Study notes on organizational climate

Study notes on organizational climate

References with extracted contents

Patterson, M.G., M.A. West, V.J. Shackleton, J.E. Dawson, R. Lawthom, S. Maitlis, D.L. Robinson and A.M. Wallace. 2005. "Validating the organizational climate measure: links to managerial practices, productivity and innovation" Journal of Organizational Behavior 26, Wiley: 379-408.

"Central to most, if not all, models of organizational behavior are perceptions of the work environment, referred to generally as ‘organizational climate’ (Rousseau, 1988). Primarily understood as an intervening variable between the context of an organization and the behavior of its members, and attempting to understand how employees experience their organizations, the concept has inspired many descriptions and operationalizations. Despite the level of interest surrounding organizational climate, however, there are few well-validated measures of the construct".

"The dominant approach conceptualizes climate as employees’ shared perceptions of organizational events, practices, and procedures. These perceptions are assumed to be primarily descriptive rather than affective or evaluative (Schneider & Reichers, 1983). More recent work contradicts this view, suggesting strong evaluative or affective components (Patterson, Warr, & West, 2004). At the individual level of analysis, referred to as ‘psychological climate’ (James & Jones, 1974), these perceptions represent how work environments are cognitively appraised and represented in terms of their meaning to and significance for individual employees in organizations (James & Jones, 1974; James & Sells, 1981)".

"The rationale behind aggregating individual data to a unit level is the assumption that organizational collectives have their own climate and that these can be identified through the demonstration of significant differences in climate between units and significant agreement in perceptions within units (James, 1982). Perceptual agreement implies a shared assignment of psychological meaning allowing individual perceptions to be aggregated and treated as a higher-level construct. Most research is now focused on aggregate rather than on psychological climate (Schneider, Bowen, Ehrhart, & Holcombe, 2000)".

Rojas, D., C. Segpieri and S.  Nuti. 2014. "Organizational climate: Comparing private and public hospitals within professional roles" Suma Neg 5(11), Elsevier: 10-14.

"Organizational climate is defined as the shared perceptions of the work environment (Jones and James, 1979). This concept can be traced back to several studies, for example, Lewin et al., (1939) analyse the relationship between the leadership style and climate; Koffka (1935) focuses on “behaviour environment”; Lewin (1936) studies the “life space”; and Phillips (1996) investigated how women and men perceived the organizational climate. Some studies have shown the efforts made to better understand those factors which contribute to improve the work environment (or climate) and motivate all employees, regardless of their position, status and gender, to be committed and effective performers (Clark, 1997; Gershon, 2007; Nembhard, 2006)".

"The results of the present study support the hypothesis that there are differences in how the organizational climate is perceived by employees within professional roles and hospital status in the Tuscan healthcare organizations (General hospitals). The analysis showed that the Tuscan organizational climate questionnaire is a reliable instrument used as a measurement tool for evaluating working conditions and deter-mining the factors which satisfies and motivates employees in the healthcare sector".

Smith-Crowe, K., M.J. Burke and R.S. Landis. 2003. "Organizational climate as a moderator of safety knowledge-safety performance relationships" Journal of Organizational Behavior 24, Wiley: 861-876.

"For some time now, applied psychologists and management researchers have adopted a social interactionist perspective to study relations between individual difference variables (e.g., knowledge and job performance). A common social interactionist hypothesis is that the relationship between two individual difference variables is moderated by a third class of variables: organizational climate dimensions. Organizational climate dimensions are those characteristics of workplaces that facilitate or inhibit the exhibition of certain behaviors (cf. James, Demaree, Mulaik, & Ladd, 1992; Schneider, 1975; Schneider, Smith, & Sipe, 2000).....".

"James et al. (1992) and Russell and Gilliland (1995) have presented the argument that organizational climate influences relationships between individual difference variables specifically in terms of ‘restrictiveness-of-climate,’ which they defined as the degree to which characteristics of organizational environments restrict individual decision-making and individual differences in job performance".

"Another body of literature suggests that organizational climate moderates relationships between individual difference variables to the extent that organizations promote strategically focused climates (i.e., climates that are aligned with organizational goals). This research is based on the assumption that

human beings strive to cohere with their environments. To give an example, one would expect that if an organization has a supportive climate for safety, then individuals would seek to be productive organizational members by transferring the knowledge and skills that they learned during safety training to their jobs".

Cooil, B., L. Aksoy, T.L. Keiningham and K.M. Maryott. 2009. "The Relationship of Employee Perceptions of Organizational Climate to Business-Unit Outcomes: An MPLS Approach" Journal of Service Research 11(3), Sage: 277-294.

"The origins of climate research date back to Lewin and his colleagues (Lewin, Lippitt, and White 1939) who emphasized the role of leaders in the creation of climate. Today, organizational climate can be defined as perceptions attributed to the work environment (Rousseau 1988) and is used primarily as a framework to understand how employees experience their work environment and is distinct from employee satisfaction (Schneider and Snyder 1975)".

"The importance of measuring organizational climate is critical, as it has been shown to link to a variety of outcomes and successful organizational functioning. Researchers have sought to understand how the dimensions of organizational climate are related to a variety of business outcomes such as employee retention, turnover, intentions to quit (Dean 2004; Hemingway and Smith 1999; Mulki, Jaramillo, and Locander 2006; Ryan, Schmit, and Johnson 1996), customer satisfaction (Gelade and Young 2005; Heskett, Sasser, and Schlesinger 1997; Schneider, White, and Paul 1998; Schneider et al. 2005), and firm financial performance such as growth, sales, revenue, and profitability (Borucki and Burke 1999; Gelade and Young 2005; Schneider et al. 2005)".

"Research results on the dimensions of organizational climate, however, have been wide-ranging since the inception of the area. Initially, it was assumed that the social environment could be described by a limited number of dimensions, such as individual autonomy, structure, reward orientation and consideration, warmth, and support (Campbell et al.1970). Later, other dimensions were added, such as role stress and lack of harmony, job challenge, autonomy, leadership facilitation, work group cooperation, and friendliness (James and James 1989; James and McIntyre 1996)".

D'Alleo, G. and A. Santangelo. 2011. "Organizational climate and burnout in call-center operators" Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 30, Elsevier: 1608-1615.

"In recent years, attention to issues related to the promotion of a climate based on individual and organizational well-being in business success has increased. The “climate” variable can affect the behavior of the individual in adapting to the demands of the organization where they work (Schneider, 1983). In this strategy one may see the study of relationships between the dimensions of organizational climate and the phenomenon of burnout; such as psycho-social risk. This syndrome can occur in people working in contact with others (Cherniss, 1980) and as such it also affects call center operators".

"The organizational climate is a psychological construct that refers to the perceptions developed by people with regard to their working environment: it is a collective perception of the organization that originated in a small team and manifests itself relatively stably through socio-psychological dynamics that characterize the group. The climate is both the result and the determinant of the behavior of individuals and groups within the organizational structure (Morocco, Wells, 2003). The climate reflects the culture in society, its values and is composed of different sizes (Ostroff, 1993): participation, warmth, social rewards, cooperation, communication (affective factor), .....";

"Many studies in the literature (Zapf, Knorz, Kulla, 1996; Groenblinghoff, Becker, 1996; Maslach, Leiter, 2000) show a significant correlation between organizational climate and factors relating to actions or events related to stress, burnout and mobbing. The climate variable influences the behavior of the individual and then work performance (Schneider 1983)";

Akbaba, ö and E. Altɪndağ. 2016. "The Effects of Reengineering, Organizational Climate and Psychological Capital on the firm performance" Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 235, Elsevier: 320-331.

"The first study on climate concept is based on the motivation theory of Lewin et al. It can be likened to the climate or weather definitions of geographic regions formed by the combination of environmental forces. When analogies are customized to the organization, the morale level surrounding the organization can be expressed as the power of good will and sense of belonging among the members of the organization. The climate is based on the perceptions of employees for the organization (Terzi, 2002, 92). According to Şişman (2002, 156), it is the whole of factors which are perceived by the individuals who constitute the organization and affect their behaviors";

"The morale, motivation or sense of commitment to the organization of the organization members are considered to be among the factors contributing to the formation of organizational climate. While skiing can be enjoyable for someone who loves winter sports, swimming will also be as enjoyable as it for someone who loves summer. Organizational climate varies according to the employees...";

Entrepreneurship - study notes

Entrepreneurship study notes

References with extracted contents

Qureshi, S. and E. Aftab. 2015. "KoldKraft Pakistan: An Entrepreneurial Journey"  Asian Journal of Management Cases 12(1), Sage: 29-41.

"the future was not only unknown, but unknowable";

"The knowledge, experience and networks developed in his previous jobs enabled him to proceed with his own entrepreneurial venture";

"The growth of the KoldKraft business was directly associated with the progress of the economy of the country";

Kirkley, W.W. 2016. "Creating ventures: decision factors in new venture creation", Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 10(1): 151-167.

"The increasing awareness of global markets and rapid market expansion has served to create a wide and varied range of new potential which allows businesses to expand their scope of operations across international borders (Knight, 2001; European Commission, 2011). The increasing pace of  technological development has furthermore significantly improved the potential for new venture creation";

"An entrepreneur, in the context of this study, is an individual who typically has limited resources, which he/she attempts to efficiently utilise to exploit a viable business idea through new venture creation (Sobel, 2008). By creating a new venture, the entrepreneur gains access to additional resources, which assist in increasing the point of differentiation and competitiveness of the new venture".

"In new venture creation, entrepreneurs need to focus on strategically analysing the external macro-environment to determine gaps and deficiencies where exploitable needs/problems may exist. Such analysis enables the entrepreneur to learn and discover new information, analyse it for trends and possibilities and develop unique, innovative solutions to identify problems or needs in the marketplace".

"Besides factors such as economic conditions, the changing social environment, market demands, trends, supply chain viability and so on, the most pervasive factor that currently influences new venture creation appears to be technological change. This factor represents a major source of innovation and features prominently in entrepreneurial decision-making, leading to new venture creation";

"According to Cornelissen and Clarke (2010), entrepreneurship, as a process of economic activity, is widely recognised as a source of innovation that has an impact on economic development. Part of this process of economic activity involves the establishment of new ventures targeted at providing specific solutions to identified needs or problems in the marketplace. The underlying premise that drives new venture creation is to provide a significant value to an identified segment of the market, which in turn supports and justifies the  establishment of a sustainable business".

"Mehdivand et al. (2012) state that the notion of new venture creation is primarily explained through a cognitive perspective. According to this view, new ventures are designed and established on the basis of the cognitive  characteristics of entrepreneurs. Prior knowledge, experience and skill is needed when establishing a start-up (Shane, 2003). The entrepreneur’s identification and resolution of unresolved problems or unsatisfied needs are best understood and made sense of through the cognitive processes of the individual. The other approach used to explain new venture creation is institutional theory (Platzek et al., 2010). According to this theory, entrepreneurs are influenced by the social and cultural contexts within which they operate and are more focused on providing meaning to these constructs through new venture creation";

"According to Krlev (2012), the entrepreneurship process is based on identifying and exploiting needs/problems well ahead of potential competitors and through the use of unique and creative approaches. To achieve a measure of confidence prior to start-up, entrepreneurs need to focus on the industry, macro-environmental and competitive landscapes they are planning to enter. Strategically, it is important to analyse and quickly evaluate the key forces a new venture will need to contend with prior to launch. Entrepreneurs are generally considered to have a favourable disposition to risk, ...";

"There are a number of different strategies an entrepreneur might choose to achieve a successful outcome as follows:

Transcendent-based approach: .....  Product-based approach: ...  User-based approach .... Manufacturing-based approach ....   The strategy best suited to new venture creation is primarily the user-based approach. One of the most significant problems facing entrepreneurs at start-up is the belief that they somehow intuitively “know” what users are looking for or what the problem is.."

Fisher, R., A. Maritz and A. Lobo. 2014. "Evaluating entrepreneurs' perception of success: Development of a measurable scale" International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 20(5): 478-492.

"A review of the entrepreneurship literature suggests entrepreneurial success is understood to be present by its indicators; however, these indicators are broadly conceived. The indicators can exclude or include typical business, economic, psychological, and social indicators; include survival beyond a certain timeframe; or simply constitute being in existence (that is, being a registered business entity)";

"Entrepreneurial success is informed by cultural issues or is dependent on individual perspective (Rauch and Frese, 2000). For example, venture capitalists and the entrepreneurs seeking their funds were found to have different perceptions of entrepreneurial success (Black et al., 2010). The attainment of wealth is a typical indicator of success (McMullen and Shepherd, 2006); yet other research shows many entrepreneurs do not necessarily consider attainment of wealth as a measure of their success";

"Fried and Tauer (2009) propose an index of entrepreneur success that comprises total cost (the resources used by the enterprise), owner hours (the commitment and effort of the entrepreneur to the enterprise), total revenue, and revenue growth. Liechti et al. (2009) develop performance factors that comprise entrepreneurial success using industry-adjusted scales, aggregate income and return on initial invested capital. Caliendo and Kritikos (2008) measure entrepreneurial success in terms of how many employees were hired after a venture launch. Entrepreneurial success is also variously measured by goal achievement, economic success, lifestyle success, and company growth (Rauch and Frese, 2000; Steffens et al., 2012)";

Cha, M.S. and Z.T. Bae. 2010. "The entrepreneurial journey: From entrepreneurial intent to opportunity realization" Journal of High Technology Management Research 21: 31-42.

"In the course of opportunity realization, entrepreneurs create new ventures from scratch. Although the interaction between the entrepreneur and  opportunity is the essence of entrepreneurship, no distinctive theory exists to explain it (Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). Opportunity, which is the potential state of value creation, is realized through the emergent process (Phan, 2004). Emergence means that opportunity comes into reality in the multiple level processes where entrepreneurs interact with many other economic agents that possess resources for creating a new venture that can, in turn, deliver value in the marketplace".

"New ventures must confront a number of diverse problems, pitfalls, and obstacles. Although the dominant problems, like new product development and commercialization, are predictable (Kazanjian, 1988), a multitude of other serious potential problems are not. Entrepreneurs try to solve these unpredictable problems throughout the new-venture-creation process. We call “the series and combinations of entrepreneurs' autonomous, innovative, and unpredictable or improvised actions and interactions” the entrepreneurial journey. This underlying and interacting journey of entrepreneur is for transforming potentiality of opportunity into actual value in new business".

"... a new venture experiences the “liability of newness” (Stinchcombe, 1965). Initial conditions such as assets, networks, legitimacy, and capabilities are disadvantageous to new organizations. A lack of resources and legitimacy cannot

guarantee the competitive advantage of new entrants (Alvarez & Busenitz, 2001). The traditional resource-based view cannot illuminate the future of new ventures. However, the concept of “entrepreneurial capability” has been suggested as a means for developing a theory of entrepreneurship.  Entrepreneurial capability is the capability to combine new resources that will carry new values in the future market";

"Several researchers have studied the processes and the driving forces of realizing opportunities. Ajzen (1985) proposed the “theory of planned behavior,” which predicts human behavior with consideration of intention. Hamel and Prahalad (1989) suggested the concept of “strategic intent,” or an obsession to stretch goals, as a source of winning in the world market. Shepherd and Krueger (2002) illustrated “entrepreneurial intention,” which can be used to predict the intention of founding a venture";

"The entrepreneurial process is composed of three activities: opportunity recognition, gap-filling, and opportunity realization. In this paper, we conceptualize the obsessive motivation and internal driving forces that underlie the entrepreneurial process or journey as “entrepreneurial intent,” which will be defined as a type of strategic intent characterized by an entrepreneurial mindset that can be defined as “an aroused state of entrepreneurial motivation to complete the entrepreneurial journey toward opportunity realization.”

Zhang, Z. and D. Chun. 2017. "Becoming entrepreneurs: how immigrants developed entrepreneurial identities" International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research [URL address: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-07-2016-0214].

"Entrepreneurial identities refer to cognitive schemas of oneself and a set of behavioral expectations that allow individuals to interpret what it means to be an entrepreneur (Hoang and Gimeno, 2010; Murnieks et al., 2014). Research has shown that the salience of the entrepreneurial identity explains why individuals give up their old work roles and engage in entrepreneurship. For instance, Farmer et al. (2011) suggested that possible entrepreneurial selves motivate actions to fulfill the desire to become an entrepreneur. In particular, when individuals’ perceptions of the entrepreneurial role and their self-conceptions are congruent, strong aspiration toward a possible entrepreneurial self is generated. Entrepreneurial identities are also tied directly to the experiences of venture creation....".

Tipu, S.A.A. and F.M. Arain. 2011. "Managing success factors in entrepreneurial ventures: a behavioral approach" International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 17(5): 534-560.

"Robbins and Coulter (2007) defined behavior as “how people act.” Some authors have defined entrepreneurial behavior as a set of activities performed by an entrepreneur (Mair, 2002) while others have referred to entrepreneurial behavior as entrepreneurial actions (Bateman and Crant, 1993; He´bert and Link, 1998). Gartner (1985) discussed the behavioral approach towards entrepreneurship in lieu of the emergence of an  organization and highlighted the entrepreneur’s interaction with environment. The behavioral approach focuses on activities performed by an entrepreneur and the personality traits are  considered as ancillary to behavior (Gartner, 1988). The behavioral approach portrays an entrepreneur who exhibits opportunistic behavior of identifying and exploiting potential opportunities".

Study notes on marketing mix

Study notes on marketing mix

References with extracted contents

Low, S.P. and M.C.S. Tan. 1995. "A convergence of Western marketing mix concepts and oriental strategic thinking" Marketing Intelligence & Planning 13(2), Emerald: 36-46.

"The basic marketing strategy used by a company is the result of the blending of various marketing elements. These elements consist of: * the service offered (or product); * the availability of service offered (or place); * the promotion or communications to prospective client using various promotional techniques; and

* the price charged for the service. The term marketing mix (Borden, 1964) or the classical four Ps (McCarthy, 1960) have been used to describe these various elements. Marketing strategy development may therefore be viewed as developing a marketing mix aimed at satisfying the needs of selected markets and accomplishing specific marketing objectives".

"... in order to achieve organizational goals, the marketer must be engaged constantly in fashioning a mix of marketing procedures and policies to cope with the dynamic environment or, as it is otherwise known, the uncontrollable variables"

"The marketing mix concept has two important benefits. First, it is an important tool used to enable one to see that the marketing manager’s job is, in a large part, a matter of trading off the benefits of one’s competitive strengths in the marketing mix against the benefits of others....  The second benefit of the marketing mix is that it helps to reveal another dimension of the marketing manager’s job. All managers have to allocate available resources among various demands, and the marketing manager will in turn allocate these available resources among the various competitive devices of the marketing mix".

Wise, R. and N. Sirohi. 2005. "Finding the best marketing mix" Journal of Business Strategy 26(6), Emerald: 10-11.

"... what’s the best way to identify and implement the marketing mix that will advance your company’s growth goals? These six guidelines provide a good starting point: 1. Set up the right scorecards.... 2. Track and analyze... 3. Don’t be afraid to experiment... 4. Keep both brand and revenues in mind... 5. Look over the fence.... 6. Build a ‘‘test and learn’’ culture...".

Vignali, C. and B.J. Davies. 1994. "The Marketing  Mix Redefined and Mapped: Introducing the MIXMAP Model" Management Decision 32(8) Emerald: 11-16.

"In the Macmillan Dictionary of Retailing, Baron, et al.[1] define the retail marketing mix as “those activities that show similarities to the overall process of marketing, requiring the combination of individual elements”. This definition closely resembles traditional definitions of the marketing mix given by well known marketeers from Levitt[2] to Kotler[3]. Also in this tradition, Czinkota [4] gives the following definition of the marketing mix: “A complex of tangible and intangible elements to distinguish it in the market place”..".

"It was after the Second World War that Cullotin originated the “P” philosophy of marketing, proposing a long list of Ps which typified Profit, Planning, Production etc. and which stood for the key activities of running a business. It was his view that one could differentiate between a “sales orientated” and a “manufacture oriented” company by examining the amount of emphasis given to the different “Ps”...".

"The service marketing literature[6,7] also extends the marketing mix,  broadening the traditional four “Ps” into the seven “Ps” of services by adding Physical Evidence, Participants and Process, thus including all elements an organization can control in order to satisfy its target market. In contrast, Jones and Vignali[8] add an “S” for Service which should be included as an essential basic element of the marketing mix".

Rafiq, M. and P.K. Ahmed. 1995. "Using the 7Ps as a generic marketing mix: an exploratory survey of UK and European marketing academics" Marketing Intelligence & Planning 13(9) Emerald: 4-15.

"The marketing mix concept is one of the core concepts of marketing theory. However, in recent years, the popular version of this concept McCarthy’s (1964) 4Ps (product, price, promotion and place) has increasingly come under attack with the result that different marketing mixes have been put forward for different marketing contexts. While numerous modifications to the 4Ps framework have been proposed (see for example Kotler, 1986; Mindak and Fine, 1981; Nickels and Jolson, 1976; Waterschoot and Bulte. 1992) the most concerted criticism has come from the services marketing area. .... The proliferation of numerous ad hoc conceptualizations has undermined the concept of the marketing mix and what is required is a more coherent approach".

"Borden, in his original marketing mix, had a set of 12 elements namely:

(1) product planning;

(2) pricing;

(3) branding;

(4) channels of distribution;

(5) personal selling;

(6) advertising;

(7) promotions;

(8) packaging;

(9) display;

(10) servicing;

(11) physical handling; and

(12) fact finding and analysis.

He did not consider this list of elements to be fixed or sacrosanct and suggested that others may have a different list to his".

"Industrial marketing has, therefore, tended to emphasize the importance of building of relationships in marketing rather than the manipulation of the market through the marketing mix. The criticism levelled at the 4Ps by the interaction/network approach is that personal contacts are rarely discussed and even then only in the context of salesperson-consumer interaction, where the mass marketing approach is insufficient (for example the sale of insurance and cars).".

Fan, S., R.Y.K. Lau and J.L. Zhao. 2015. "Demystifying Big Data Analytics for Business Intelligence Through the Lens of Marketing Mix" Big Data Research 2, Elsevier: 28-32.

"The marketing mix framework is a well-known framework that identifies the principal components of marketing decisions, and it has dominated marketing thought, research, and practice [6]. Borden[5]has been recognized as the first to use the term “marketing mix” and he proposed a set of 12 elements. McCarthy [29]re-grouped Borden’s 12 elements to four elements or 4Ps, namely product, price, promotion, and place. The 4P model has been considered to be most relevant for consumer marketing. However, it has been criticized as being a production-oriented definition of marketing, and researchers proposed a fifth P (people) [18].".

Reid, D.M. 1980. "Evaluation of the Marketing Mix - Its Application to Strategic Marketing" European Journal of Marketing 14(4), Emerald:192-205.

"The marketing mix concepts recognises that results are derived from a combination of variables over which the marketer has control. Selection of, and concentration on, a particular combination brings about a collective effect. While

the execution of a marketing plan necessarily results in some sort of marketing mix being evolved and directed at the market, there is often a glaring cognitive gap between the marketing objectives established in the plan and the resulting actions".

Martin, D.M. 2009. "The entrepreneurial marketing mix" Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 12(4), Emerald: 391-403.

"Marketing scholars and practitioners have long depended on the same basic elements for success. The elements of successful corporate marketing have traditionally boiled down to the familiar four P’s: price, promotion, product, and placement (Kotler, 2001). Companies typically organize these elements into proven patterns, marked by logical step-by-step processes. The plans behind the patterns are both highly structured and disciplined (Carson, 1993)".

"While it may seem appropriate to take the tradition of the four P’s as gospel, doing so would blind one to important differences at the heart of entrepreneurial experience. Gronroos (1994) argues that the usefulness of the four P’s as a general theory is highly questionable. Others note that adherence to the four P’s misses the “fundamental point of marketing – adaptability, flexibility and responsiveness” (McKenna, 1991, p. 13) and is “both wasteful and inappropriate, and consequently is not seen to function effectively” (Carson, 1993, p. 190)".

"For entrepreneurs, tactics for using the marketing mix diverge from the traditional progression of product development, pricing, promotion, and distribution. Entrepreneurs prefer direct interchanges and building personal relationships".

Peattie, K. and L. Peters. 1997. "The marketing mix in the third age of computing" Marketing Intelligence & Planning 15(3), Emerald: 142-150.

"Third age technology has the potential to revolutionize many aspects of the mix, and many companies are already making use of them in terms of product, price, place and promotion".

Wu, C. and S. Wu. 1998. "A proposed method for the development of marketing mix of the tea drink market" Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 10(1), Emerald: 3-21.

"Development of marketing mix has received considerable academic and industry attention. However, the majority of the literature focused on product de sign but did not ex tend it to the development of marketing mix. To meet the consumer’s needs and wants for a successful product is necessary but not sufficient, especially, for our target, tea drink. The other three Ps (Price, Promotion, Place) should be taken into account. In our case, convenience purchasing is the major concern of most of the consumers, but it cannot be merely satisfied by a product. Lauternborn [11] thus proposed a new formula called the “Four C’s:” “consumer wants and needs, cost to satisfy, convenience to buy and communication.”...".

Sustainable operations management study notes

Sustainable operations management  study notes

References with extracted contents

Ahi, P., M.Y. Jaber and C. Searcy. 2016. "A comprehensive multidimensional framework for assessing the performance of sustainable supply chains" Applied Mathematical Modelling 40, Elsevier: 10153-10166.

"Sustainability is commonly defined as using resources to “meet the needs of the present in a way that the future generations’ ability to meet their own needs will not be compromised”[1] . However, such an all-encompassing definition can present challenges when the aim is to operationalize sustainability. As a result, there is no collective consensus on what key characteristics can be used to comprehensively portray the sustainability concept in a business context".

"Based on a review of previously published definitions, Ahi and Searcy [4, p. 339] provided a comprehensive definition of SSCM: “The creation of coordinated supply chains through the voluntary integration of economic, environmental, and social considerations with key inter- organizational business systems designed to efficiently and effectively manage the material, information, and capital flows associated with the procurement, production, and distribution of products or services in order to meet stakeholder requirements and improve the profitability, competitiveness, and resilience of the organization over the short- and long-term.” The definition was explicitly written to capture the key characteristics of both business sustainability (i.e., economic, environmental, social, stakeholder, volunteer, resilience, and long-term focuses) and SCM (i.e., flow, coordination, stakeholder, relationship, value, efficiency, and performance focuses)";

"...one of the underlying foundations of SSCM is that it assumes that the concept of sustainability cannot be confined within the limits of any one firm, as its implications extend well beyond those boundaries [12] . The many players in a supply chain (e.g., suppliers, focal firm, distributors, customers, etc.) greatly increase the complexity of incorporating sustainability into SCM. This is, in part, due to the large number of potential interactions between the players in the supply chain [13,14] . This complexity is also due to the inherently multidimensional nature of sustainability, which encompasses the “triple bottom line” of economic, environmental, and social aspects as a minimum. Moreover, the fact that these issues and interactions must be considered over time adds further complexity to the subject. These challenges highlight the fact that it is difficult to determine if a sustainable state has been reached. Measuring progress toward, or away, from sustainability is often the best that can be achieved";

"Drawing on the recent research by Hassini et al. [17] , Seuring [18], Brandenburg et al. [19] , Brandenburg and Rebs [13] , and Beske-Janssen et al. [20] , quantitative analytical modeling approaches suggested for assessing sustainability issues in the supply chain may be categorized as summarized in Table 1 . As highlighted in the table, these categories include life cycle assessment (LCA) based models, applications of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), equilibrium models, multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) models, models based on input-output (IO) analysis, and composite metrics"

"....it has been conceptualized that any supply chain, and the respective players within it, will have some capacity, as determined through the application of the framework, to overcome the sustainability challenges it faces. In this light, the enabler factors increase the capacity of the supply chain to move toward sustainability and to overcome its key sustainability challenges. The inhibitor factors, on the other hand, represent challenges to the supply chain and/or reduce the capacity of the chain to endure and overcome such challenges. The framework is based on the principle that if the supply chain’s capacity exceeds the challenges posed by the inhibitors, it will be making progress toward sustainability".

Sarkis, J., C. Bai, A.B.L.d.S. Jabbour, C.J.C. Jabbour and V.A. Sobreiro. 2016. "Connecting the pieces of the puzzle toward sustainable organizations" Benchmarking: An International Journal 23(6), Emerald: 1605-1623.

"Operations management has evolved in recent years due to changes in market requirements and competitiveness including an increase in environmental awareness, causing industries to rethink their productivity and quality strategies (Gunasekaran and Ngai, 2012). Natural environmental management requires strategic integration with business processes and other company functions in order to maintain consistency between operational strategic planning and environmental planning".

"SOM [sustainable operations management] can be defined as strategies, actions and techniques that support operational policies to achieve economic and environmental objectives simultaneously (Gunasekaran et al., 2014)";

"Hart and Milstein (2003) proposed a framework whose purpose was to present how organizations could pursue the creation of sustainable value for shareholders. Some strategies were suggested for organizations that could contribute to SD. The strategies suggested were pollution prevention, product stewardship, cleaner technologies, and vision of sustainability. The framework can be used by organizations as a diagnostic tool and for identifying opportunities to develop capabilities for achieving sustainable value and thus new markets. The framework was based on four quadrants: today and tomorrow internal and today and tomorrow external";

"Kleindorfer et al. (2005) alluded to the proposal by Hayes and Wheelwright (1984) regarding the four stage model for evaluating the role and contribution of the production function in a company’s competitive advantage. They proposed four strategies: internal present, external present, internal to the future, and external to the future. These strategies generally suggest actions that organizations can follow in order to improve environmental aspects of their operations. Those authors believed that supply chains could be involved for external strategies".

"Operations management influences environmental improvement through alterations in production processes and by taking into account the systemic logic of production systems (Corbett and Klassen, 2006). Operations management principles and philosophies such as JIT, TQM, TOC, Six Sigma and lean manufacturing can be adapted to support environmental management systems and improvements (MacCarthy et al., 2013).";

Jaehn, F. 2016. "Sustainable Operations" European Journal of Operational Research 253, Elsevier: 243-264.

"(Sustainable System) . A system is called sustainable if the environment influences the system in such a way that it can exist permanently. The “permanent existence” of a system is not to be understood in a strict sense, but rather in the sense of a very long time horizon";

"....a system is therefore sustainable if the environment 1. Only adds as much (harmful) things within a period of time to the system as can be absorbed by the system within this time, and

2. Only removes as much (essential) things from the system within a period of time as can be renewed by the system in this time";

"... we focus on economic, environmental and social sustainability, i.e., the sustainability of corresponding systems. Since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, from which the Agenda 21 also emerged, these three areas are seen as equally important pillars of sustainable development (the Triple Bottom Line, 3BL). It is assumed that the sustainability of one of these three systems can only be achieved by way of the sustainability of the other two. For example, the earth’s ecological system is influenced by the economy and by the social system, i.e., the latter two are within the environment of the earth’s ecological system. Similarly, the economy and society are influenced by nature. Of course, the interdependency of economic, ecological, and social systems also exists for smaller systems. For example, a small company can be seen as an economic system as well as a social system, both interacting with the (regional) ecological system and a decision maker, e.g., from the company’s management, should keep these systems sustainable";

"Note that the simultaneous consideration of conflicting goals does not necessarily imply multi-objective approaches. It is only required that these goals find some consideration, e.g., as satisfactory goals, which could then be considered as constraints. Especially the implementation of certain ecological or social standards requires models and solution procedures such that these standards can be reached at minimum cost. Such models should obviously not be seen as purely economic models. If the conflicting goals can be expressed in monetary values, which often holds true for economic goals but also, e.g., for emissions within an emission trading system, the goals can easily be incorporated into a single objective";

Gimenez, C., V. Sierra and J. Rodon. 2012. "Sustainable operations: Their impact on the triple bottom line" Int. J. Production Economics 140, Elsevier: 149-159.

"The term sustainability integrates social, environmental and economic responsibilities. Kleindorfer et al.(2005) use the term to include environmental management, closed-loop supply chains and  a broad perspective on triple-bottom-line thinking that integrates profit, people and the planet into corporate culture, strategy and operations. Studying sustainability from the Operations Management(OM) field is essential for two fundamental reasons: First, firms have to account for the energy and other resources they use and the resulting footprint they leave behind. The primary activities that contribute to their foot print are the production, transportation, recycling and remanufacturing of current products and the design of new products; therefore, it is clear that OM can contribute to reduce this footprint (Kleindorfer et al.,2005). Second, companies need to operate in a prudent and responsible manner and take care of employee health and safety and the quality of life of the external community. As Operations is one of the areas employing the most personnel and having the highest footprint and impact on the external community, it can have a significant effect on sustainability’s social dimension".

"A widely adopted definition of sustainability is that used by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987): ‘‘Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs’’ (p. 8). Unfortunately, this macroeconomic definition is difficult for organisations to apply and provides little guidance regarding how they should identify present versus future needs, determine the technologies and resources to meet those needs, and understand how to effectively balance organisational responsibilities between multiple stakeholders (Hart, 1995; Starik and Rands, 1995)";

"Economic sustainability is usually well understood. At the plant level, it has been operationalised as production or manufacturing costs (e.g., Cruz and Wakolbinger, 2008). However, what is sometimes not so clear is the definition of environmental and social sustain- ability. At the plant level, environmental sustainability refers to the use of energy and other resources and the footprint companies leave behind as a result of their operations. Environmental sustainability is often related to waste reduction, pollution reduction, energy efficiency, emissions reduction, a decrease in the consumption of hazardous/harmful/toxic materials, a decrease in the frequency of environmental accidents, etc. Social sustainability shifts the focus to both internal communities (i.e., employees) and external ones (Pullman et al., 2009). Social sustainability means that organisations (and manufacturing plants) provide equitable opportunities, encourage diversity, promote connectedness within and outside the community, ensure the quality of life and provide democratic processes and accountable governance structures (Elkington, 1994)";

Chin, T.A., H.H. Tat and Z. Sulaiman. 2015. "Green Supply Chain Management, Environmental Collaboration and Sustainable Performance" Procedia CIRP 26, Elsevier: 695-699.

"The GSCM [green supply chain management] practices are conceptualized to include green procurement, green manufacturing, green distribution and green logistics. The sustainability performance is investigated from the perspectives of economic, environmental and social";

"Collaboration effort between focal company and supplier is the main ingredient of GSCM to facilitate supply-side environmentally and socially responsible activities. Collaboration in terms of environmental is an approach that helps firms to develop and support the environmental prowess of their supply partners [27]. According to Paulraj [23], environmental collaboration includes cooperating with suppliers to achieve environmental objectives and improve waste reduction initiatives, providing suppliers with design specification that include environmental requirements for purchased items, encouraging suppliers to develop new source reduction strategies, working with suppliers for cleaner production and helping suppliers to provide materials, equipment, parts and services that support organizational goals. Besides, top management plays a critical role in affecting the scope of an organizational sustainability practices";