Frits K. Pil, Stephen M. Disney, Jan Holmström, Benn Lawson, Christopher Tang
<p>The field of operations and supply chain management (OSCM) has a long history of identifying and engaging with risk and uncertainty in operational practices.<sup>1</sup> We provide a brief review of uncertainty in the OSCM domain, alongside an overview of our special issue (SI) call and accepted manuscripts. This serves as a starting point for the introduction of a new theoretical framework that reframes uncertainty as unresolved states of <i>possibility</i>. In this framework, the term <i>possibility</i> can refer to a broad array of OSCM actions and solutions including the novel application of existing approaches or technology as well as completely novel practices that enhance organizational outcomes. We illustrate the path-dependent evolution in these possibilities, alongside the limitations and opportunities imposed on the set of available possibilities resulting from concurrent evolution in the broader socio-technical system. We present the benefits of deploying a broader array of methodologies in the empirical study of what is, and is not, possible at discrete points in time, as well as the dual process of constraint and expansion in possibilities over time. The resulting empirical efforts to understand possibilities in turn enable novel theory development, elaboration of existing OSCM theory, and opportunities for bridging to other disciplines.</p><p>Much of the OSCM literature views uncertainty through the lens of risk (real and probabilistic, or perceived). Other areas of management examine uncertainty from the perspective of available solutions and possible alternatives, as well as <i>opportunity by design</i> (e.g. in entrepreneurial ventures, strategic decision making, and policy), see Alvarez and Barney (<span>2007</span>), Dimov (<span>2016</span>), and McBride and Wuebker (<span>2022</span>). This latter framing shifts uncertainty away from a troublesome factor to be mitigated and towards a source of potential value creation and progress. We conceptualize economic activity and operations as part of a larger, nearly decomposable, evolving structure (Simon, <span>1962</span>, <span>2002</span>). This offers the opportunity to redirect OSCM uncertainty research towards a deeper reflection on what actions and solutions are <i>possible</i> or <i>impossible</i> in an evolving socio-technical system—a system in which OSCM is deeply embedded (Arthur, <span>2009</span>; Simon, <span>2002</span>). Artificial systems evolve not just through competition and selection but also through purposeful cultivation and design (Simon, <span>1996</span>). Thus, with technology in the socio-economic context of a complex system, OSCM is part of this larger autopoietic<sup>3</sup> system—continuously regenerating itself, from itself (Holland, <span>1995</span>). This centres our attention on the temporal aspect of our work. Specifically, it requires a consideration of how the world is, how it can and cannot be in the future, alongside how it could have b
{"title":"Possibility theory: A foundation for theoretical and empirical explorations of uncertainty","authors":"Frits K. Pil, Stephen M. Disney, Jan Holmström, Benn Lawson, Christopher Tang","doi":"10.1002/joom.1341","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1341","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The field of operations and supply chain management (OSCM) has a long history of identifying and engaging with risk and uncertainty in operational practices.<sup>1</sup> We provide a brief review of uncertainty in the OSCM domain, alongside an overview of our special issue (SI) call and accepted manuscripts. This serves as a starting point for the introduction of a new theoretical framework that reframes uncertainty as unresolved states of <i>possibility</i>. In this framework, the term <i>possibility</i> can refer to a broad array of OSCM actions and solutions including the novel application of existing approaches or technology as well as completely novel practices that enhance organizational outcomes. We illustrate the path-dependent evolution in these possibilities, alongside the limitations and opportunities imposed on the set of available possibilities resulting from concurrent evolution in the broader socio-technical system. We present the benefits of deploying a broader array of methodologies in the empirical study of what is, and is not, possible at discrete points in time, as well as the dual process of constraint and expansion in possibilities over time. The resulting empirical efforts to understand possibilities in turn enable novel theory development, elaboration of existing OSCM theory, and opportunities for bridging to other disciplines.</p><p>Much of the OSCM literature views uncertainty through the lens of risk (real and probabilistic, or perceived). Other areas of management examine uncertainty from the perspective of available solutions and possible alternatives, as well as <i>opportunity by design</i> (e.g. in entrepreneurial ventures, strategic decision making, and policy), see Alvarez and Barney (<span>2007</span>), Dimov (<span>2016</span>), and McBride and Wuebker (<span>2022</span>). This latter framing shifts uncertainty away from a troublesome factor to be mitigated and towards a source of potential value creation and progress. We conceptualize economic activity and operations as part of a larger, nearly decomposable, evolving structure (Simon, <span>1962</span>, <span>2002</span>). This offers the opportunity to redirect OSCM uncertainty research towards a deeper reflection on what actions and solutions are <i>possible</i> or <i>impossible</i> in an evolving socio-technical system—a system in which OSCM is deeply embedded (Arthur, <span>2009</span>; Simon, <span>2002</span>). Artificial systems evolve not just through competition and selection but also through purposeful cultivation and design (Simon, <span>1996</span>). Thus, with technology in the socio-economic context of a complex system, OSCM is part of this larger autopoietic<sup>3</sup> system—continuously regenerating itself, from itself (Holland, <span>1995</span>). This centres our attention on the temporal aspect of our work. Specifically, it requires a consideration of how the world is, how it can and cannot be in the future, alongside how it could have b","PeriodicalId":51097,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Operations Management","volume":"70 8","pages":"1182-1193"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/joom.1341","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142868368","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Does the speed of adopting environmental practices impact financial benefits? The strategy literature discusses the contingencies under which firms can gain an early-mover advantage or a late-mover advantage. This research examines the effect of adoption speed on two types of environmental practices: environmental innovation practices (EIP) and environmental management practices (EMP). The results show that early adoption of EIP increases competitive advantage when firms face intense competition. In comparison, we show that early adoption of EMP increases competitive advantage when firms face extremely low competition or have moderate to high levels of slack resources. The study contributes to the literature by revealing the nuances, contingencies, and boundary conditions of when it pays to be green. Prior research shows mixed results when studying firms' decisions to implement environmental practices, which implies that it may not pay to be green. This study shows that firms can get an early mover advantage from environmental practices, but it depends on the type of environmental practices, the firm's internal slack resources, and the firm's external competitive environment.
{"title":"When does it pay to be green? The strategic benefits of adoption speed","authors":"Hung-Chung Su, Wayne Fu, Kevin Linderman","doi":"10.1002/joom.1337","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1337","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Does the speed of adopting environmental practices impact financial benefits? The strategy literature discusses the contingencies under which firms can gain an early-mover advantage or a late-mover advantage. This research examines the effect of adoption speed on two types of environmental practices: environmental innovation practices (EIP) and environmental management practices (EMP). The results show that early adoption of EIP increases competitive advantage when firms face intense competition. In comparison, we show that early adoption of EMP increases competitive advantage when firms face extremely low competition or have moderate to high levels of slack resources. The study contributes to the literature by revealing the nuances, contingencies, and boundary conditions of when it pays to be green. Prior research shows mixed results when studying firms' decisions to implement environmental practices, which implies that it may not pay to be green. This study shows that firms can get an early mover advantage from environmental practices, but it depends on the type of environmental practices, the firm's internal slack resources, and the firm's external competitive environment.</p>","PeriodicalId":51097,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Operations Management","volume":"70 7","pages":"1155-1177"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/joom.1337","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142642481","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>In this editorial, we build upon the increased attention of the operations management (OM) community toward field experiments and the recent publication of the Pre-Approved Research Designs Special Issue that provided an initial test of Registered Reports as a novel review process for field experiments in OM. Addressing lingering concerns voiced by the editorial team and learning from the experiences of journals from other disciplines that implemented Registered Reports, we introduce a new initiative and outline a new review process in the <i>Journal of Operations Management</i> (<span></span><math>