Eight Rules for Formal Conceptual Definitions
Theory-building empirical research needs formal conceptual definitions. Particularly, such definitions are necessary conditions for construct validity. But what is a “good” formal conceptual definition? In his seminal JOM paper, A Theory of Formal Conceptual Definitions: Developing Theory-building Measurement Instruments, Wacker (2004) presents eight rules for formal conceptual definitions: (1) “Definitions should be formally defined using primitive and derived terms.” (2) “Each concept should be uniquely defined.” (3) “Definitions should include only unambiguous and clear terms.” (4) “Definitions should have as few as possible terms in the conceptual definition to avoid violating the parsimony virtue of ‘good’ theory.” (5) “Definitions should be consistent within the [general academic] field.” (6) “Definitions should not make any term broader.” (7) “New hypotheses cannot be introduced in the definitions.” (8) “Statistical tests for content validity must be performed after the terms are formally defined.” These rules are explained in detail in Wacker’s article. I am convinced that Wacker’s rules lead to better measurement instruments.
Wacker, J.G. (2004). A Theory of Formal Conceptual Definitions: Developing Theory-building Measurement Instruments. Journal of Operations Management, 22 (6), 629-650 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2004.08.002
Measuring Research Impact: h-index and h-rate
As I have highlighted in a recent post (Interesting × Important = Impact), research needs to be impactful. But how can research impact be measured? IJPDLM has now published an article by Rao, Iyengar and Goldsby that answers exactly this question: On the Measurement and Benchmarking of Research Impact among Active Logistics Scholars. The authors compare “several commonly used measures of research impact to identify one that best normalizes for the effect of career stage”. One of these measures is the h-index. However, early career researchers are put at a relative disadvantage, as the h-index can only rise with time. This has led to the h-rate, which divides the h-index by the academic age of the scholar. Based on bibliometric data, the authors find that “[t]he h-rate provides the most appropriate basis for comparing research impact across logistics scholars of various career stages” and they provide benchmark h-rates for scholars to identify their research impact.
Delivery by Drone
Amazon is testing delivery packages using drones. Is this the future of logistics?
Angora Wool
Last week, a shocking video, created by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), was published. The images cast a dark shadow over global garment supply chains. In response, brands like H&M and C&A halted manufacturing of items containing Angora wool. This case, again, demonstrates the importance of ethical aspects in supply chain management.
Logistics and Supply Chain Management in Africa
Introducing the Journal of Operations Management (Guest Post by the Editors-in-Chief)
In today’s guest post, Thomas Y. Choi and Daniel Guide, Editors-in-Chief of the Journal of Operations Management, provide an introduction to their journal, which is a leading journal of our field.
The Journal of Operations Management (JOM) is an empirical journal whose mission is to advance the theories of operations management (OM) and supply chain management (SCM). The goal is to publish original, high quality, OM and SCM empirical research that will have a significant impact on theory and practice. Regular articles accepted for publication in JOM must have clear implications for operations managers based on one or more of a variety of rigorous research methodologies. It is the premier ranked journal, repeatedly ranked above other journals in the discipline. It is one of the OM-SCM focused empirical journals used by both the Financial Times in its rankings of Business Schools as well as by the University of Texas at Dallas in its assessment of scholarship. In terms of citation share, in 2011 JOM was given the following ISI category ranking: 1/73 in “Operations Research & Management Science” and 7/166 in “Management”. The current impact factor (IF) is 4.40 and the five year IF is 7.13.
Thomas Y. Choi is a Professor of Supply Chain Management at the W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University. Daniel Guide is a Professor of Supply Chain Management at the Smeal College of Business, Pennsylvania State University. They have published their research in numerous academic and managerial journals.
SCM Best Paper Award Winners 2013 (2/2)
Three more leading journals of our field have announced the winners of their best paper awards. First, the Decision Sciences Journal has selected the article Managing Differentiation-Integration Duality in Supply Chain Integration by Terjesen, Patel and Sanders for its Best Paper Award for 2012. Second, the article The Competitive Determinants of a Firm’s Environmental Management Activities: Evidence from US Manufacturing Industries by Hofer, Cantor and Dai has won the Journal of Operations Management Jack Meredith Best Paper Award. Finally, the judges for the 2012 Harold E. Fearon Best Paper Award were evenly split between two articles. Therefore, the Journal of Supply Chain Management has announced two winning articles: Supply Chain-Wide Consequences of Transaction Risks and Their Contractual Solutions: Towards an Extended Transaction Cost Economics Framework by Wever, Wognum, Trienekens and Omta, and Who Owns the Customer? Disentangling Customer Loyalty in Indirect Distribution Channels by Eggert, Henseler and Hollmann. Congratulations to all winners! (part 1/2)
Terjesen, S., Patel, P.C., & Sanders, N.R. (2012). Managing Differentiation-Integration Duality in Supply Chain Integration. Decision Sciences, 43 (2), 303-339 DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2011.00345.x
Hofer, C., Cantor, D.E., & Dai, J. (2012). The Competitive Determinants of a Firm’s Environmental Management Activities: Evidence from US Manufacturing Industries. Journal of Operations Management, 30 (1–2), 69-84 DOI: 10.1016/j.jom.2011.06.002
Wever, M., Wognum, P.M., Trienekens, J.H., & Omta, S.W.F. (2012). Supply Chain-Wide Consequences of Transaction Risks and Their Contractual Solutions: Towards an Extended Transaction Cost Economics Framework. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 48 (1), 73-91 DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-493X.2011.03253.x
Eggert, A., Henseler, J., & Hollmann, S. (2012). Who Owns the Customer? Disentangling Customer Loyalty in Indirect Distribution Channels. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 48 (2), 75-92 DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-493X.2011.03260.x
A Moral Revision of Electronic Supply Chains (Guest Post by Bas van Abel, Fairphone)
To make the supply chain more transparent, Fairphone opens up the entire system to understand what shapes our economy. I am happy to share the following guest post by Bas van Abel, CEO and founder of Fairphone. Thank you for contributing to my blog.
Business practices in the supply chains of the electronics industry are in urgent need of moral revision. What do we know about the production of complex electronic devices and the people who make them? By making a phone, Fairphone wants to uncover and expose each link in the supply chain and step-by-step make interventions to improve the way things are made. Instead of hiding behind the complexity of the supply chain, Fairphone wants to unveil the problems associated with the smartphone production like poor labor conditions, the use of conflict minerals and the rise in electronic waste. To do so, we are searching for solutions by engaging in partnerships to come with alternatives to current models. In the first Fairphone that will be released in December 2013, conflict-free tin and tantalum from the Democratic Republic of the Congo has been integrated in the manufacturing of the phone, but that’s only a first step. By growing a movement of people who can share best practices and by creating a platform for discussion, Fairphone aims to raise the bar for the industry meanwhile giving people a choice for fairer electronics.
Bas has a background in interaction design and is an active member of the Maker Movement. He supports open design principles. He has set up projects such as the Waag Society’s Fablab and the Instructables restaurant (an open source restaurant). He is co-editor of the book “Open Design Now”.
SCM Best Paper Award Winners 2013 (1/2)
This year’s CSCMP Annual Global Conference took place in Denver, Colorado. It has become a good tradition that some of the leading journals of our field announce their best paper awards during the CSCMP’s Supply Chain Management Educators’ Conference, the academic part of the CSCMP Conference (see my previous post from Atlanta last year). The best paper published in the International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management is The Impact of Individual Debiasing Efforts on Financial Decision Effectiveness in the Supplier Selection Process by Lutz Kaufmann, Craig R. Carter and Christian Buhrmann. The Bernard J. LaLonde Best Paper Award (best paper published in the Journal of Business Logistics) goes to The Roles of Procedural and Distributive Justice in Logistics Outsourcing Relationships by Adriana Rossiter Hofer, A. Michael Knemeyer and Paul R. Murphy. The quality of these papers has certainly raised the bar for our own manuscripts. Thanks to Christian F. Durach for sending me these entries from Denver. (part 2/2)
Kaufmann, L., Carter, C.R., & Buhrmann, C. (2012). The Impact of Individual Debiasing Efforts on Financial Decision Effectiveness in the Supplier Selection Process. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 42 (5), 411-433 DOI: 10.1108/09600031211246492
Rossiter Hofer, A., Knemeyer, A.M., & Murphy, P.R. (2012). The Roles of Procedural and Distributive Justice in Logistics Outsourcing Relationships. Journal of Business Logistics, 33 (3), 196-209 DOI: 10.1111/j.2158-1592.2012.01052.x
Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation
Recently, I discovered an article by Ahuja (2000), Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study, which was published in Administrative Science Quarterly. It contains a framework that “relates three aspects of a firm’s ego network—direct ties, indirect ties, and structural holes (disconnections between a firm’s partners)—to the firm’s subsequent innovation output.” The author suggests that “[t]he more direct ties that a firm maintains, the greater the firm’s subsequent innovation output”. Similarly, he suggests that “[t]he greater a firm’s number of indirect ties, the greater the subsequent innovation output of the firm”. Here, the impact of indirect ties “will be moderated by the level of the firm’s direct ties”. These hypotheses are supported by the results of a longitudinal study. Two competing hypotheses are presented concerning the effect of increasing structural holes on innovation. The empirical results indicate that this effect is negative. Ahuja’s article is among the most-cited ASQ articles.
Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45 (3), 425-455 DOI: 10.2307/2667105
