Gomory Award Highlights the Impact of Industry Studies Research at JOM

IF 6.5 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
John Paul MacDuffie
{"title":"Gomory Award Highlights the Impact of Industry Studies Research at JOM","authors":"John Paul MacDuffie","doi":"10.1002/joom.1356","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>For two consecutive years, articles published in the <i>Journal of Operations Management</i> (JOM) have received the Ralph Gomory Best Industry Studies Paper Award, given annually by the Industry Studies Association (ISA). This achievement is unprecedented and a testimony to JOM's encouragement and support of industry studies research. It also speaks to the remarkable broad impact on firms and industries that the journal continues to provide. In the interest of encouraging future outstanding work of this kind, I here provide a short introduction to industry studies, the ISA, and the Gomory Award. The remaining discussion is devoted to accounts from the authors of the award-winning articles on the “backstory” of their research.</p><p>The “industry studies” idea—that much can be learned from close study of industrial activity—dates to the Industrial Revolution. In <i>The Wealth of Nations</i> (<span>1976</span>), Adam Smith famously chose to explain the advantages of a specialized division of labor for productivity by providing a detailed explication of the production process in a pin factory. Advocacy for industry studies as a method of scholarship began with Alfred Marshall and his attention to industrial districts in <i>The Economics of Industry</i> (<span>1879</span>). Competing firms locate near each other in such a district to gain the benefits of agglomeration—of skilled labor, production inputs, technological expertise, and customer demand.</p><p>Marshall was perhaps the first—but surely not the last—to advocate for direct observation as the best way “to get the direct feel of the economic world, more intimate than merely reading descriptions, enabling one to set things in their true scale of importance” (Pigou <span>1925</span>, describing Marshall's work). Proponents of an industry studies approach see a path to better research questions and the generation of insights that equally inform theory and practice. Attention to industry context opens the door to more varied and valid data; good access allows researchers to “wallow in the data—to get down and dirty with the data” (Hamermesh <span>2008</span>). Seeking to take advantage of such access can point the way towards the most appropriate (and often multiple) research methods. A phenomenon or empirical puzzle may initiate an industry studies inquiry while the insights may often be “pre-theory” contributions that stimulate further research rather than providing confirmatory testing of pre-determined hypotheses.</p><p>Gomory and Sloan staff saw MIT's International Motor Vehicle Program (IMVP) as a prototype. At the time, IMVP was completing a five-year research program that led to the best-selling book <i>The Machine That Changed the World</i> about the rise of lean production (aka Toyota Production System) as an alternate production paradigm that challenged traditional mass production. Susan Helper, the first Department Editor for JOM's Public Policy Department, and I were among the core IMVP researchers, an experience that shaped our entire careers.</p><p>After helping the National Bureau of Economic Research (led at the time by Martin Feldstein) develop a “pin factory” initiative that took leading economists on factory tours, Sue Helper wrote a valuable short article (its subtitle is an immortal Yogi Berra quote, “You Can Observe a Lot Just by Watching”) in <i>American Economic Review</i> (Helper <span>2000</span>). She advocates for field work as a valuable input to impactful scholarship that strengthens pre-research identification of research questions, hypotheses, and relevant data while facilitating post-research sense-making that contributes to theory. Cognizant of criticism of the validity of data from field-based interviews vis-à-vis objectivity, replicability, and generalizability, she stands up a compelling counter-argument that is relevant to JOM's community of authors (past, present, future) to this day.</p><p>The ISA was established in 2009 to carry on the work of the Sloan initiative after Gomory's successor chose different funding priorities. ISA's members come from a wide variety of disciplines such as management, economics, engineering, industrial and labor relations, operations management, law, economic geography, and public policy. Industry studies scholars may focus on particular industries or occupations, or conduct cross-industry analysis. They are committed to learning about the context—market, firms, and institutions—in the industry or industries they study. This engagement, which includes close interaction with industry practitioners and often includes primary data collection, helps researchers achieve a broad and deep knowledge of this context. ISA's members, beyond their own research activity, contribute to national debates and policy decisions as well as affect the actions of global firms.</p><p>This award is named after Ralph Gomory for his foundational role in furthering the growth and influence of industry studies research. Editors from nine mainstream academic journals nominate up to three articles each year for consideration based on criteria provided by ISA\n <sup>1</sup>\n .</p><p>When JOM invited me to become editor of the Department of Public Policy, I asked to expand that department's scope to include Industry Studies. Of course, public polices often affect many industries at once—and many of the best industry studies publications have little to do with public policy. Nonetheless, at a time when geopolitical tensions are rising, many are questioning the assumption that globalization is the only acceptable means of achieving economic growth, while long-dominant notions of global supply chains and global trade are being challenged. Industry studies—and industry strategy at the level of national and regional governments—are now front and center in today's debates over how to attain economic as well as social goals, such as good jobs, and how to be attentive to market failures that can weaken the capacity to pursue national interests in key technologies or social innovation.</p><p>Ralph Gomory asked ISA for only one condition to be attached to the award. The winning authors must, he insisted, have the opportunity to provide the “backstory” of their research for the readers of the journal in which their article appeared. He feels that academics trained to seek generalizability, inclined to treat industry as a control, and suspicious of context as imposing a constraint on theorizing need education in how industry studies scholarship was different.</p><p>In that spirit, JOM here offers the winning authors of the 2023 and 2024 Gomory Award the opportunity to tell the story of how their research project came to be, how the research question evolved over time, what types of data they gathered and what difficulties they faced in doing so, and how their communication of research findings has affected those involved in that industry.</p><p>The two most recent Gomory Award-winning articles are as follows:</p><p>2023 winner: Jordana George, Dwayne Whitten, Richard Metters, and James Abbey (2022).</p><p>“Emancipatory Technology and Developing-World Supply Chains: A Case Study of African Women Gemstone Miners.” <i>JOM</i> 68, no. 6–7: 619–648.</p><p>2024 winner: Danny Samson and Morgan Swink (2023)</p><p>“People, Performance and Transition: A Case Study of Psychological Contract and Stakeholder Orientation in the Toyota Australia Plant Closure.” <i>JOM</i> 69, no. 1: 67–101.</p><p>Initially, this work was sparked by a Wall Street Journal article about diamond mines using blockchain for provenance to attest they were not lab-created diamonds and were not mined by warlords seeking to overthrow governments. This concept was popularized in the movie “Blood Diamonds.” Our research began by speaking with numerous industry professionals to gain background. The intense contact with industry shifted our interest from diamonds to digital provenance in colored gemstones, an area where our research could provide a significant difference in the lives of miners and their families. The diamond industry is a sophisticated oligopoly comprised mostly of large firms, but the mining of colored stones is a wild and mostly unregulated arena.</p><p>These stones are primarily mined not by large corporations, but by people in extreme poverty typically referred to as “artisanal and small miners,” or ASMs. The world of colored stones is full of desperate miners, unscrupulous middlemen, and the romantic hope that anyone might find the “big one”—the stone that would change their life. We found their stories fascinating. We discovered through industry contact that ASMs were not only constrained in terms of process, tools, and education, but also socially and economically, especially women miners. Our focus narrowed to women miners as we discovered the additional hardships women miners face due to abusive supply chain practices.</p><p>Our research question was motivated by the opportunity provided by Toyota Motor Corporation of Australia who decided to commission an independent academic study to derive lessons learned and managerial insights from the first major plant closure in that company. After our initial literature review determined that this “plant closure best practices” phenomenon was under-researched, we expressed the research question in the article as “how can operations managers better address links between their decisions, operating values, and socioeconomic outcomes?”</p><p>Toyota wanted to learn as much as possible internally from this plant closure, specifically about how their “respect for people” core principle could be applied to this situation of some 2500 job losses. They also encouraged us to publish our analysis and article, consistent with their public- spirited philosophy.</p><p>The research design and method entailed ‘engaged research’ involving 150 in-depth, confidential interviews with Toyota employees from shop floor to executive ranks, supplemented by the open access we were given to datasets and reports within the company, for example, on employee engagement, satisfaction, and vehicle build quality. The company set up a steering committee for this project that was strongly supportive of our broad and deep data collection. We used qualitative data structure tables as a data reduction method, from which we deduced new moderators in creating our model of the relationship between a psychological contract breach and the outcomes of employee engagement, commitment, job satisfaction, and performance in the countdown period towards closure.</p><p>In terms of lucky breaks and obstacles, we were fortunate to have special interest and support from one senior and influential Toyota executive (PhD qualified) who ensured that a very high level of open access and communication was provided to us during the data collection processes. This access included participation in what would otherwise have been closed and confidential meetings and conferences associated with managing the plant closure. The Toyota executives and local managers described our role at these meetings as “fresh eyes”</p><p>Comments from the Gomory Award selection committee:</p><p>This approach aligns perfectly with JOM's vision for how theoretical contributions can advance both scholarly understanding and management practice(see Bendoly and Oliva, <span>2025</span>).</p><p>As Department Editor for Public Policy and Industry Studies at JOM, I encourage submissions that embrace this approach. Whether examining public policy impacts or conducting deep industry analyses, research that combines rigorous methodology with rich contextual understanding has the power to advance both theory and practice in operations management.</p><p>The success of these Gomory Award winners demonstrates that industry studies research can meet the highest standards of academic rigor while maintaining deep relevance to practice. We look forward to publishing more work that continues this tradition of excellence.</p>","PeriodicalId":51097,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Operations Management","volume":"71 2","pages":"293-297"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/joom.1356","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Operations Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joom.1356","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For two consecutive years, articles published in the Journal of Operations Management (JOM) have received the Ralph Gomory Best Industry Studies Paper Award, given annually by the Industry Studies Association (ISA). This achievement is unprecedented and a testimony to JOM's encouragement and support of industry studies research. It also speaks to the remarkable broad impact on firms and industries that the journal continues to provide. In the interest of encouraging future outstanding work of this kind, I here provide a short introduction to industry studies, the ISA, and the Gomory Award. The remaining discussion is devoted to accounts from the authors of the award-winning articles on the “backstory” of their research.

The “industry studies” idea—that much can be learned from close study of industrial activity—dates to the Industrial Revolution. In The Wealth of Nations (1976), Adam Smith famously chose to explain the advantages of a specialized division of labor for productivity by providing a detailed explication of the production process in a pin factory. Advocacy for industry studies as a method of scholarship began with Alfred Marshall and his attention to industrial districts in The Economics of Industry (1879). Competing firms locate near each other in such a district to gain the benefits of agglomeration—of skilled labor, production inputs, technological expertise, and customer demand.

Marshall was perhaps the first—but surely not the last—to advocate for direct observation as the best way “to get the direct feel of the economic world, more intimate than merely reading descriptions, enabling one to set things in their true scale of importance” (Pigou 1925, describing Marshall's work). Proponents of an industry studies approach see a path to better research questions and the generation of insights that equally inform theory and practice. Attention to industry context opens the door to more varied and valid data; good access allows researchers to “wallow in the data—to get down and dirty with the data” (Hamermesh 2008). Seeking to take advantage of such access can point the way towards the most appropriate (and often multiple) research methods. A phenomenon or empirical puzzle may initiate an industry studies inquiry while the insights may often be “pre-theory” contributions that stimulate further research rather than providing confirmatory testing of pre-determined hypotheses.

Gomory and Sloan staff saw MIT's International Motor Vehicle Program (IMVP) as a prototype. At the time, IMVP was completing a five-year research program that led to the best-selling book The Machine That Changed the World about the rise of lean production (aka Toyota Production System) as an alternate production paradigm that challenged traditional mass production. Susan Helper, the first Department Editor for JOM's Public Policy Department, and I were among the core IMVP researchers, an experience that shaped our entire careers.

After helping the National Bureau of Economic Research (led at the time by Martin Feldstein) develop a “pin factory” initiative that took leading economists on factory tours, Sue Helper wrote a valuable short article (its subtitle is an immortal Yogi Berra quote, “You Can Observe a Lot Just by Watching”) in American Economic Review (Helper 2000). She advocates for field work as a valuable input to impactful scholarship that strengthens pre-research identification of research questions, hypotheses, and relevant data while facilitating post-research sense-making that contributes to theory. Cognizant of criticism of the validity of data from field-based interviews vis-à-vis objectivity, replicability, and generalizability, she stands up a compelling counter-argument that is relevant to JOM's community of authors (past, present, future) to this day.

The ISA was established in 2009 to carry on the work of the Sloan initiative after Gomory's successor chose different funding priorities. ISA's members come from a wide variety of disciplines such as management, economics, engineering, industrial and labor relations, operations management, law, economic geography, and public policy. Industry studies scholars may focus on particular industries or occupations, or conduct cross-industry analysis. They are committed to learning about the context—market, firms, and institutions—in the industry or industries they study. This engagement, which includes close interaction with industry practitioners and often includes primary data collection, helps researchers achieve a broad and deep knowledge of this context. ISA's members, beyond their own research activity, contribute to national debates and policy decisions as well as affect the actions of global firms.

This award is named after Ralph Gomory for his foundational role in furthering the growth and influence of industry studies research. Editors from nine mainstream academic journals nominate up to three articles each year for consideration based on criteria provided by ISA 1 .

When JOM invited me to become editor of the Department of Public Policy, I asked to expand that department's scope to include Industry Studies. Of course, public polices often affect many industries at once—and many of the best industry studies publications have little to do with public policy. Nonetheless, at a time when geopolitical tensions are rising, many are questioning the assumption that globalization is the only acceptable means of achieving economic growth, while long-dominant notions of global supply chains and global trade are being challenged. Industry studies—and industry strategy at the level of national and regional governments—are now front and center in today's debates over how to attain economic as well as social goals, such as good jobs, and how to be attentive to market failures that can weaken the capacity to pursue national interests in key technologies or social innovation.

Ralph Gomory asked ISA for only one condition to be attached to the award. The winning authors must, he insisted, have the opportunity to provide the “backstory” of their research for the readers of the journal in which their article appeared. He feels that academics trained to seek generalizability, inclined to treat industry as a control, and suspicious of context as imposing a constraint on theorizing need education in how industry studies scholarship was different.

In that spirit, JOM here offers the winning authors of the 2023 and 2024 Gomory Award the opportunity to tell the story of how their research project came to be, how the research question evolved over time, what types of data they gathered and what difficulties they faced in doing so, and how their communication of research findings has affected those involved in that industry.

The two most recent Gomory Award-winning articles are as follows:

2023 winner: Jordana George, Dwayne Whitten, Richard Metters, and James Abbey (2022).

“Emancipatory Technology and Developing-World Supply Chains: A Case Study of African Women Gemstone Miners.” JOM 68, no. 6–7: 619–648.

2024 winner: Danny Samson and Morgan Swink (2023)

“People, Performance and Transition: A Case Study of Psychological Contract and Stakeholder Orientation in the Toyota Australia Plant Closure.” JOM 69, no. 1: 67–101.

Initially, this work was sparked by a Wall Street Journal article about diamond mines using blockchain for provenance to attest they were not lab-created diamonds and were not mined by warlords seeking to overthrow governments. This concept was popularized in the movie “Blood Diamonds.” Our research began by speaking with numerous industry professionals to gain background. The intense contact with industry shifted our interest from diamonds to digital provenance in colored gemstones, an area where our research could provide a significant difference in the lives of miners and their families. The diamond industry is a sophisticated oligopoly comprised mostly of large firms, but the mining of colored stones is a wild and mostly unregulated arena.

These stones are primarily mined not by large corporations, but by people in extreme poverty typically referred to as “artisanal and small miners,” or ASMs. The world of colored stones is full of desperate miners, unscrupulous middlemen, and the romantic hope that anyone might find the “big one”—the stone that would change their life. We found their stories fascinating. We discovered through industry contact that ASMs were not only constrained in terms of process, tools, and education, but also socially and economically, especially women miners. Our focus narrowed to women miners as we discovered the additional hardships women miners face due to abusive supply chain practices.

Our research question was motivated by the opportunity provided by Toyota Motor Corporation of Australia who decided to commission an independent academic study to derive lessons learned and managerial insights from the first major plant closure in that company. After our initial literature review determined that this “plant closure best practices” phenomenon was under-researched, we expressed the research question in the article as “how can operations managers better address links between their decisions, operating values, and socioeconomic outcomes?”

Toyota wanted to learn as much as possible internally from this plant closure, specifically about how their “respect for people” core principle could be applied to this situation of some 2500 job losses. They also encouraged us to publish our analysis and article, consistent with their public- spirited philosophy.

The research design and method entailed ‘engaged research’ involving 150 in-depth, confidential interviews with Toyota employees from shop floor to executive ranks, supplemented by the open access we were given to datasets and reports within the company, for example, on employee engagement, satisfaction, and vehicle build quality. The company set up a steering committee for this project that was strongly supportive of our broad and deep data collection. We used qualitative data structure tables as a data reduction method, from which we deduced new moderators in creating our model of the relationship between a psychological contract breach and the outcomes of employee engagement, commitment, job satisfaction, and performance in the countdown period towards closure.

In terms of lucky breaks and obstacles, we were fortunate to have special interest and support from one senior and influential Toyota executive (PhD qualified) who ensured that a very high level of open access and communication was provided to us during the data collection processes. This access included participation in what would otherwise have been closed and confidential meetings and conferences associated with managing the plant closure. The Toyota executives and local managers described our role at these meetings as “fresh eyes”

Comments from the Gomory Award selection committee:

This approach aligns perfectly with JOM's vision for how theoretical contributions can advance both scholarly understanding and management practice(see Bendoly and Oliva, 2025).

As Department Editor for Public Policy and Industry Studies at JOM, I encourage submissions that embrace this approach. Whether examining public policy impacts or conducting deep industry analyses, research that combines rigorous methodology with rich contextual understanding has the power to advance both theory and practice in operations management.

The success of these Gomory Award winners demonstrates that industry studies research can meet the highest standards of academic rigor while maintaining deep relevance to practice. We look forward to publishing more work that continues this tradition of excellence.

Gomory奖强调JOM行业研究的影响
连续两年,发表在《运营管理杂志》(JOM)上的文章获得了由行业研究协会(ISA)每年颁发的Ralph Gomory最佳行业研究论文奖。这一成就是前所未有的,也是JOM对行业研究的鼓励和支持的见证。这也说明了该杂志对公司和行业的广泛影响。为了鼓励未来这类杰出的工作,我在这里简要介绍一下行业研究、ISA和Gomory奖。剩下的讨论是由获奖文章的作者讲述他们研究的“背景故事”。“工业研究”的理念——通过对工业活动的深入研究可以学到很多东西——可以追溯到工业革命。在《国富论》(1976)一书中,亚当•斯密通过详细说明大头针工厂的生产过程,解释了专业化劳动分工对生产率的好处。倡导将工业研究作为一种学术方法,始于阿尔弗雷德·马歇尔(Alfred Marshall)在《工业经济学》(1879)中对工业区的关注。在这样的区域内,相互竞争的公司彼此靠近,以获得集聚的好处——熟练劳动力、生产投入、技术专长和客户需求。马歇尔可能是第一个——但肯定不是最后一个——主张直接观察是“获得对经济世界的直接感受的最佳方式,比仅仅阅读描述更亲密,使人们能够确定事物的真正重要性”(Pigou 1925,描述马歇尔的工作)。行业研究方法的支持者看到了一条更好的研究问题和产生见解的道路,这些见解同样为理论和实践提供了信息。对行业背景的关注为获取更多样化、更有效的数据打开了大门;良好的访问使研究人员能够“沉浸在数据中——与数据打交道”(Hamermesh 2008)。寻求利用这种途径可以指向最合适的(通常是多种)研究方法。一个现象或经验难题可能会引发一个行业研究的调查,而这些见解往往是“理论前”的贡献,可以刺激进一步的研究,而不是为预先确定的假设提供验证性的测试。戈莫里和斯隆管理学院的员工将麻省理工学院的国际汽车项目(IMVP)视为一个原型。当时,IMVP正在完成一项为期五年的研究计划,该计划最终出版了畅销书《改变世界的机器》(the Machine that change the World),该书讲述了精益生产(又名丰田生产系统)的兴起,这是一种挑战传统大规模生产的替代生产模式。约翰·约翰公共政策部门的第一任部门编辑苏珊·赫珀和我都是IMVP的核心研究人员,这段经历塑造了我们的整个职业生涯。在帮助国家经济研究局(当时由马丁·费尔德斯坦领导)发展了一项“别针工厂”倡议,带领主要经济学家参观工厂后,苏·霍珀在《美国经济评论》(2000年)上写了一篇有价值的短文(副标题是Yogi Berra的一句不朽名言,“你可以通过观察观察到很多”)。她倡导实地工作作为有影响力的学术研究的宝贵投入,加强研究前对研究问题、假设和相关数据的识别,同时促进研究后对理论的理解。认识到对实地访谈数据有效性的批评-à-vis客观性、可复制性和概括性,她提出了一个令人信服的反驳论点,这与JOM的作者社区(过去、现在和未来)有关。2009年,在戈莫里的继任者选择了不同的资助重点后,ISA成立,以继续斯隆倡议的工作。ISA的成员来自各种各样的学科,如管理学、经济学、工程学、工业和劳动关系、运营管理、法律、经济地理学和公共政策。行业研究学者可能会关注特定的行业或职业,或者进行跨行业分析。他们致力于了解他们所研究的行业的背景——市场、公司和机构。这种参与,包括与行业从业者的密切互动,通常包括原始数据收集,帮助研究人员获得对这一背景的广泛而深入的了解。ISA的成员,除了他们自己的研究活动外,还为国家辩论和政策决定做出贡献,并影响全球公司的行动。该奖项以拉尔夫·戈莫里的名字命名,以表彰他在促进工业研究的发展和影响方面所发挥的基础性作用。 根据ISA提供的标准,来自九家主流学术期刊的编辑每年提名最多三篇文章进行审议。当JOM邀请我成为公共政策部门的编辑时,我要求扩大该部门的范围,包括工业研究。当然,公共政策经常同时影响许多行业,而许多最好的行业研究出版物与公共政策几乎没有关系。然而,在地缘政治紧张局势加剧之际,许多人质疑全球化是实现经济增长的唯一可接受手段的假设,而长期占主导地位的全球供应链和全球贸易观念正在受到挑战。产业研究——以及国家和地区政府层面的产业战略——现在是当今关于如何实现经济和社会目标的辩论的前沿和中心,比如好工作,以及如何关注市场失灵,因为市场失灵会削弱在关键技术或社会创新方面追求国家利益的能力。拉尔夫·戈莫里要求ISA只附加一个条件。他坚持认为,获奖作者必须有机会为发表文章的期刊读者提供他们研究的“背景故事”。他认为,学者们被训练来寻求普遍性,倾向于将工业视为一种控制,并怀疑背景对理论化施加了约束,需要教育工业研究的学术是如何不同的。本着这种精神,JOM在这里为2023年和2024年戈莫瑞奖的获奖作者提供了一个机会,讲述他们的研究项目是如何形成的,研究问题是如何随着时间的推移而演变的,他们收集了什么类型的数据,他们在这样做的过程中遇到了什么困难,以及他们对研究成果的交流如何影响了该行业的相关人员。最近的两篇Gomory获奖文章如下:2023年获奖者:Jordana George, Dwayne Whitten, Richard Metters和James Abbey(2022)。“解放技术和发展中国家的供应链:非洲女性宝石矿工的案例研究”。jom68,不是。获奖:Danny Samson和Morgan Swink(2023),“人、绩效和转型:心理契约和利益相关者导向在丰田澳大利亚工厂关闭中的案例研究”。jom69,不。1: 67 - 101。最初,这项工作是由《华尔街日报》的一篇关于钻石矿的文章引发的,该文章使用区块链作为来源,证明它们不是实验室制造的钻石,也不是由试图推翻政府的军阀开采的。这个概念在电影《血钻》中得到普及。我们的研究开始于与众多行业专业人士交谈以获取背景。与行业的密切接触将我们的兴趣从钻石转移到彩色宝石的数字来源,在这个领域,我们的研究可以为矿工及其家人的生活带来重大改变。钻石行业是一个复杂的寡头垄断行业,主要由大公司组成,但彩色钻石的开采是一个狂野的、几乎不受监管的领域。这些石头主要不是由大公司开采的,而是由极端贫困的人开采的,这些人通常被称为“手工和小矿工”,简称asm。彩色宝石的世界充满了绝望的矿工,肆无忌惮的中间商,以及浪漫的希望,即任何人都可以找到“大石头”-改变他们的生活的石头。我们发现他们的故事很吸引人。我们通过与行业接触发现,asm不仅在流程、工具和教育方面受到限制,而且在社会和经济方面也受到限制,尤其是女性矿工。当我们发现女性矿工由于滥用供应链而面临额外的困难时,我们的关注范围缩小到女性矿工身上。我们的研究问题是由澳大利亚丰田汽车公司提供的机会激发的,丰田汽车公司决定委托进行一项独立的学术研究,从该公司第一次主要工厂关闭中获得经验教训和管理见解。在我们最初的文献回顾确定了这种“工厂关闭最佳实践”现象的研究不足之后,我们在文章中将研究问题表达为“运营经理如何更好地处理他们的决策、运营价值和社会经济成果之间的联系?”丰田希望从这次工厂关闭中尽可能多地从内部学习,特别是如何将“尊重人”的核心原则应用于这种大约2500人失业的情况。他们还鼓励我们发表我们的分析和文章,这与他们的公益精神是一致的。 研究设计和方法包括“参与式研究”,包括对丰田员工进行150次深入、保密的采访,从车间到高管级别,辅以我们获得的公司内部数据集和报告的开放访问,例如,员工敬业度、满意度和汽车制造质量。公司为这个项目成立了一个指导委员会,该委员会强烈支持我们广泛而深入的数据收集。我们使用定性数据结构表作为数据简化方法,从中我们推导出新的调节因子,以创建我们的心理契约违约与员工敬业度、承诺、工作满意度和关闭倒计时期间绩效之间关系的模型。在幸运的突破和障碍方面,我们很幸运地得到了一位有影响力的丰田高管(博士学位)的特别关注和支持,他确保在数据收集过程中向我们提供了非常高水平的开放访问和沟通。这种接触包括参加与管理工厂关闭有关的非公开和保密会议。丰田高管和当地经理将我们在这些会议上的角色描述为“新鲜的眼睛”,来自Gomory奖评选委员会的评论:这种方法与JOM关于理论贡献如何促进学术理解和管理实践的愿景完全一致(见Bendoly和Oliva, 2025)。作为JOM公共政策和行业研究部门的编辑,我鼓励采用这种方法的投稿。无论是检查公共政策影响还是进行深入的行业分析,将严谨的方法与丰富的上下文理解相结合的研究都有能力推进运营管理的理论和实践。这些戈莫瑞奖得主的成功表明,行业研究可以在保持与实践密切相关的同时,达到学术严谨性的最高标准。我们期待着出版更多延续这一卓越传统的作品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Operations Management
Journal of Operations Management 管理科学-运筹学与管理科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
15.40%
发文量
62
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Operations Management (JOM) is a leading academic publication dedicated to advancing the field of operations management (OM) through rigorous and original research. The journal's primary audience is the academic community, although it also values contributions that attract the interest of practitioners. However, it does not publish articles that are primarily aimed at practitioners, as academic relevance is a fundamental requirement. JOM focuses on the management aspects of various types of operations, including manufacturing, service, and supply chain operations. The journal's scope is broad, covering both profit-oriented and non-profit organizations. The core criterion for publication is that the research question must be centered around operations management, rather than merely using operations as a context. For instance, a study on charismatic leadership in a manufacturing setting would only be within JOM's scope if it directly relates to the management of operations; the mere setting of the study is not enough. Published papers in JOM are expected to address real-world operational questions and challenges. While not all research must be driven by practical concerns, there must be a credible link to practice that is considered from the outset of the research, not as an afterthought. Authors are cautioned against assuming that academic knowledge can be easily translated into practical applications without proper justification. JOM's articles are abstracted and indexed by several prestigious databases and services, including Engineering Information, Inc.; Executive Sciences Institute; INSPEC; International Abstracts in Operations Research; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; SciSearch/Science Citation Index; CompuMath Citation Index; Current Contents/Engineering, Computing & Technology; Information Access Company; and Social Sciences Citation Index. This ensures that the journal's research is widely accessible and recognized within the academic and professional communities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信