About Cynthia Nalevanko, Editor, SAGE Publishing

Founded in 1965, SAGE is the world’s leading independent academic and professional publisher. Known for our commitment to quality and innovation, SAGE has helped inform and educate a global community of scholars, practitioners, researchers, and students across a broad range of subject areas. With over 1500 employees globally from principal offices in Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, and Melburne, our publishing program includes more than 1000 journals and over 900 books, reference works and databases a year in business, humanities, social sciences, science, technology and medicine. Believing passionately that engaged scholarship lies at the heart of any healthy society and that education is intrinsically valuable, SAGE aims to be the world’s leading independent academic and professional publisher. This means playing a creative role in society by disseminating teaching and research on a global scale, the cornerstones of which are good, long-term relationships, a focus on our markets, and an ability to combine quality and innovation. Leading authors, editors and societies should feel that SAGE is their natural home: we believe in meeting the range of their needs, and in publishing the best of their work. We are a growing company, and our financial success comes from thinking creatively about our markets and actively responding to the needs of our customers.

Capturing Relative Importance of Customer Satisfaction Drivers Using Bayesian Dominance Hierarchy

[We’re pleased to welcome authors Philippe Duverger and Xiaoyin Wang of Towson University. Duverger and Wang recently published an article in Cornell Hospitality Quarterly entitled “Capturing Relative Importance of Customer Satisfaction Drivers using Bayesian Dominance Hierarchy,” which is currently free to read for a limited time. Below, they reflect on the inspiration for conducting this research:]

cqxb_58_2.cover

What motivated you to pursue this research?

We observed that most research on the drivers of customer satisfaction (CS) used large samples, often aggregated from several month and/or several properties. Although this is a fine method to look at CS trends it is not practical at the property level for immediate action. The current methods require large samples in order to achieve sufficient power and find significant estimates in models. Unfortunately, most hotel property monthly survey yield samples of less than 100 that will make driver analyses problematic and more likely most drivers will have non-significant estimates.

We asked ourselves if there would not be a method that could circumvent the problem of property managers that want and need to address CS drivers on a monthly basis, if not on a daily basis.

What has been the most challenging aspect of conducting your research? Were there any surprising findings?

We used a Bayesian statistical framework, borrowing from several literature areas to construct a model. Bayesian statistical analysis is still a fairly new method in practice, often not well understood, and can be computationally heavy. Therefore we first needed to explain the advantages of the method in a way that was pragmatic enough because our goal in this paper was to appeal to the hospitality manager.

Bayesian statistics work from the belief that the unknown parameter is a random variable and is associated with a probability distribution (prior distribution). The information in the sample data is used to adjust the prior perception of the unknown parameter and results in the final estimation of the parameter (posterior distribution). Therefore, even if the sample is small, significance can be determined.

Maybe more pragmatically, Bayesian analysis is “often a more direct way to tackle questions we usually want to know, such as: is the hypothesis likely to be true?” Bayesian analysis does not use double negatives, such as we often encounter, e.g., “we failed to reject the null hypothesis that there is no difference.” Bayesian analysis reports are straight forward: “given these data, it is likely that the difference is X% probable” (Chapman and McDonnell Fei 2015, p. 150).

There are many other advantages that we discuss in the paper.

In what ways is your research innovative, and how do you think it will impact the field?

We believe that our Bayesian model, for which we share the code at http://tinyurl.com/kdqjf4u, could be used by hospitality properties or hospitality corporate departments, to enhance monthly reporting along with other marketing metrics, and shared via dashboards.

 

Stay up-to-date with the latest research from Cornell Hospitality Quarterly and sign up for email alerts today through the homepage!

Is It Better to Govern Managers Via Agency or Stewardship?

[We’re pleased to welcome author Albert E. James of Dalhousie University, Canada. James recently published an article in the Family Business Review entitled “Is It Better to Govern Managers via Agency or Stewardship? Examining Asymmetries by Family Versus Nonfamily Affiliation,” which is currently free to read for a limited time. Below, James reflects on the inspiration for conducting this research:]

fbra_30_2.coverThe research is based upon the first author’s dissertation. It is the result of his effort to understand the many different behaviours and outcomes that he witnessed during his 20-year career working as a non-family employee for various family firms—particularly his desire to understand why and how some families’ businesses seem to be more successful than others. It is also the result of a PhD supervisor’s determination to see her student succeed as an academic and her willingness to let him follow his passion and research questions.

The most challenging aspect of this process has been finding the way to tell the story of the research project. What is published here is the result of many re-writes, iterations, and direction changes. It was challenging to adapt concepts and measures to the particularities of the family business field. And it was challenging to make full use of the reviewers’ and editor’s advice. All in all, though, the challenges were an opportunity for a new academic to learn many things about rigorous research and publishing. Without the patient work, extensive knowledge and leadership of the co-authors, none of the challenges would have been overcome.

One of the study’s most surprising findings is the high level of positive work outcomes exhibited by both the family and non-family managers in the sample. Sometimes family business managers—of either type—are portrayed with at least a hint of negativity. Those in our sample, however, tended to score highly on behaviours and attitudes that are normally considered beneficial to organizations (i.e., job performance, organizational identification and affective commitment). As for the anticipated impact of our research, we hope that it will become known for providing empirical evidence that challenges commonly held assumptions regarding the attitudes and behaviours exhibited by non-family versus family managers and the mechanisms by which each group should be governed.

The advice I would give new scholars is to be willing to re-work the story you wanted to tell to your chosen audience. No matter how interesting you believe your research to be, you have to be willing to find the right way to tell the story. You need to tell the story in a way that fits your audience’s conversations. It is not easy to let go of parts of your research that were highly motivational for you. As hard as it is upon a first read, don’t take the reviewer and editor comments personally. Instead, take your time with the comments, let your reactions cool, and then find the nuggets and gems within them. Don’t be afraid to ask for help. This research started off as a study of non-family manager turnover intentions and became a story of the governance mechanisms used in family businesses. It is important to keep your eye on your end goal. If you can’t tell the entire story this time around, tell what you can, save the rest, add what you learned from the current round, and mix it into your next project.

Stay up-to-date with the latest research from the Family Business Review and sign up for email alerts today through the homepage!

Do Customers Assign Different Meanings to Different Acts of Compensation?

[We’re pleased to welcome author Holger Roschk of the Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt, Klagenfurt, Austria. Roschk recently published an article in the Journal of Service Research entitled “Compensation Revisited: A Social Resource Theory Perspective on Offering a Monetary Resource after a Service Failure,” which is currently free to read for a limited time. Below, Roschk reflects on the inspiration for conducting this research:]

dollar-531639_960_720One of the many propositions by social resource theory comprises that people assign different meanings to the same action. Being a great fan of mafia movies, this idea intrigued me as it nicely reflects the popular “kiss of death” metaphor. While a kiss is usually considered as something positive, it can also — as portrayed in these very special movie situations mean that a person has fallen in disgrace.

Fascinated by this idea, we wanted to see if complainants assign different meanings to an act of service failure compensation. In service recovery research, social resource theory has been employed in promising ways such as explaining the situational desirability of recovery efforts. Accordingly, it seemed logical to take the next step and see if varying the properties of one and the same resource—in our case money—impacts recovery effectiveness.

With this purpose in mind, we also had to deal with a couple of challenges. One of them was the above mentioned issue that people attach different meanings to the same action. It is not reported in the article, but it was quite interesting. Accidentally, in one of our tests we manipulated the compensation act in such a way that respondents seemed to assign a negative meaning, eventually leading to obstructive effects which was exactly the contrary of what we wanted to achieve.

People often talk about money in terms of “money is money—so why should one care about how it is given?” Finding that complainants actually do care about how they are compensated in a recovery situation is an interesting new perspective for practitioners and researchers alike. Practitioners in particular learn about an outcome relevant property allowing to facilitate recovery outcomes without additional monetary costs. Further, they learn about an interesting side effect. Specifically, we observed that handing over the money in a personal and tangible way can be used to increase monetary returns to the firm in the form of tipping and cross-buying.

With regards to the research community, we hope that future scholars also draw on social resource theory in order to broaden our understanding of service failure and recovery, especially as SRT comprises many more propositions not yet considered.

02JSR13_Covers.inddStay up-to-date with the latest research from the Journal of Service Research and sign up for email alerts today through the homepage!

An Educator’s Perspective on Reflexive Pedagogy: Identity Undoing and Issues of Power

[We’re pleased to welcome author Dr. Marian Iszatt-White of the Lancaster University Management School. Dr. Iszatt-White recently published an article in Management Learning entitled “An educator’s perspective on reflexive pedagogy: identity undoing and issues of power,” which is currently free to read for a limited time. Below, Dr. Iszatt-White reveals the inspiration for conducting this research and the impact it has on the field:]

mlqb_48_3.coverWhat motivated you to pursue this research?

All the authors of this paper are teachers as well as researchers, and spend much of our time working with ‘gnarly’ middle managers on executive education programmes and Executive MBAs. It was piloting an innovative leadership learning intervention (co-constructed coaching – the subject of an earlier paper in Management Learning by Steve and myself) with this latter population that triggered the insights underpinning this paper. Specifically, we realised that adopting a reflexive pedagogy had implications for us as ‘teachers’ as well as for our students. This was not the direction we intended the paper to go, but it really hit us as something important and not well understood in the literature. The idea of ‘identity undoing’, which Brigid had already developed, seemed key to our own experiences and offered a valuable framework for processing and theorizing them.

What has been the most challenging aspect of conducting your research? Were there any surprising findings?

A significant challenge in conducting this research was the autoethnographic element – which was not part of the original design but still needed to be methodologically robust. Our original intention had been to validate the idea of co-constructed coaching as a leadership learning intervention, which we had previously proposed. An early draft of the paper, pursuing this intent, happened to mention our own experience of implementing this intervention and our reviewers picked up on this as being interesting. This led Steve and I to home in on this previously marginal aspect of the project and to bring Brigid in as an ‘independent witness’ to our reflections on what it felt like to adopt a reflexive pedagogy. Brigid did a great job of ‘interrogating’ and then narrating key elements of this experience, which we were then able to theorize in relation to identity undoing and issues of power.

In what ways is your research innovative, and how do you think it will impact the field?

In undertaking this analysis, we problematize the pursuit of a reflexive pedagogical practice within executive and postgraduate education and offer a paradox: the desire to engage students in reflexive learning interventions – and in particular to disrupt the power asymmetries and hierarchical dependencies of more traditional educator-student relationships – can in practice have the effect of highlighting those very asymmetries and dependencies. Successful resolution of such a paradox becomes dependent on the capacity of educators to undo their own reliance on and even desire for authority underpinned by a sense of theory-based expertise. We belief this insight – as well as the innovative use of autoethnographic methods to turn a critically reflexive lens upon academic teaching – will provide food for thought (and for further research) across a wide range of academic disciplines. With the introduction in the UK of the Teaching Excellence Framework, now seems to be a fitting time to review what it means to be an ‘expert’ teacher.

Stay up-to-date with the latest research from MLQ and sign up for email alerts today through the homepage!

Contemporary Careers and Portable Selves

Author Gianpiero Petriglieri recently published an article in the Harvard Business Review, promoting his research. His most recent publication, “Fast Tracks and Inner Journeys: Crafting Portable Selves for Contemporary Careers” was featured in Administrative Science Quarterly. For more details, the abstract for Petriglieri’s research is below:

ASQ_72ppiRGB_powerpointThrough a longitudinal, qualitative study of 55 managers engaged in mobile careers across organizations, industries, and countries, and pursuing a one-year international master’s of business administration (MBA), we build a process model of the crafting of portable selves in temporary identity workspaces. Our findings reveal that contemporary careers in general, and temporary membership in an institution, fuel people’s efforts to craft portable selves: selves endowed with definitions, motives, and abilities that can be deployed across roles and organizations over time. Two pathways for crafting a portable self—one adaptive, the other exploratory—emerged from the interaction of individuals’ aims and concerns with institutional resources and demands. Each pathway involved developing a coherent understanding of the self in relation to others and to the institution that anchored participants to their current organization while preparing them for future ones. The study shows how institutions that host members temporarily can help them craft selves that afford a sense of agentic direction and enduring connection, tempering anxieties and bolstering hopes associated with mobile working lives. It also suggests that institutions serving as identity workspaces for portable selves may remain attractive and extend their cultural influence in an age of workforce mobility.

For more updates on ASQ articles check out their homepage and sign up for notifications! 

The Evolution and Prospects of Service-Dominant Logic Research

[We’re pleased to welcome author Dr. Ralf Wilden of Newcastle Business School, University of Newcastle, Australia. Dr. Wilden recently published an article in the Journal of Service Research entitled “The Evolution and Prospects of Service-dominant Logic Research: An Investigation of Past, Present, and Future Research,” which is currently free to read for a limited time.” Below, Dr. Wilden reflects on the inspiration for conducting this research:]

02JSR13_Covers.inddService innovation is a driving force of economic growth in developed economies. Large corporations, such as BMW and IBM, increasingly define their business as service centric. For example, the BMW Group has moved away from defining their value proposition being focused on cars and motorcycles to positioning themselves as a mobility provider, thus moving away from a product-centered to service-centered narrative. The ‘servitization’ of traditional business models converges with a growing academic discourse around the emergence and evolution of the so-called ‘service-dominant logic’. Ongoing studies in this area explore the value of service in dynamic exchange systems and how managers are responding to or guided by ideas that 1) service forms the basis of all economic exchange, 2) value is always co-created between relevant actors, and 3) so-called operant resources are central to value co-creation.

In a recent study in the Journal of Service Research, an international team of researchers studied existing research to uncover core concepts and thematic shifts in the development of new knowledge in this field. More specifically, they studied how service-dominant logic advances the understanding of how value is created and service is innovated in dynamic service ecosystems. Based on a citation analyses and text mining of more than 300 key articles, the authors identify how service-dominant logic bridges traditional service research (e.g., regarding satisfaction, quality and customer experiences) with strategic and systems views. However, looking at the evolution of service-dominant logic research over time, it appears focus on strategic research has waned. Thus, the authors argue future studies should draw on several specific research areas to develop frameworks to aid managers in strategically thinking about service design and innovation.

The results from this study verify service-dominant logic is highly influential in areas such as customer engagement and value cocreation. An underlying shift towards social and systemic perspectives is also evident. However, many valuable insights emerging from the wealth of relevant studies have not yet impacted research regarding managerial decision-making and strategy development on a large scale. Furthermore, the authors identify the need to develop a stronger understanding of the way service-dominant logic can be used to inform how managerial actions and social and cultural practices influence and are influenced by a wider service ecosystem. For example, Ralf Wilden says “the way organizations engage in innovation-related activities has changed from a firm-centric model to a model that stresses the importance of knowledge in-flows and out-flows across organizational boundaries.” He adds, “despite the commonly accepted importance of services in value creation activities our knowledge about the role of open innovation in service ecosystems is limited.” The authors further stress that service thinking has benefited from interdisciplinary research in the past. Moving forward, combining service-dominant research with organizational strategy insights in the area of open innovation, dynamic capabilities and microfoundations, together with social, cultural and systems theories, can lead to developing new knowledge regarding service and drive continual improvement in service design and innovation.

Visit the journal homepage to sign up for email alerts!

Stages of Corporate Sustainability: Integrating the Strong Sustainability Worldview

[We’re pleased to welcome author Nancy E. Landrum of Loyola University Chicago. Landrum recently published an article in Stages of Corporate Sustainability: Integrating the Strong Sustainability Worldview,” which is currently free to read for a limited time. Below, Landrum reflects on the inspiration for conducting her research and her contribution to the field:]

O&E_72ppiRGB_powerpointI recently read sustainability reports produced by mining companies.  The reports stated the companies were balancing economic, social, and environmental responsibilities, their environmental impact was minimized while their social benefits were maximized, and they were striving to be environmental leaders.  Yet the dictionary describes sustainability as using a resource in a way that it is not depleted or permanently damaged.  I thought it was ironic that mining companies could claim they were operating sustainably since resource depletion is the purpose of mining.

I went back to the literature on the sustainability spectrum which suggests that sustainability is a continuum that ranges from weak to strong sustainability.  It occurred to me that while the mining companies’ activities did not match my understanding of sustainability, there could, in fact, be multiple interpretations of sustainability.  Companies’ activities could be placed along the sustainability spectrum to define whether they were following the principles of weak sustainability, strong sustainability, or somewhere in between.

This lead to the integration of 22 micro- and macro-level models of stages of development in corporate sustainability which were then aligned with the sustainability spectrum.  I found that existing models had numerous stages that aligned with weak sustainability but did not include stages that aligned with strong sustainability.  The integration of existing models and subsequent alignment with the sustainability spectrum resulted in the creation of a new unified model for stages of corporate sustainability that now included strong sustainability.

This new model allows us to see that companies can be at varying points along the sustainability spectrum and reveals multiple interpretations of sustainability.  While mining companies might be at one end of the spectrum, more progressive companies might be further along the spectrum; they are at different stages based upon their differing interpretations of corporate sustainability.  Most importantly, with the inclusion of strong sustainability, this new model expands our view beyond what currently defines corporate sustainability and opens new territory for the pursuit of a more sustainable future.

Stay up-to-date with the latest research from OAE and sign up for email alerts today through the homepage!