Leveling the playing field: factors influencing trade show success for small companies

Recent research indicates that trade shows are a place to find prospects and close sales. Yet, many requisites of success found in prior studies may not be available to companies with limited resources. A study that compares the activities of successful vs. unsuccessful exhibitors from small companies was conducted. Results indicate similar budgets, yet very different results. Factors influencing success include strategic factors such as centering responsibility in one position, as well as tactical decisions such as those regarding pre-show promotion.     

Reconfiguring supplier relationships between local and global: History matters

Small and medium-sized companies are increasingly facing international markets as part of their processes of growth and development. A great deal of literature deals with different patterns of growth and international development that are specific to SMEs with respect to large companies. Fewer studies have been conducted on the reconfiguration of company supplier relationships involved in these processes. This paper focuses on the role played by the consolidated set of company supplier relationships when the firm faces some critical stages in its process of development, i.e., growth from small to mid-sized and the implementation of new ventures abroad accessing new business relationships with international suppliers. A multiple and longitudinal case study shows how the local set of supplier relationships of four mid-sized Italian mechanical companies acting in industrial districts has played an important role in shaping the emerging set of supplier relationships and addressing companies' actions in their growth and internationalization processes.     

The impact of coercive and non-coercive forms of influence on trust, commitment, and compliance in supply chains

A major premise in managing channel relationships is encouraging cooperation to achieve the aims of the relational partners. This often requires a balancing act between utilization of influence across the supply chain to motivate decisions, while employing tactics that do not damage the future of the relationship. This paper builds and tests a model of how influence strategies affect relational elements, specifically trust and commitment, which both promote strong inter-firm relationships and act as mediators of joint action, specifically cooperation and compliance across channel partners. Results suggest that coercive strategies are counterproductive in encouraging cooperation and compliance either directly or through relational intermediaries, while non-coercive influence produces positive outcomes and effects on intermediaries. Low levels of coercive influence do appear to generate positive outcomes. Managerial implications and future research based on these results conclude the paper.     

Comparing two territory partitions in districting problems: Indices and practical issues

Planning as part of public sector decision-making situations is an activity of critical importance, with direct relevance for urban planners. The ramifications of such decisions generally have significant effect on peoples’ lives. The current paper deals with the comparison between territorial maps in the context of districting problems with a strong socio-economic component. The theoretical problem involves the comparison of two partitions in a connected, undirected, and planar graph. In considering this problem, we introduce three new indices to compare territory partitions: compatibility, inclusion, and distance, all of which have importance for real-world planning situations. Numerical experiments of these indices were carried out for the communes network in (Iˆle de France), France.     

Science and politics: The 1981 and 1984 LIHEAP distribution formulas

The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) is a federal block grant program to help low-income households pay their heating and cooling bills. If the regular fiscal year LIHEAP appropriation is less than or equal to $1.975 billion, then a 1981 formula is applied to distribute funding across states, while if appropriations rise above the $1.975 billion threshold, a 1984 formula is applied in conjunction with two hold-harmless provisions. In 18 of the past 20 years, the 1981 formula has served as the default mechanism to distribute LIHEAP funding. The purpose of this paper is to call attention to the inadequacy of the 1981 formula and to explain why the objectives of LIHEAP are not met when this formula is used. We explain why the distribution of LIHEAP funds is not proportionate to the need for assistance and offer some suggestions for improvement. The 1981 formula is shown to be the outcome of a convoluted political process heavily biased in favor of cold-climate states, with cold-climate states receiving on-the-order of at least $150 million a year in allotment dollars beyond their “fair share” of heating requirements. The 1981 and 1984 distribution formulas are derived and a critical examination of each formula is presented. The 1984 formula is shown to be an ideal mechanism to distribute LIHEAP funds, based on a scientific and rational understanding of low-income energy needs, but legislative constraints prevent its application.     

Euro-currency market as recycling medium

During the past year the Euro-currency market played a very large role in bridging over the oil-induced payments imbalances. In the interest of international monetary stability this market should now move somewhat away from the centre of the stage and leave the main responsibility for the recycling of oil funds to the official financing mechanisms.     

Does the Delphi process lead to increased accuracy in group-based judgmental forecasts or does it simply induce consensus amongst judgmental forecasters?

We investigate the relative impact of internal Delphi process factors - including panelists' degree of confidence, expertise, majority/minority positioning - and an external factor, richness of feedback - on opinion change and subsequent accuracy of judgmental forecasts. We found that panelists who had low confidence in their judgmental forecast and/or who were in a minority were more likely to change their opinion than those who were more confident and/or in a majority. The addition of rationales, or reasons, to the numeric feedback had little impact upon panelists' final forecasts, despite the quality of panelists' rationales being significantly positively correlated with accurate forecasts and thus of potential use to aid forecast improvement over Delphi rounds. Rather, the effect of rationales was similar to that of confidence: to pull panelists towards the majority opinion regardless of its correctness. We conclude that majority opinion is the strongest influence on panelists' opinion change in both the ‘standard’ Delphi, and Delphi-with-reasons. We make some suggestions for improved variants of the Delphi-with-reasons technique that should help reduce majority influence and thereby permit reasoned arguments to exert their proper pull on opinion change, resulting in forecast accuracy improvements over Delphi rounds.