Supply disruptions and protection motivation: Why some managers act proactively (and others don't)

被引:4
|
作者
Bode, Christoph [1 ]
Macdonald, John R. [2 ]
Merath, Maximilian [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Mannheim, Business Sch, Area Operat Management, Mannheim, Germany
[2] Colorado State Univ, Dept Management, Ft Collins, CO 80523 USA
关键词
discrete choice analysis; experiment; proactive action; protection motivation theory; supply disruption management; supply risk management; DISCRETE-CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; SAMPLE-SIZE REQUIREMENTS; CHAIN RISK; FEAR APPEALS; HEALTH-CARE; UNITED-STATES; JOB KNOWLEDGE; BEHAVIOR; INTENTIONS; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1111/jbl.12293
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Supply (chain) disruptions present considerable managerial challenges with potentially severe consequences. To protect their firms, managers often must decide whether or not to take proactive measures. Protection motivation theory suggests that individuals' intention to respond to a threat proactively results from their cognitive appraisal (situational interpretation) processes. These processes evaluate the characteristics of potential coping responses (e.g., its effectiveness in averting the threat) and the threat itself (e.g., its severity). Building on this framework, this study presents an analysis of what drives managers to, or deters them from, proactively responding to the threat of a disruption. The results from a discrete choice experiment suggest that decision makers have a strong subconscious focus on cost-related aspects of a specific proactive action, all the while consciously prioritizing the efficacy (effectiveness) of the action over its costs. Moreover, decision makers' perceptions of the relative importance of proactive action attributes deviate considerably from their actual choice behavior. This study investigates additional behavioral aspects of supply chain risk management such as a proactive personality, risk attitude, control appraisal, and experience, many of which have significant effects on the relative importance of certain proactive action attributes. The improved understanding has three relevant messages for managerial practice, which are related to the perception-action gap, the importance of self-assessment and self-awareness, and training.
引用
收藏
页码:92 / 115
页数:24
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Power: why some people have it - and others don't
    White, Howard
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVENESS, 2014, 6 (01) : 69 - 71
  • [2] Resident research: why some do and others don't
    Chan, Jason Yongsheng
    Narasimhalu, Kaavya
    Goh, Orlanda
    Xin, Xiaohui
    Wong, Tien Yin
    Thumboo, Julian
    Phua, Ghee Chee
    [J]. SINGAPORE MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2017, 58 (04) : 212 - 217
  • [3] WHY DO SOME PSYCHOTROPIC DRUGS WORK AND SOME OTHERS DON'T?
    Hoeschl, C.
    [J]. EUROPEAN PSYCHIATRY, 2013, 28
  • [4] WHY SOME BONES FRACTURE AND OTHERS DON'T: A BIOMECHANICAL PERSPECTIVE
    Currey, J. D.
    [J]. CALCIFIED TISSUE INTERNATIONAL, 2004, 74 : S24 - S24
  • [5] Why do some conduits get infected and others don't?
    Mery, Carlos M.
    Fraser, Charles D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2018, 155 (01): : 333 - 334
  • [6] The Openness Challenge: Why Some Cities Take It On and Others Don't
    Agrawal, Deepti
    Kettinger, William J.
    Zhang, Chen
    [J]. AMCIS 2014 PROCEEDINGS, 2014,
  • [8] Trade-Off: Why Some Things Catch on and Others Don't
    Jones, Robert
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PRODUCT AND BRAND MANAGEMENT, 2010, 19 (06): : 463 - +
  • [9] Trade-Off: Why Some Things Catch On and Others Don't
    Dollinger, Mimi
    [J]. BUSINESS HORIZONS, 2011, 54 (02) : 177 - 178