Supply chain challenges. building relationships

Supply chain management is all about software and systems, right? Put in the best technology, sit back, and watch as your processes run smoothly and the savings roll in? Apparently not. When HBR convened a panel of leading thinkers in the field of supply chain management, technology was not top of mind. People and relationships were the dominant issues of the day. The opportunities and problems created by globalization, for example, are requiring companies to establish relationships with new types of suppliers. The ever-present pressure for speed and cost containment is making it even more important to break down stubbornly high internal barriers and establish more effective cross-functional relationships. The costs of failure have never been higher. The leading supply chain performers are applying new technology, new innovations, and process thinking to far greater advantage than the laggards, reaping tremendous gains in all the variables that affect shareholder value: cost, customer service, asset productivity, and revenue generation. And the gap between the leaders and the losers is growing in almost every industry. This roundtable gathered many of the leading thinkers and doers in the field of supply chain management, including practitioners Scott Beth of Intuit, Sandra Morris of Intel, and Chris Gopal of Unisys. David Burt of the University of San Diego and Stanford's Hau Lee bring the latest research from academia. Accenture's William Copacino and the Warren Company's Robert Porter Lynch offer the consultant's perspectives. Together, they take a wide-ranging view of such topics as developing talent, the role of the chief executive, and the latest technologies, exploring both the tactical and the strategic in the current state of supply chain management.     

Interdisciplinary research redefined: Multi-skill, problem-focussed research in the STRAP framework

A new framework for the study of interdisciplinary research processes is presented 'STRAP' emphasizes the combination of identifiable skills—substantive knowledge and techniques—that must come together to solve a complex research problem. This framework holds promise of better accommodating non-academic settings and yielding new insights into the management of complex R&D projects.     

Analysts' Reactions to Earnings Preannouncement Strategies

Preannouncements of earnings tend to overstate negative or understate positive news, which decreases the chance of a negative surprise when actual earnings is announced. We conduct an experiment to investigate how experienced sell-side analysts' earnings forecasts are affected by preannouncements that either understate, accurately state, or overstate the magnitude of positive or negative total earnings news, holding total earnings news constant. We find that firms with negative (positive) total news receive the highest post-earnings announcement forecasts of future earnings when the earlier preannouncement overstates (understates) the magnitude of the news. These forecasts are consistent with the analysts' perceptions about the firms' future prospects, but not their perceptions of management. While analysts expect preannouncements to be lower than actual earnings, they do not adjust their forecasts for these beliefs. These insights into analysts' responses have implications both for managers and analysts.     

QTIP: Quick technology intelligence processes

Empirical technology analyses need not take months; they can be done in minutes. One can thereby take advantage of wide availability of rich science and technology publication and patent abstract databases to better inform technology management. To do so requires developing templates of innovation indicators to answer standard questions. Then, one can automate routines to generate composite information representations (“one-pagers”) that address the issues at hand, the way that the target users want.     

Capital disadvantage: America's failing capital investment system

The U.S. system of allocating investment capital is failing, putting American companies at a serious disadvantage and threatening the long-term growth of the nation's economy. The problem, says Michael Porter, goes beyond the usual formulation of the issue: accusations of "short-termism" by U.S. managers, ineffective corporate governance by directors, or a high cost of capital. The problem involves the external capital allocation system by which capital is provided to companies, as well as the system by which companies allocate capital internally. America's system is marked by fluid capital and a financial focus. Other countries--notably Japan and Germany--have systems with dedicated capital and a focus on corporate position. In global competition, where investment increasingly determines a company's capacity to upgrade and innovate, the U.S. system does not measure up. These conclusions come out of a two-year research project sponsored by the Harvard Business School and the Council on Competitiveness. Porter recommends five far-reaching reforms to make the U.S. system superior to Japan's and Germany's: 1. Improve the present macroeconomic environment. 2. Expand true ownership throughout the system so that directors, managers, employees, and even customers and suppliers hold positions as owners. 3. Align the goals of capital providers, corporations, directors, managers, employees, customers, suppliers, and society. 4. Improve the information used in decision making. 5. Foster more productive modes of interaction and influence among capital providers, corporations, and business units.     

A Market-Based Mechanism for Allocating Space Shuttle Secondary Payload Priority

This is an investigation into the design of a market-based process to replace NASA's current committee process for allocating Shuttle secondary payload resources (lockers, Watts and crew). The market-based process allocates budgets of tokens to NASA internal organizations that in turn use the budget to bid for priority for their middeck payloads. The scheduling algorithm selects payloads by priority class and maximizes the number of tokens bid to determine a manifest. The results of a number of controlled experiments show that such a system tends to allocate resources more efficiently by guiding participants to make resource and payload tradeoffs. Most participants were able to improve their position over NASA's current ranking system. Furthermore, those that are better off make large improvements while the few that do worse have relatively small losses.     

Work Ethic and Ethical Work: Distortions in the American Dream

Economic progress in the United States has been attributed to the successful combination of two social structures – capitalism as an economic system and democracy as a political system. At the heart of this interaction is a particular work ethic in which hard work is considered the path to both immediate and future rewards. This article examines the evolution of work ethic in the United States, as well as the returns experienced through various adaptations in the country’s history. From this grounding, the information is structured into a proposal that key messages contained in the current, accepted work ethic are subject to distortions that may contribute to unethical decision making. These distortions result from two potentials: (1) efforts to reconcile the work ethic with contradictory messages and (2) exaggerations of the work ethic that become dysfunctional. The intent is to provide a framework that may explain to organizational leaders how people with the same basic work ethic can behave differently in terms of ethical work. Along with this understanding comes the potential to offset possible distortions and to encourage more ethical behavior.     

Smarter through social protection? Evaluating the impact of Ethiopia’s safety-net on child cognitive abilities

Ethiopia’s productive safety net is the second largest Social Protection Program in sub-Saharan Africa and has been rolled out to almost 10 million beneficiaries since 2005; its effects are therefore of general interest. We provide the first estimates of its impact on children’s cognitive abilities. To identify impacts of this program, we exploit four rounds of data on a cohort of children surveyed repeatedly between 2002 and 2013. We find a small but significant positive effect of the programme on both numeracy skills and vocabulary. This is driven mainly by children in households that had graduated (left) the programme just before 2013. We argue that this is at least partially related to time allocation: graduates of the programme spent more time in school than continuing beneficiaries. We also find evidence that the maths (though not language) improvement is more pronounced for boys.     

Blended Social Impact Investment Transactions: Why Are They So Complex?

Journal of Business Ethics - Blended social impact investment (SII) transactions, in which multiple types of capital are combined to support attainment of social impact, are a pervasive, yet not...