Scholarship that matters

Abstract

The AACSB has not been the only advocate for this perspective. In a recent Harvard Business Review article, the authors lamented that a significant challenge for scholars is to produce and disseminate research that is both academically rigorous and applicable to practicing managers (Shapiro & Kirkman, 2018). They propose that the challenge is two-fold (Shapiro et al., 2007). First, there is a “lost in translation” problem—research finds that practitioners do not use the academic literature as a resource to learn about best practices. Second, there is a “lost before translation” problem, which reflects the tendency for researchers to design studies without receiving input from the very people who are impacted by the phenomenon of interest.

To address these challenges, there have also been calls for better collaboration between academics and practitioners (e.g., Bartunek et al., 2001; Benoit et al., 2019; Guesalaga & Johnston, 2010; Rynes, 2007). The call for business schools to change their reward systems has also been proposed as a means to incentivize impactful scholarship (e.g., Aguinis et al., 2014). It is interesting to note that despite calls in the literature for academics to offer more relevant insights for practitioners, the AACSB felt it necessary to address this issue directly in its recent report.

From our own perspective as editors, we are pleased to see that AACSB is promoting what we in the logistics and supply chain field have understood since inception. The Journal of Business Logistics (JBL) has been focused on contributing to Logistics and Supply Chain Management (L&SCM) theory and practice for over four decades. There has never been serious debate about “rigorous versus relevant” research, for as Tom Mentzer so sufficiently noted, “Why should we choose only one?” (Mentzer, 2008). At JBL, it has never been enough to provide a theoretical contribution that benefits the academy. JBL contributions are expected to offer both academic and managerial impact. In our remaining tenure as editors, we intend to double-down on this fundamental tenet of our discipline.

Specifically, we are actively working to address the “lost in translation” problem. Rather than efforts to encourage managers and other stakeholders to use our literature as a resource, we are bringing the insight from articles published in JBL to them. In addition to our presence on the Linked In platform, soon you will see Katie Thompson-Taylor's (our Editorial Assistant) JBL article insights into SC Quarterly, on the CSCMP website, in the Reverse Logistics Journal, and in future outlines depending on the specific content. As AASCB (and donors, companies, and legislative bodies) applies more pressure on business school administrators to align with changing expectations and updated metrics, we believe it is our responsibility as editors to help JBL authors highlight the value of their research.

We also want to note the importance of addressing the “lost before translation” issue. Unfortunately, we see a disconnect in manuscripts submitted to JBL, and these are most often the ones that receive desk rejections. It is critical to ask research questions and design studies that reflect what occurs in practice (Shapiro et al., 2007). We strongly encourage authors to craft compelling and realistic insights for practitioners and other relevant stakeholders. Too often this part of a manuscript gets short shrift, but this is equally as important as the theoretical implications derived from the research. As we expand our efforts to share published JBL research more broadly through practitioner outlets, this component of the manuscript will be increasingly scrutinized.

Given the history and importance of JBL as an industry-grounded journal, as editors, we cannot live in an academic ivory tower. We make intentional effort to spend significant time with the practitioner community. Unique to our field is the Council of Supply Chain Management (CSCMP) Edge conference, which offers the opportunity for academics and practitioners to connect and engage. For two decades, we have been part of this organization because of the valuable insights we gain about important research topics, mega trends, industry needs, and data-based partnerships. CSCMP (and previously, CLM) helped shape our careers. Beyond CSCMP, there are a number of industry-focused conferences around the world that invite academics to contribute. We highly recommend that L&SCM researchers attend at least once a year to enhance their perspective and receive direct feedback about the managerial impact of their work. When crafting a manuscript, the interactions at industry conferences can provide a compelling rationale for a research question or the examination of the phenomenon of interest.

The supply chain program at our institution has a good relationship with the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA), which comes with opportunities to attend the organization's annual LINK event. The top retail management teams from around the world meet at this event to discuss the best L&SCM practices and innovations. Participation has created a significant understanding of what logistics and supply chain managers need in terms of research. It is an especially good opportunity to gain insights into consumer-centric supply chain management (Esper et al., 2020). Engaging with RILA members provides additional nuance about changes in industry dynamics and managerial decision making. In short, it provides a bridge between theory and practice.

Over the last two years, it has been fascinating to participate because of the emphasis on supply chain disruptions largely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The market impact of a disruption is best measured at the customer–retailer interface. Generally accepted best practices in L&SCM are in an unfrozen state (Godsell et al., 2010), as we look to control resources and risk (Wiedmer & Whipple, 2022) and improve responsiveness (Richey et al., 2022). At the most recent LINK conference, top retail supply chain executives underscored these issues in several of the general presentations and follow-up discussions.

In the second paper, “Utilizing social media in a supply chain B2B setting: A knowledge perspective,” Agnihotri et al. (2022) employ a representative dyadic survey method. Digitalization of supply chains has presented an opportunity for businesses to transform practices to connect with customers. Social media can be employed as a digital tool supporting customer-centric supply chains by providing data and enhanced communication. The authors examine the intersection of social media and supply chains by collecting data from suppliers and customers to examine social media's impact across the digital supply chain. They find that a supplier account manager's social media use can increase product and competitor knowledge, positively influencing customer outcomes. The authors also find that when a supplier perceives customer demand to be high, the relationship between social media use and knowledge grows stronger.

In “More is not always better: The impact of value co-creation fit on B2B and B2C customer satisfaction,” Gligor and Maloni (2022) take a customer-oriented service-dominant logic perspective supported by a polynomial regression and surface plot analysis to understand customer value co-creation. The authors investigated how excess co-creation of value might negatively impact both B2B and B2C customers. The results indicate an inverted U-shaped relationship between co-creation and customer satisfaction. The result details how co-creation might peak and then decrease satisfaction. The authors also found that expertise and process enjoyment moderate the co-creation relationship for B2C customers. When examining the importance of “fit” for value co-creation, a positive misfit has a stronger negative influence on customer satisfaction than a negative misfit. Retailers and partners beware!

Next Peinkofer et al. (2022) present “Retail ‘Save the Sale’ tactics: Consumer perceptions of in-store logistics service recovery.” This is an increasingly important topic given the growth of disruptions and multipoint omnichannel service strategy. The authors note that retail supply chains frequently encounter stockouts, which can lead to lost sales and negative perceptions by consumers. To keep customers from leaving a store without completing a transaction, retailers increasingly leverage inventory visibility and order fulfillment capabilities. This is called “save the sale” tactics. Options include: (1) buying from one store and shipping from another, (2) buying from a store but shipping from the distribution center, and (3) home delivery options. All three options lead to different delivery speeds and varying conveniences for customers. The study examines how customers evaluate and respond to stockout recovery services, using four experiments to explain why customers assess specific dimensions as more just than others, how customers appraise the justice of bundled dimensions, how purchase involvement and monetary offers impact their perceptions, and how justice perceptions and stockout recoveries impact the likelihood of saving the sale. The authors propose several solutions for retail managers strategizing their stockout recovery services, such as developing ship from store programs to reduce order delivery lead times.

Finally, employing four experiments and a mixed multinomial logit model, Phares and Balthrop (2022) build an understanding of what makes truckers leave the trucking industry in “Investigating the role of competing wage opportunities in truck driver occupational choice.” As retailers and suppliers continue to be impacted by the ongoing driver shortage, research, and consultants continue to fall sort of finding solutions. Driver wages have risen over time but are often below what they could earn in logistics industry positions. Gender and education level are important as men are 12 times more likely than women to choose truck driving and 8.6 times more likely than women to be found in trucking compared with other industries. Formal education is inversely correlated with pursuing trucking as a career. Trucking companies must compete with construction, sales, production, and other logistics occupations for labor. The authors show that wage increases in the trucking industry are less effective at attracting workers than similar wage increases in a competing industry. Job tenure also matters as work experience decreases the likelihood of a worker leaving the field. The authors also suggest that pay bumps may be effective in attracting and retaining experienced workers. Cross-industry elasticities show that while wages are important to attracting and retaining drivers, they cannot be adjusted in a vacuum.

This brief editorial underscores the importance of “sticking to our roots” and continuing to publish research that is relevant to practice. It also details the wide scope of retail-related research discoveries and potential streams of research that came from a single industry conference. We hope that those in the JBL community will take advantages of opportunities like this to unearth interesting insights that can enrich theory and impact practice. Regardless of the topic, however, we look for strong and relevant discussions about the implications for practice in the submissions. In concert with the efforts of our authors, we will promote these discoveries to industry—building on a communication strategy that makes the most out of the research that is published in the Journal.