重复性和临时性合作绩效差异分析:1994年至2021年的文献综述

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT
Sara Rye
{"title":"重复性和临时性合作绩效差异分析:1994年至2021年的文献综述","authors":"Sara Rye","doi":"10.3390/logistics6040071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Performance frameworks are common ways to guarantee the success of a collaboration by assessment/improvement of the organisations. However, collaborative performance in recurring collaborations (RC) and temporary ones (TC) are being measured differently due to their inherent characteristics. A systematic review of 282 existing studies, from 2000 onwards, into collaborative networks divided between RC and TC based on the duration of collaboration and the application of the studies was performed. The result gave rise to the thematic analysis of the textual narratives, as well as a quantitative meta-summary of the synthesis. The review shows two different approaches to guarantee the performance of the collaboration. The first group provide a recipe for success by recognizing the causal relationship between nine collaborative measures, including information and risk sharing, trust, commitment, agility, power balance, leadership, prior-experience, and alignment. The second group ensures the success of collaboration by selecting suitable partners based on their previous performance emerging through synergy, readiness, agility and internal–external factors. The reasoning behind these differences are discussed and the current gaps in research are outlined.","PeriodicalId":56264,"journal":{"name":"Logistics-Basel","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of the Disparity between Recurring and Temporary Collaborative Performance: A Literature Review between 1994 and 2021\",\"authors\":\"Sara Rye\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/logistics6040071\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Performance frameworks are common ways to guarantee the success of a collaboration by assessment/improvement of the organisations. However, collaborative performance in recurring collaborations (RC) and temporary ones (TC) are being measured differently due to their inherent characteristics. A systematic review of 282 existing studies, from 2000 onwards, into collaborative networks divided between RC and TC based on the duration of collaboration and the application of the studies was performed. The result gave rise to the thematic analysis of the textual narratives, as well as a quantitative meta-summary of the synthesis. The review shows two different approaches to guarantee the performance of the collaboration. The first group provide a recipe for success by recognizing the causal relationship between nine collaborative measures, including information and risk sharing, trust, commitment, agility, power balance, leadership, prior-experience, and alignment. The second group ensures the success of collaboration by selecting suitable partners based on their previous performance emerging through synergy, readiness, agility and internal–external factors. The reasoning behind these differences are discussed and the current gaps in research are outlined.\",\"PeriodicalId\":56264,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Logistics-Basel\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Logistics-Basel\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6040071\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Logistics-Basel","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6040071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

绩效框架是通过评估/改进组织来保证合作成功的常用方法。然而,重复合作(RC)和临时合作(TC)中的合作绩效由于其固有特征而被不同地衡量。从2000年起,对282项现有研究进行了系统审查,这些研究根据合作的持续时间和研究的应用划分为RC和TC之间的合作网络。这一结果引发了对文本叙事的主题分析,以及对综合的定量元总结。审查显示了两种不同的方法来保证合作的绩效。第一组通过认识到九项合作措施之间的因果关系,提供了成功的秘诀,包括信息和风险共享、信任、承诺、灵活性、权力平衡、领导力、先前经验和一致性。第二组通过选择合适的合作伙伴来确保合作的成功,这是基于他们之前通过协同、准备、灵活性和内部-外部因素表现出来的表现。讨论了这些差异背后的原因,并概述了目前研究中的差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analysis of the Disparity between Recurring and Temporary Collaborative Performance: A Literature Review between 1994 and 2021
Performance frameworks are common ways to guarantee the success of a collaboration by assessment/improvement of the organisations. However, collaborative performance in recurring collaborations (RC) and temporary ones (TC) are being measured differently due to their inherent characteristics. A systematic review of 282 existing studies, from 2000 onwards, into collaborative networks divided between RC and TC based on the duration of collaboration and the application of the studies was performed. The result gave rise to the thematic analysis of the textual narratives, as well as a quantitative meta-summary of the synthesis. The review shows two different approaches to guarantee the performance of the collaboration. The first group provide a recipe for success by recognizing the causal relationship between nine collaborative measures, including information and risk sharing, trust, commitment, agility, power balance, leadership, prior-experience, and alignment. The second group ensures the success of collaboration by selecting suitable partners based on their previous performance emerging through synergy, readiness, agility and internal–external factors. The reasoning behind these differences are discussed and the current gaps in research are outlined.
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
Logistics-Basel
Logistics-Basel Multiple-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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