decisions are implemented, we need to understand the interaction between the top management team (TMT) and supply chain managers (SCMers). Building on the literatures of corporate governance and supply chain management, we argue that SCMers perceive increased risk for loss of compensation and employment as the TMT establishes ambitious goals because these goals make SCMers more likely to become underperformers. Conversely, we propose that SCMers perceive less risk for loss of compensation and employment as the supply chain plays a crucial role in corporate strategy, because SCMers gain more resources and leeway and use long-term planning to accomplish desired performance targets. Based on both survey and archival data from 133 firms, our results show that ambitious goals catalyze perceived compensation risk. The supply chain’s Strategic Importance reduces perceived employment risk for SCMers, but, interestingly, not perceived compensation risk. The results also show that...
Henri C. Dekker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
collaborative performance management in interfirm relationships
Social Science Research Network, 2016Co-Authors: Henri C. Dekker, Rong Ding, T L C M GrootAbstract:In this study we examine how firms’ collaborative objectives influence their use of performance management practices in interfirm relationships. We conceptualize collaborative performance management to include three interrelated practices: measurement of interfirm performance, information sharing, and interaction between boundary spanners of partner firms. Prior research has related firms’ interfirm control choices to transaction risk as proxied by ‘given’ transaction characteristics. We hypothesize that transaction characteristics are determined by the Strategic Importance of the collaboration (manifested by the Importance of firms’ collaborative objectives), and in turn influence the use of firms’ performance management practices. Analysis of survey data supports our hypotheses that Strategic Importance of the collaboration is associated with transaction characteristics (i.e., with asset specificity, transaction scope, task interdependencies and environmental variability), which characteristics in turn mediate the influence of collaborative objectives on the use of performance management practices. We also find that performance measurement, information sharing and boundary spanner interaction are used as complementary practices in the management of interfirm relationships.
-
collaborative performance management in interfirm relationships
Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2016Co-Authors: Henri C. Dekker, Rong Ding, T L C M GrootAbstract:ABSTRACT In this study, we examine how firms' collaborative objectives influence their use of performance management practices in interfirm relationships. We conceptualize collaborative performance management to include three interrelated practices: measurement of interfirm performance, information sharing, and interaction between boundary spanners of partner firms. Prior research has related firms' interfirm control choices to transaction risk as proxied by “given” transaction characteristics. We hypothesize that transaction characteristics are determined by the Strategic Importance of the collaboration (manifested by the Importance of firms' collaborative objectives) and, in turn, influence the use of firms' performance management practices. Analysis of survey data supports our hypotheses that Strategic Importance of the collaboration is associated with transaction characteristics (i.e., with asset specificity, transaction scope, task interdependencies, and environmental variability), which, in turn, me...
Veronica H. Villena - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
is top management team supply chain manager interaction the missing link an analysis of risk bearing antecedents for supply chain managers
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 2018Co-Authors: Veronica H. Villena, Luis R Gomezmejia, Elena RevillaAbstract:Supply chain managers (SC managers) may make less than optimal decisions for the firm when facing compensation and employment risks. The purpose of this paper is to study two relevant factors (target setting and Strategic Importance of the supply chain function) that may drive SC managers to perceive more or less risk to their welfare.,The study combines survey data from 133 firms with secondary data in order to reduce source bias and enhance the validity of results. The authors also conducted interviews with supply chain and human resources managers.,The results show that top managers can alter SC managers’ perceived risks. Ambitious targets drive compensation risk but not employment risk. The supply chain function’s Strategic Importance, on the other hand, decreases employment risk but increases compensation risk.,The authors emphasize two ways that the top management team (TMT) influences SC managers’ perceived personal welfare but acknowledge that there may be others factors. Due to the topic sensitivity, the authors could not collect data on all variables (e.g. individual characteristics) that may affect risk perception. The findings are based on Spanish firms and may not be generalized to other contexts.,This research proposes three suggestions. First, compensation and employment risks should be considered separately when designing compensation and evaluation systems. Second, appropriate performance targets may put compensation risk in a reasonable range that is neither too high to prevent risky-yet-beneficial decisions nor too low to allow nonfeasance. Third, escalating the supply chain’s Strategic Importance effectively offsets employment risk.,Scholars have repeatedly shown the negative outcomes of SC managers’ perceived compensation and employment risks. Yet, little attention has been given to their antecedents. The study explores two relevant antecedents and provides integrative empirical evidence regarding actions top leaders can take to manage SC managers’ perceived risk and subsequently enhance firm performance.
-
is top management team supply chain manager interaction the missing link an analysis of risk bearing antecedents for supply chain managers
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Veronica H. Villena, Luis R Gomezmejia, Elena RevillaAbstract:Purpose – Supply chain managers (SC managers) may make less than optimal decisions for the firm when facing compensation and employment risks. The purpose of this paper is to study two relevant factors (target setting and Strategic Importance of the supply chain function) that may drive SC managers to perceive more or less risk to their welfare. Design/methodology/approach – The study combines survey data from 133 firms with secondary data in order to reduce source bias and enhance the validity of results. The authors also conducted interviews with supply chain and human resources managers. Findings – The results show that top managers can alter SC managers’ perceived risks. Ambitious targets drive compensation risk but not employment risk. The supply chain function’s Strategic Importance, on the other hand, decreases employment risk but increases compensation risk. Research limitations/implications – The authors emphasize two ways that the top management team (TMT) influences SC managers’ perceived personal welfare but acknowledge that there may be others factors. Due to the topic sensitivity, the authors could not collect data on all variables (e.g. individual characteristics) that may affect risk perception. The findings are based on Spanish firms and may not be generalized to other contexts. Practical implications – This research proposes three suggestions. First, compensation and employment risks should be considered separately when designing compensation and evaluation systems. Second, appropriate performance targets may put compensation risk in a reasonable range that is neither too high to prevent risky-yet-beneficial decisions nor too low to allow nonfeasance. Third, escalating the supply chain’s Strategic Importance effectively offsets employment risk. Originality/value – Scholars have repeatedly shown the negative outcomes of SC managers’ perceived compensation and employment risks. Yet, little attention has been given to their antecedents. The study explores two relevant antecedents and provides integrative empirical evidence regarding actions top leaders can take to manage SC managers’ perceived risk and subsequently enhance firm performance.
-
ambitious goals supply chain function s Strategic Importance and supply chain managers behavior
Academy of Management Proceedings, 2014Co-Authors: Veronica H. Villena, Luis R Gomezmejia, Elena RevillaAbstract:To understand how key supply chain decisions are implemented, we need to understand the interaction between the top management team (TMT) and supply chain managers (SCMers). Building on the literatures of corporate governance and supply chain management, we argue that SCMers perceive increased risk for loss of compensation and employment as the TMT establishes ambitious goals because these goals make SCMers more likely to become underperformers. Conversely, we propose that SCMers perceive less risk for loss of compensation and employment as the supply chain plays a crucial role in corporate strategy, because SCMers gain more resources and leeway and use long-term planning to accomplish desired performance targets. Based on both survey and archival data from 133 firms, our results show that ambitious goals catalyze perceived compensation risk. The supply chain’s Strategic Importance reduces perceived employment risk for SCMers, but, interestingly, not perceived compensation risk. The results also show that...
Arjen Ysbert Hoekstra - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Strategic Importance of green water in international crop trade
Ecological Economics, 2010Co-Authors: Maite M. Aldaya, John Anthony Allan, Arjen Ysbert HoekstraAbstract:Virtual water is the volume of water used to produce a commodity or service. Hitherto, most virtual water 'trade' studies have focused on its potential contribution to saving water, especially in water short regions. Very little, however, has been said about the opportunity cost of the associated water. The present research critically evaluates the Strategic Importance of green water (soil water originating from rainfall) in relation to international commodity trade. Besides having a lower opportunity cost, the use of green water for the production of crops has generally less negative environmental externalities than the use of blue water (irrigation with water abstracted from ground or surface water systems). Although it is widely known that major grain exporters - the USA, Canada, France, Australia and Argentina - produce grain in highly productive rain-fed conditions, green water volumes in exports have rarely been estimated. The present study corroborates that green water is by far the largest share of virtual water in maize, soybean and wheat exports from its main exporting countries (USA, Canada, Australia and Argentina) during the period 2000-2004. Insofar virtual water is 'traded' towards water-scarce nations that heavily depend on their blue water resources, green virtual-water 'trade' related to these commodities plays a role in ensuring water and water-dependent food security and avoiding further potential damage to the water environments in both importing and exporting countries. This potential of international green virtual-water 'trade', however, is constrained by factors such as technology, the potential for further increases in the productivity of soil and irrigation water, the level of socio-economic development, national food policies and international trade agreements.
-
Strategic Importance of green water in international crop trade
2008Co-Authors: Maite Martinez-aldaya, Arjen Ysbert Hoekstra, John Anthony AllanAbstract:Virtual water is the volume of water used to produce a commodity or service. By importing agricultural commodities and the virtual water embedded in them, a country saves the water it would have required to produce those commodities domestically. Virtual-water ‘trade’, thus, has the potential to relieve water stress and improve water security. The present research critically evaluates the Strategic Importance and implications of green water (soil water) in relation to international crop trade. Even if, traditionally, emphasis has been given to irrigation systems, today most global crop production is rain-fed. Besides having a lower opportunity cost, green water use for the production of crops is considered more sustainable than the use of blue water (irrigation). Although green water represents the largest share of virtual water in the international trade of agricultural commodities, with exports going from highly productive rain-fed rich countries towards generally blue water based ones, green water volumes have rarely been estimated. The present study corroborates that green water is by far the largest share of virtual water embodied in maize, soybean and wheat exports from the USA, Canada, Australia and Argentina during the period 2000-2004. Accordingly, green virtual-water flows can play a major role in ensuring water security and saving water in water-deficit economies. The potential of international green virtual-water ‘trade’ for saving water and improving water security, however, is constrained by factors such as technology, the potential for further increases in the productivity, the level of socio-economic development, national food policies and international trade agreements.
