A heightened awareness of the fundamental behavioral science principles underlying human interactions can be translated directly into service design. Service encounter design can be approached with the same depth and rigor found in goods production. Service encounters can be designed to enhance the customer's experience during the process and their recollection of the process after it is completed. This paper summarizes the key concepts from a panel discussion at the DSI National Meeting in Orlando in November 2000. The panel brought together a number of leading academic researchers to investigate current research questions relating to the human side of the design, development and deployment of new service technologies. Human issues from the customer and service provider vantage are illustrated and challenges to researchers for exploring this perspective are presented.

SUMMARY As the economy evolves from manufacturing to services, it is important to understand whether the lessons learned in the manufacturing sector can be directly extrapolated to service supply chains. Unfortunately, the majority of existing supply chain research focuses exclusively on the manufacturing sector. To address this deficiency, this article compares the effect of traditional manufacturing‐oriented supply chain strategies on the operational and financial performance of firms in both service and manufacturing sectors. The results highlight similarities and differences between the two sectors — demonstrating that effective supply chain strategies in one sector may not be appropriate in the other sector. This suggests that practicing managers should identify appropriate benchmarks and competitive priorities before pursuing specific supply chain strategies. The insights provided by this research should help guide companies toward strategies that may positively affect their specific organization's operational and financial performance.

No abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationships between specific supply chain practices and organizational performance and whether this relationship is moderated by the role that a company assumes in its respective supply chain. Design/methodology/approach -This paper uses regression analysis and the relative weights method to analyze a set of survey data from respondents within the non-academic, North American membership of the Institute of Supply Management. Findings -The results show that the supply chain role for a company makes a difference in terms of the specific supply chain practices that lead to better performance. Further, there is a clear indication that the relative importance of a specific practice varies across the supply chain roles thereby indicating that a general link between practice and performance may be erroneous without considering the specific context of the company concerned. Research limitations/implications -Supply chain practices are complex constructs. While this study shows the effect of broadly-accepted supply chain practices on performance, not all possible practices are covered in the study. Additional practices not considered may have an effect on company performance and future research may improve upon the findings by extending the analysis to include an expanded segmentation of supply chain role. Practical implications -The results of the study serve as a practical guideline for managers that not all practices would be effective for all companies. Managers must look at the role-specific context of their organization in the supply chain before deciding which practices are likely to be appropriate. Originality/value -This paper expands the current body of research in the supply chain area by examining the supply chain roles of manufacturer, distributor, retailer and service provider. This is a much broader construct than the more common dyadic treatment of a supply chain consisting only of a customer and supplier, and adds a new contextual dimension to supply chain research. In addition, service provider as a supply chain role has been hardly researched before.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to compare “how we see ourselves” vs “how others see us” when communicating corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities in US pharmaceutical companies. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected as follows: CSR reports from the companies themselves and Business Press reports from the Lexis-Nexis database. NVivo content analysis was used to compare CSR communication by companies and the Business Press. This analysis was comprised of almost 10 million words. Comparisons of Carroll’s framework, including the economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic categories between CSR reports and the Business Press, were done. Additional analysis was done to discern individual, organizational, and societal patterns of communications. Return on assets was computed for companies that have formal CSR reports and those that do not. Findings The analysis of documents containing almost 10 million words allowed the following conclusions: companies communicate more about their economic and philanthropic activities, and the Business Press communicates more about their legal and ethical activities. The companies and the Business Press communicated similarly about individual CSR. The organization communicated more about organizational topics, and the Business Press communicated less about societal topics. Originality/value This paper makes both substantive and methodological contributions. Its substantive contribution allows an understanding of what pharmaceutical companies need to do to fully communicate their CSR activities. Its methodological contribution is in suggesting that content analysis be used in understanding communication patterns. A levels of analysis approach allowed the discernment of individual-oriented, organizational, and societal-oriented communication patterns.