供应中断和保护动机:为什么一些管理者采取主动行动(而另一些则没有)

IF 11.2 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Christoph Bode, John R. Macdonald, Maximilian Merath
{"title":"供应中断和保护动机:为什么一些管理者采取主动行动(而另一些则没有)","authors":"Christoph Bode,&nbsp;John R. Macdonald,&nbsp;Maximilian Merath","doi":"10.1111/jbl.12293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>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 <i>subconscious</i> focus on cost-related aspects of a specific proactive action, all the while <i>consciously</i> 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":48090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business Logistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jbl.12293","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supply disruptions and protection motivation: Why some managers act proactively (and others don't)\",\"authors\":\"Christoph Bode,&nbsp;John R. Macdonald,&nbsp;Maximilian Merath\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jbl.12293\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>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 <i>subconscious</i> focus on cost-related aspects of a specific proactive action, all the while <i>consciously</i> 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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48090,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Business Logistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jbl.12293\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Business Logistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jbl.12293\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business Logistics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jbl.12293","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: 4

摘要

供应(链)中断带来了相当大的管理挑战,可能带来严重后果。为了保护他们的公司,管理者经常必须决定是否采取积极的措施。保护动机理论认为,个体对威胁做出主动反应的意图是由其认知评价(情境解释)过程产生的。这些过程评估潜在应对反应的特征(例如,其在避免威胁方面的有效性)和威胁本身(例如,其严重程度)。在这个框架的基础上,本研究分析了是什么促使管理者主动应对颠覆性威胁,或者阻碍他们主动应对颠覆性威胁。一项离散选择实验的结果表明,决策者在潜意识中强烈关注与成本相关的具体主动行动,同时有意识地优先考虑行动的效率(有效性),而不是成本。此外,决策者对主动行动属性的相对重要性的认识与他们实际的选择行为有很大的偏差。本研究调查了供应链风险管理的其他行为方面,如主动性人格、风险态度、控制评估和经验,其中许多对某些主动性行动属性的相对重要性有显著影响。这种改进的认识对管理实践有三个相关的信息,它们与感知-行动差距、自我评估和自我意识的重要性以及培训有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Supply disruptions and protection motivation: Why some managers act proactively (and others don't)

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
14.60%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Supply chain management and logistics processes play a crucial role in the success of businesses, both in terms of operations, strategy, and finances. To gain a deep understanding of these processes, it is essential to explore academic literature such as The Journal of Business Logistics. This journal serves as a scholarly platform for sharing original ideas, research findings, and effective strategies in the field of logistics and supply chain management. By providing innovative insights and research-driven knowledge, it equips organizations with the necessary tools to navigate the ever-changing business environment.
×
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