The Knowledge Value Chain: An Operational Perspective

Gaimon, Cheryl; Ramachandran, Karthik

doi:10.1111/poms.13312

Cited by 15 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results specifically support that the use of information to change the decision‐making of planning processes rather than relying on resource reconfiguration is a better strategy for providing resiliency and continuity in a short time frame. They also align with recent research that has discussed the importance of understanding how to align the use of information within a supply chain with its physical operation (Gaimon & Ramachandran, 2021; Thevenin et al., 2021).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

When preemptive risk mitigation is insufficient: The effectiveness of continuity and resilience techniques during COVID‐19

Dohmen

Merrick

Saunders

et al. 2023

Production and Operations Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The extreme demand volatility caused by corona virus 2019 (COVID-19) overwhelmed most preemptive measures enacted by firms to mitigate disruptions in their supply chains. This led to the rapid implementation of reactive measures to provide business continuity. The operations and supply chain management literature has grouped these reactive techniques into those that involve the reconfiguration of firm resources and those that involve changes to its decision-making processes. Unfortunately, little of this work has empirically assessed the efficacy of individual reactive techniques on business continuity after the onset of a disruption such as COVID-19. The research reported in this paper addresses this gap through an experimental design and discreteevent simulation to empirically test the impact on firm outcomes of resource reconfiguration techniques versus those related to adaptive decision-making processes. Data from a canned foods manufacturer is used to populate the simulation and isolate the impact of these reactive changes implemented in March 2020 at the beginning of the COVID-19 disruption on the attainment of business continuity in the 3 months following the COVID-19 disruption. The results show that for this company, decision-making changes-specifically changes to planning process cadence and time horizon-had more impact on business continuity than those focused on resource reconfiguration (increasing capacity through stock keeping unit (SKU) prioritization and increasing the number of shifts). These results, in addition to qualitative data collected from company executives to provide context for the modeling results, are used to provide insights that are generalizable to many firms.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

When preemptive risk mitigation is insufficient: The effectiveness of continuity and resilience techniques during COVID‐19

Dohmen

Merrick

Saunders

et al. 2023

Production and Operations Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study built on the recent efforts to increase scholarly understanding regarding CLSC value creation (Ritola et al, 2020;Schenkel et al, 2015;Koppius et al, 2014) and knowledge value chain (Gaimon and Ramachandran, 2020). More specifically, we aimed to advance insights into the potential of product returns information (Jayaraman and Luo, 2007;Mihi-Ramirez, 2012), by applying the DCs view into a new functional domain, namely CLSC management.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, it answers to the call to apply the DC framework to new functional domains (Schilke et al, 2018), by exploring the role of DC in the domain of CLSC management and product returns information. By analyzing product returns information and providing insights into how other kinds of values can be generated from it, this study also contributes to knowledge value chain research (Gaimon and Ramachandran, 2020) and in increased knowledge regarding the enablers and barriers to learning processes, feedback loops and innovation (Koteshwar, 2017). We capture our contribution in three propositions, which can be used in further research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning-based dynamic capabilities in closed-loop supply chains: an expert study

Ritola

Krikke

Caniëls

2022

IJLM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Product returns information gives firms an opportunity for continuous strategic adaptation by allowing them to understand the reasons for product returns, learning from them and improving their products and processes accordingly. By applying the Dynamic Capabilities (DCs) view in the context of closed-loop supply chains (CLSC), this study explores how firms can continuously learn from product returns information.Design/methodology/approach This study adopts a qualitative Delphi study-inspired approach. Experts from industry and academia are interviewed in two interview rounds. First round of interviews are based on extant research, while the second round allows the experts to elaborate and correct the results.Findings This study culminates into a conceptual model for incremental learning from product returns information. The results indicate incremental learning from product returns can potentially lead to a competitive advantage. Additionally, the authors identify the sources of information, capabilities along with their microfoundations and the manifestations of product return information. Three propositions are formulated embedding the findings in DC theory.Research limitations/implications This study supports extant literature in confirming the value of product returns information and opens concrete avenues for research by providing several propositions.Practical implications This research elucidates the practices, processes and resources required for firms to utilize product returns information for continuous strategic adaptation. Practitioners can use these results while implementing continuous learning practices in their organizations.Originality/value This study presents the first systematic framework for incremental learning from product returns information. The authors apply the DC framework to a new functional domain, namely CLSC management and product returns management. Furthermore, the authors offer a concrete example of how organizational learning and DC intersect, thus advancing DC theoretical knowledge.

show abstract

“…The necessary resources may already reside within the firm or may require substantial investment in knowledge external to the firm, or a combination of the two. If the executive level assesses that the firm does not possess the intellectual skills needed to close the capability gap in the desired time frame, it may outsource knowledge on a large scale (raising issues with absorptive capacity) (Gaimon & Ramachandran, 2021) or jointly develop features of the major innovation through an alliance or partnership (raising issues with coordination and integration) (Gaimon et al., 2017). For example, McKinsey acquired another firm to add design capabilities to the product portfolios offered to clients (Section 2).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Successful innovation and the alignment of knowledge workers at the executive, management, and technical specialist levels

Gaimon

Carrillo

2022

Production and Operations Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the critical roles of knowledge workers when a firm pursues a major innovation project. In this context, we consider knowledge workers as those who contribute to a firm's performance at the executive, management, and technical specialist levels. Technical specialists include persons with advanced skills in engineering, analytics, statistics, science, and economics. By analyzing a series of case studies and personal interviews, we demonstrate that alignment (i.e., coordination, integration, and collaboration) among these knowledge workers is critical for the success of an innovation project. The paper concludes with a discussion of the responsibilities of knowledge workers at the executive, management, and technical specialist levels to ensure the necessary alignment occurs for successful innovation.

show abstract

The Knowledge Value Chain: An Operational Perspective

Cited by 15 publications

References 59 publications

When preemptive risk mitigation is insufficient: The effectiveness of continuity and resilience techniques during COVID‐19

When preemptive risk mitigation is insufficient: The effectiveness of continuity and resilience techniques during COVID‐19

Learning-based dynamic capabilities in closed-loop supply chains: an expert study

Successful innovation and the alignment of knowledge workers at the executive, management, and technical specialist levels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About