Purpose This study aims to examine the effects of formal and informal institutional factors (i.e. marketization and guanxi culture) on interorganizational conflicts (IOCs) and their interaction effects. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on IOC literature and an institution-based view, the authors use a sample of 12,022 Chinese firms from the World Bank’s Investment Climate Survey. A zero-inflated negative binomial regression was used to analyze the data. Findings The results suggest that guanxi culture has U-shaped effects, but marketization does not negatively affect IOCs. Furthermore, a low level of marketization weakens the U-shaped effect of guanxi culture on IOCs. A moderate level of guanxi culture can enable marketization to reduce IOCs. Practical implications This study provides a better understanding of the management of IOCs. Managers should fully understand the differential effects of the institutional environment in different regions and their interactions by adopting different response strategies. Originality/value This study enriches the literature on IOCs’ antecedents and contextual factors by examining the institutions’ direct and interaction effects on IOCs.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine how knowledge inflows and outflows interact to affect performance outcomes. Though previous studies have dealt with knowledge inflows and outflows, the quality and quantity characteristics of knowledge are often not taken into account, thus leaving a research gap with regards to the effect of their interactions on performance outcomes. Design/methodology/approach Based on Poisson regression analysis, this quantitative study fills the aforementioned research gaps by analyzing the ambidextrous configurations of knowledge flows from an ambidexterity perspective and examines their effects on two-phase performance (i.e. regular season and playoffs), using a longitudinal data set of National Basketball Association transactions from the 2003-2004 to 2014-2015 season. Findings The results suggest that the complementarity between knowledge inflows and outflows along the quality and quantity dimensions of knowledge, respectively, has a positive impact on two-phase performance, while the imbalance between knowledge inflows and outflows under the quality and quantity dimensions of knowledge, respectively, has a negative impact on playoffs performance (Phase 2). These findings suggest that organizations can balance knowledge inflows and outflows under a single quality or quantity dimension of knowledge. Furthermore, the interaction between the quantity of the inflows of knowledge and the quality of the outflows of knowledge and the interaction between the quality of the inflows of knowledge and the quantity of the outflows of knowledge are both positively related to two-phase performance. These findings suggest that organizations can balance knowledge inflows and outflows across quality and quantity dimensions of knowledge. Finally, the effects of the interaction between knowledge inflows and outflows on playoffs performance are greater than regular-season. Practical implications Organizations should leverage ambidexterity to manage/balance knowledge inflows and outflows across quality and quantity dimensions, further enhancing performance outcomes. Originality/value This study, first, provides new insights into knowledge flows by distinguishing between the quality and quantity of knowledge, the inflows and outflows of knowledge, constructing ambidextrous configurations of knowledge flows from an ambidexterity perspective. Second, it contributes to the relationship between knowledge flows and organizational performance by revealing how ambidextrous configurations of knowledge flows exert different effects on performance outcomes. Third, it adds to the literature of ambidexterity-performance relationships and expands it to the context of sports.
PurposeThis study attempts to examine the performance differences between firms with and without integrated management systems (IMSs), and the impact of three integration strategies (i.e. implementing quality management system (QMS) first, then environmental management system (EMS) (QMS + EMS); implementing EMS first, then QMS (EMS + QMS); implementing QMS and EMS simultaneously (QMS − EMS)) on firm performance to reveal the IMS–performance relationship and provide empirical evidence.Design/methodology/approachTwo panel datasets were collected during 2009–2019. This study used the Mann–Whitney non-parametric test and a sample of 33,155 observations from 4,316 Chinese listed firms to compare the performance differences between the IMS and non-IMS groups through performance indicators. This study also examined the effects of three integration strategies on firm performance using a cross-sectional time-series feasible generalized least squares (FGLS) regression model and a sample of 11,289 observations from 2,037 firms.FindingsThe results show that significant performance differences exist between IMS and non-IMS firms; however, the performance of firms with an IMS is not always better than that of firms without IMS. Furthermore, the simultaneous integration strategy has a positive impact, whereas sequential integration strategies (QMS + EMS and EMS + QMS) negatively affect firm performance. Compared with the EMS + QMS strategies, the QMS + EMS strategies have a more prominent effect on firm performance. Simultaneous strategies are more effective than sequential strategies.Practical implicationsFirms should fully consider the potential benefits and costs associated with the difficulties of IMS implementation and the implementation order of different management systems and the potential effects of the management systems in different conditions. Firms also should try to develop internal capabilities through implementing different integration strategies.Originality/valueBy comparing performance differences between firms with and without IMS, this study enriches the understanding of the performance benefits of IMS implementation in the Chinese context. By examining the impact of integration strategies that follow different sequences on firm performance, this study promotes an in-depth understanding of the integration strategies and their performance implications beyond simple descriptions and also provides new insights into operations strategy models.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.