The Ethical Shopper: A Myth?
It has often been assumed that one of the characteristics of SCM philosophy is “a customer focus to create unique and individualized sources of customer value, leading to customer satisfaction” (Mentzer et al., 2001). This assumption has led to business models like Primark, which aim to satisfy customer needs for fashion by making incredibly cheap garments available – so cheap that many teenagers nowadays are used to throw them away after just two weeks. Part of the truth is that such customer needs are not only satisfied by these businesses, but also created by the marketing experts that are part of the system. But to what extend can we expect that customers critically reflect the way they consume? A very interesting article by Michael Hobbes argues: “We’re still trying to eliminate sweatshops and child labor by buying right. But that’s not how the world works in 2015.” Hobbes’ article is titled The Myth of the Ethical Shopper. See also: Supply Chain Management and Corporate Social Responsibility.
Redefining Some Methodological Criteria for Empirical Research
In their new editorial, the editors of the Journal of Operations Management highlight five important issues, “many of which continue to be reasons for rejections in the manuscript review process”. First, “it is time to take causality seriously”. Particularly, authors have to take steps toward correcting for endogeneity or demonstrating exogeneity. Second, “know which rules are worth following”. For example, the yes–no rule that a measure is reliable if Cronbach’s α exceeds 0.7 is no longer recommended. Third, “always understand the tools you use”. Here, authors of PLS-based manuscripts routinely fail to discuss the weaknesses of the estimator. Fourth, “be cautious with claims about common method bias”. Particularly, ex-post techniques (e.g., Harman, 1967) do not have much practical value (see, however, my post about the CFA marker technique). Finally, “stay current on methodological developments”. For example, Baron & Kenny (1986) are widely used, although updated approaches have been published. It seems that the JOM editors no longer send manuscripts to the review process that ignore these issues.
Guide, V., & Ketokivi, M. (2015). Notes from the Editors: Redefining Some Methodological Criteria for the Journal. Journal of Operations Management, 37 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(15)00056-X
Introducing the Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management (Guest Post by the Co-Editors)
In today’s guest post, Nezih Altay and Ira Haavisto, the new Co-Editors of the Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management (JHLSCM) provide an introduction to their journal.
We are very excited and motivated about the task given to us and humbled by the trust of our friends and colleagues. JHLSCM promotes the exchange of knowledge, experience and new ideas between researchers and practitioners and encourages a multi-disciplinary and cross-functional approach to the resolution of problems and exploitations of opportunities within humanitarian supply chains. Our vision for the journal is for it to be the premier publication choice for humanitarian logistics researchers and a leading knowledge resource for practitioners. We hope to accomplish this by increasing the number of issues and expanding the scope of the journal to include research on not just post-disaster relief but all kinds of humanitarian operations, hereby continuing to emphasize evidence-based research without limiting our researchers in their methodological choices. We plan to not only expand the editorial advisory board but also engage them in the process of taking JHLSCM to the next level. Our EAB members will not just review papers but counsel authors to help them build their papers and by continuing to push for better quality. In addition to academic rigor, “quality” for us also includes dimensions like readability, timeliness, and validity. Papers published in JHLSCM should be readable and understandable by non-academics as well. They should focus on contemporary topics and solve real problems.
Dr. Ira Haavisto is the Director of the HUMLOG Institute at the Hanken School of Economics in Finland. Dr. Nezih Altay is an Associate Professor at the Driehaus College of Business of DePaul University in the United States.
