¿Es posible medir el emprendimiento social en las empresas?

[EN] This study defines and proposes a measurement scale for social entrepreneurship (SE) in its broadest sense. The broad definition of SE covers for-profit firms that use social aims as a core component of their strategy. By pursuing social aims, these firms can boost the value of their products or services for consumers or exploit new business areas. Under this broad definition of SE, profit-seeking and the pursuit of social aims converge, thereby revealing a form of SE that has received little attention in either theoretical or empirical research. To fill this research gap, the present study proposes a measurement scale to measure broad SE in firms. The process used to build the scale draws upon research by Churchill (1979) and DeVellis (1991) and combines the Delphi technique, a pre-test questionnaire and structural equation modelling. The main aim of this research is to develop a scale capable of measuring broad SE in firms. The theoretical basis for the scale is supported by an empirical study in the hotel sector. The scale provides a valid, reliable instrument for measuring broad SE in firms. The scale meets all sociometric properties required of measurement scales in the social sciences, namely dimensionality, reliability and validity[ES] Este trabajo define el emprendimiento social (SE) en su dimensión más amplia y propone una escala de medición para el mismo. En lo que se refiere a la dimensión más amplia del SE, esta forma de emprendimiento se refiere a empresas for-profit que incluyen objetivos de carácter social como una parte central de su estrategia, ya que estos objetivos incrementan el valor de sus productos o servicios para los consumidores, o abren nuevas áreas de negocio. De este modo se produce una convergencia entre la búsqueda del beneficio y el cumplimiento de objetivos sociales, poniendo de manifiesto un forma de SE que no ha sido suficientemente definida en la teoría ni investigada en el nivel empírico. De ahí la propuesta de una escala de medición, que constituye el núcleo central de este artículo. En la construcción de la escala, se ha seguido un proceso basado en Churchill (1979) y DeVellis (1991), complementado con la técnica Delphi, un cuestionario pre-test y los modelos de ecuaciones estructurales. El objetivo principal es el desarrollo de una escala que mide el emprendimiento social en la empresa. Dicha metodología se apoya en un estudio empírico realizado en el sector de la hostelería. A través del estudio se obtuvo un instrumento válido y fiable para medir el emprendimiento social en las empresas, que satisface todas las propiedades sociométricas exigibles en las escalas de medición en las ciencias sociales: dimensionalidad, fiabilidad y validez.The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Universitat Politecnica de Valencia through the project Paid-06-12 (Sp 20120792).Peris-Ortiz, M.; Rueda Armengot, C.; Palacios Marqués, D. (2016). Is it possible to measure social entrepreneurship in firms?. Cuadernos de Gestión. 16(2):15-28. https://doi.org/10.5295/cdg.140469mpS152816

The effect of managing different types of work on open innovation: A micro-organizational perspective

[EN] Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the different types of work and to examine how they are related with open innovation, either by carrying out relationships with companies or external agents, or through the outsourcing of qualified and creative work. Design/methodology/approach After the theoretical analysis of the different types of work, the empirical study uses qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to analyze the different variables and their relations which favor open innovation. Findings The combination of the variables in the QCA makes it possible to obtain three paths among the characteristics of the qualified work and open innovation, with a positive empirical result. The general conclusion is that the motivation level of the qualified work is relevant for open innovation. Originality/value The originality and value of this paper consist in relating the internal efficiency in the work management with the effectiveness and success of open innovation.Peris-Ortiz, M.; Rueda Armengot, C.; Estelles Miguel, S. (2020). The effect of managing different types of work on open innovation: A micro-organizational perspective. Journal of Organizational Change Management. 33(1):1-15. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-09-2018-0264S115331Andersen, T. J. (2000). Strategic planning, autonomous actions and corporate performance. Long Range Planning, 33(2), 184-200. doi:10.1016/s0024-6301(00)00028-5Andersen, T. J. (2004). Integrating the Strategy Formation Process: European Management Journal, 22(3), 263-272. doi:10.1016/j.emj.2004.04.008Andersen, T. J. (2004). Integrating Decentralized Strategy Making and Strategic Planning Processes in Dynamic Environments. Journal of Management Studies, 41(8), 1271-1299. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00475.xBecker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (2006). Strategic Human Resources Management: Where Do We Go From Here? Journal of Management, 32(6), 898-925. doi:10.1177/0149206306293668Brettel, M., Heinemann, F., Engelen, A., & Neubauer, S. (2011). Cross-Functional Integration of R&D, Marketing, and Manufacturing in Radical and Incremental Product Innovations and Its Effects on Project Effectiveness and Efficiency. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(2), 251-269. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00795.xBrews, P. J., & Hunt, M. R. (1999). Learning to plan and planning to learn: resolving the planning school/learning school debate. Strategic Management Journal, 20(10), 889-913. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199910)20:103.0.co;2-fCarroll, N., & Helfert, M. (2015). Service capabilities within open innovation. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(2), 275-303. doi:10.1108/jeim-10-2013-0078Cheng, C. C. J., & Huizingh, E. K. R. E. (2014). When Is Open Innovation Beneficial? The Role of Strategic Orientation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(6), 1235-1253. doi:10.1111/jpim.12148Chesbrough, H. (2010). Business Model Innovation: Opportunities and Barriers. Long Range Planning, 43(2-3), 354-363. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.010Chesbrough, H., Lettl, C., & Ritter, T. (2018). Value Creation and Value Capture in Open Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 35(6), 930-938. doi:10.1111/jpim.12471Chesbrough, H.W., Vanhaverbeke, W. and West, J. (Eds) (2008), Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128. doi:10.2307/2393553Donate, M. J., Peña, I., & Sánchez de Pablo, J. D. (2015). HRM practices for human and social capital development: effects on innovation capabilities. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(9), 928-953. doi:10.1080/09585192.2015.1047393Eisenhardt, K. M., Furr, N. R., & Bingham, C. B. (2010). CROSSROADS—Microfoundations of Performance: Balancing Efficiency and Flexibility in Dynamic Environments. Organization Science, 21(6), 1263-1273. doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0564Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of Ownership and Control. The Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301-325. doi:10.1086/467037Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1985). Organizational forms and investment decisions. Journal of Financial Economics, 14(1), 101-119. doi:10.1016/0304-405x(85)90045-5Felin, T., & Zenger, T. R. (2014). Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice. Research Policy, 43(5), 914-925. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2013.09.006Galbraith, J.R. (2014), “Designing organizations: strategy”, Structure and Process at de Business Units and Enterprise Levels, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.Hart, S. L. (1992). An Integrative Framework for Strategy-Making Processes. Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 327-351. doi:10.5465/amr.1992.4279547Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2014). Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 831-850. doi:10.1002/smj.2247Van Hoorn, A. (2016). How much does job autonomy vary across countries and other extra-organizational contexts? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(2), 420-463. doi:10.1080/09585192.2016.1192052Jensen, M.C. and Meckling, W.H. (1992), “Specific and general knowledge and organizational structure”, in Werin, L. and Wijkander, H. (Eds), Contract Economics, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.Mina, A., Bascavusoglu-Moreau, E., & Hughes, A. (2014). Open service innovation and the firm’s search for external knowledge. Research Policy, 43(5), 853-866. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2013.07.004Mintzberg, H., & Waters, J. A. (1985). Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal, 6(3), 257-272. doi:10.1002/smj.4250060306Moreno-Luzón, M.D., Peris, F.J. and González, T. (2001), “Gestión de la Calidad y Diseño de Organizaciones”, Teoría y Estudio de Casos, Prentice Hall, Madrid.Nonaka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37. doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14Nonaka, I., Toyama, R. and Konno, N. (2000), “SEC1, Ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation”, in Nonaka, I. and Teece, D.J. (Eds), Managing Industrial Knowledge: Creation, Transfer and Utilization, SAGE, London, pp. 145-169.Peris-Ortiz, M., Rueda-Armengot, C., & Pechuán, I. G. (2012). Job Classification for the Purpose of Making Optimal Decisions Concerning Management Control. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l’Administration, 29(3), 231-241. doi:10.1002/cjas.1223Perrow, C. (1967). A Framework for the Comparative Analysis of Organizations. American Sociological Review, 32(2), 194. doi:10.2307/2091811Raffiee, J., & Coff, R. (2016). Micro-Foundations of Firm-Specific Human Capital: When Do Employees Perceive Their Skills to be Firm-Specific? Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 766-790. doi:10.5465/amj.2014.0286Ragin, C.C. and Fiss, P. (2008), “Net effects analysis versus configurational analysis: an empirical demonstration”, in Ragin, C.C. (Ed.), Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 190-212.Rangus, K., & Slavec, A. (2017). The interplay of decentralization, employee involvement and absorptive capacity on firms’ innovation and business performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 120, 195-203. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.12.017Schneider, M. R., Schulze-Bentrop, C., & Paunescu, M. (2009). Mapping the institutional capital of high-tech firms: A fuzzy-set analysis of capitalist variety and export performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(2), 246-266. doi:10.1057/jibs.2009.36Spender, J.-C. (2008). Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management: Whence and Whither? Management Learning, 39(2), 159-176. doi:10.1177/1350507607087582Teece, D. J. (2014). The Foundations of Enterprise Performance: Dynamic and Ordinary Capabilities in an (Economic) Theory of Firms. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 328-352. doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0116Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199708)18:73.0.co;2-zWeick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective Mind in Organizations: Heedful Interrelating on Flight Decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 357. doi:10.2307/2393372Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180. doi:10.1002/smj.4250050207West, J., Salter, A., Vanhaverbeke, W., & Chesbrough, H. (2014). Open innovation: The next decade. Research Policy, 43(5), 805-811. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.03.001Williamson, O. E. (2002). The Theory of the Firm as Governance Structure: From Choice to Contract. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(3), 171-195. doi:10.1257/089533002760278776Woodside, A. G. (2013). Moving beyond multiple regression analysis to algorithms: Calling for adoption of a paradigm shift from symmetric to asymmetric thinking in data analysis and crafting theory. Journal of Business Research, 66(4), 463-472. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.12.021Hossain, M., Islam, K. M. Z., Sayeed, M. A., & Kauranen, I. (2016). A comprehensive review of open innovation literature. Journal of Science & Technology Policy Management, 7(1), 2-25. doi:10.1108/jstpm-02-2015-000

Toma de decisiones en situación de certeza, riesgo e incertidumbre

Se explican los diferentes métodos de ayuda a la toma de decisiones en situaciones de certeza, riesgo e incertidumbre. Criterio optimista, pesimista, Laplace, Hurwicz y Savage. Valor Monetario Esperado.Rueda Armengot, C.; Peris Ortiz, M. (2013). Toma de decisiones en situación de certeza, riesgo e incertidumbre. http://hdl.handle.net/10251/3161

Multivariable Supplier Segmentation in Sustainable Supply Chain Management

[EN] Pressure from stakeholders for sustainable development is forcing top management to reconsider its supply chain management. This form of sustainability must consider the risks, insecurities, and lack of proximity caused by any event on the global economy. Organizations must identify and manage the risks of every link in the chain, while pursuing sustainable development. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainable development must be the result of a deliberate and coordinated response by the entire organization. A suitable segmentation of suppliers allows development strategies to be prioritized. This article presents the steps that should be followed in supply chain management, the identification of risks, and the new leadership of purchasing management to develop a sustainable supply chain. To this end, some of the key industrial actions reported in the literature are outlined, and two case studies are presented to identify the steps for the segmentation and dynamic development of suppliers. This article provides reflections on the responsibilities of senior management in the new era of sustainable development and presents guidance on how to coordinate sustainable development in the supply chain.Rius-Sorolla, G.; Estelles Miguel, S.; Rueda Armengot, C. (2020). Multivariable Supplier Segmentation in Sustainable Supply Chain Management. Sustainability. 12(11):1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114556S1161211rabieh, masood, babaee, leila, Fadaei Rafsanjani, abbASS, & Esmaeili, M. (2018). Sustainable Supplier Selection and Order Allocation: An Integrated Delphi Method, Fuzzy TOPSIS and Multi-Objective Programming Model. Scientia Iranica, 0(0), 0-0. doi:10.24200/sci.2018.5254.1176Joyce, A., & Paquin, R. L. (2016). The triple layered business model canvas: A tool to design more sustainable business models. Journal of Cleaner Production, 135, 1474-1486. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.067Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180. doi:10.1002/smj.4250050207Barney, J. B. (2001). Is the Resource-Based «View» a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research? Yes. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 41-56. doi:10.5465/amr.2001.4011938Eisenhardt, K. M., Furr, N. R., & Bingham, C. B. (2010). CROSSROADS—Microfoundations of Performance: Balancing Efficiency and Flexibility in Dynamic Environments. Organization Science, 21(6), 1263-1273. doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0564Teece, D. J. (2014). The Foundations of Enterprise Performance: Dynamic and Ordinary Capabilities in an (Economic) Theory of Firms. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 328-352. doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0116Gold, S., Seuring, S., & Beske, P. (2009). Sustainable supply chain management and inter-organizational resources: a literature review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, n/a-n/a. doi:10.1002/csr.207Walker, H., & Jones, N. (2012). Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(1), 15-28. doi:10.1108/13598541211212177Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate Social Responsibility. Business & Society, 38(3), 268-295. doi:10.1177/000765039903800303Xia, Y. (2011). Competitive strategies and market segmentation for suppliers with substitutable products. European Journal of Operational Research, 210(2), 194-203. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2010.09.028Seuring, S., & Müller, M. (2008). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(15), 1699-1710. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020Bai, C., Rezaei, J., & Sarkis, J. (2017). Multicriteria Green Supplier Segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 64(4), 515-528. doi:10.1109/tem.2017.2723639Akhavan, R. M., & Beckmann, M. (2017). A configuration of sustainable sourcing and supply management strategies. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 23(2), 137-151. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2016.07.006UNCSD Industry and Sustainable Development—6th Sessionhttp://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=E/CN.17/1998/4&Lang=EVivas, R., Sant’anna, Â., Esquerre, K., & Freires, F. (2019). Measuring Sustainability Performance with Multi Criteria Model: A Case Study. Sustainability, 11(21), 6113. doi:10.3390/su11216113AENOR Certificación ISO 14001 sistemas de gestión ambientalhttps://www.aenor.com/certificacion/medio-ambiente/gestion-ambientalAENOR Certificación SA 8000https://www.aenor.com/certificacion/responsabilidad-social/sa-8000-empresa-saludableMerli, R., Preziosi, M., & Massa, I. (2015). Social Values and Sustainability: A Survey on Drivers, Barriers and Benefits of SA8000 Certification in Italian Firms. Sustainability, 7(4), 4120-4130. doi:10.3390/su7044120PAGELL, M., WU, Z., & WASSERMAN, M. E. (2010). THINKING DIFFERENTLY ABOUT PURCHASING PORTFOLIOS: AN ASSESSMENT OF SUSTAINABLE SOURCING. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 46(1), 57-73. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.2009.03186.xCarter, C. R., & Liane Easton, P. (2011). Sustainable supply chain management: evolution and future directions. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 41(1), 46-62. doi:10.1108/09600031111101420A Strategic Role for Purchasinghttps://go.gale.com/ps/anonymous?id=GALE%7CA11739695&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00475394&p=AONE&sw=wDYER, J. H. (1996). SPECIALIZED SUPPLIER NETWORKS AS A SOURCE OF COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE: EVIDENCE FROM THE AUTO INDUSTRY. Strategic Management Journal, 17(4), 271-291. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199604)17:43.0.co;2-yChen, I. J., Paulraj, A., & Lado, A. A. (2004). Strategic purchasing, supply management, and firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 22(5), 505-523. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2004.06.002Dubois, A., & Pedersen, A.-C. (2002). Why relationships do not fit into purchasing portfolio models—a comparison between the portfolio and industrial network approaches. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 8(1), 35-42. doi:10.1016/s0969-7012(01)00014-4Rezaei, J., & Fallah Lajimi, H. (2018). Segmenting supplies and suppliers: bringing together the purchasing portfolio matrix and the supplier potential matrix. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 22(4), 419-436. doi:10.1080/13675567.2018.1535649Day, M., Magnan, G. M., & Moeller, M. M. (2010). Evaluating the bases of supplier segmentation: A review and taxonomy. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(4), 625-639. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2009.06.001Svensson, G. (2004). Supplier segmentation in the automotive industry. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 34(1), 12-38. doi:10.1108/09600030410515664Parasuraman, A. (1980). Vendor segmentation: An additional level of market segmentation. Industrial Marketing Management, 9(1), 59-62. doi:10.1016/0019-8501(80)90035-8Zsidisin, G. A., & Ellram, L. M. (2003). An Agency Theory Investigation of Supply Risk M anagement. The Journal of Supply Chain Management, 39(3), 15-27. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.2003.tb00156.xLee, D. M., & Drake, P. R. (2009). A portfolio model for component purchasing strategy and the case study of two South Korean elevator manufacturers. International Journal of Production Research, 48(22), 6651-6682. doi:10.1080/00207540902897780Rezaei, J., & Ortt, R. (2012). A multi-variable approach to supplier segmentation. International Journal of Production Research, 50(16), 4593-4611. doi:10.1080/00207543.2011.615352Gelderman, C. J., & van Weele, A. J. (2005). Purchasing Portfolio Models: A Critique and Update. The Journal of Supply Chain Management, 41(3), 19-28. doi:10.1111/j.1055-6001.2005.04103003.xOlsen, R. F., & Ellram, L. M. (1997). A portfolio approach to supplier relationships. Industrial Marketing Management, 26(2), 101-113. doi:10.1016/s0019-8501(96)00089-2Rezaei, J., Wang, J., & Tavasszy, L. (2015). Linking supplier development to supplier segmentation using Best Worst Method. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(23), 9152-9164. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2015.07.073Ellram, L. M., & Pearson, J. N. (1993). The Role of the Purchasing Function: Toward Team Participation. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 29(2), 2-9. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.1993.tb00007.xGiunipero, L. C., & Vogt, J. F. (1997). Empowering the Purchasing Function: Moving to Team Decisions. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 33(4), 8-15. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.1997.tb00020.xJohnson, P. F., Klassen, R. D., Leenders, M. R., & Fearon, H. E. (2002). Determinants of purchasing team usage in the supply chain. Journal of Operations Management, 20(1), 77-89. doi:10.1016/s0272-6963(01)00078-xKitchenham, B., Pearl Brereton, O., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., & Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 51(1), 7-15. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009Rius-Sorolla, G., Maheut, J., Estelles-Miguel, S., & Garcia-Sabater, J. P. (2017). Protocol: Systematic Literature Review on coordination mechanisms for the mathematical programming models in production planning with decentralized decision making. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management, 8(2), 22. doi:10.4995/wpom.v8i2.7858Rius-Sorolla, G., Maheut, J., Estellés-Miguel, S., & Garcia-Sabater, J. P. (2018). Coordination mechanisms with mathematical programming models for decentralized decision-making: a literature review. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 28(1), 61-104. doi:10.1007/s10100-018-0594-zCooper, M. C., Lambert, D. M., & Pagh, J. D. (1997). Supply Chain Management: More Than a New Name for Logistics. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 8(1), 1-14. doi:10.1108/09574099710805556Colla, E., & Dupuis, M. (2002). Research and managerial issues on global retail competition: Carrefour/Wal‐Mart. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 30(2), 103-111. doi:10.1108/09590550210418128Dyer, J. H., Cho, D. S., & Cgu, W. (1998). Strategic Supplier Segmentation: The Next «Best Practice» in Supply Chain Management. California Management Review, 40(2), 57-77. doi:10.2307/41165933Bloom, P. N., & Perry, V. G. (2001). Retailer power and supplier welfare. Journal of Retailing, 77(3), 379-396. doi:10.1016/s0022-4359(01)00048-3Muller, H. E. (2009). Supplier integration: an international comparison of supplier and automaker experiences. International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, 9(1), 18. doi:10.1504/ijatm.2009.023584Dyer, J., & Chu, W. (2010). The determinants of trust in supplier–automaker relations in the US, Japan, and Korea: A retrospective. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(1), 28-34. doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.48Dyer, J. H., & Chu, W. (2000). The Determinants of Trust in Supplier-Automaker Relationships in the U.S., Japan and Korea. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(2), 259-285. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490905Dyer, J. H., & Chu, W. (2003). The Role of Trustworthiness in Reducing Transaction Costs and Improving Performance: Empirical Evidence from the United States, Japan, and Korea. Organization Science, 14(1), 57-68. doi:10.1287/orsc.14.1.57.12806GM Ranked Worst Automaker by U.S. Suppliers: Survey Reutershttps://www.reuters.com/article/us-gm-suppliers-survey/gm-ranked-worst-automaker-by-u-s-suppliers-survey-idUSBREA4B01I20140512Ritchie, P. (1990). McDonald′s: A Winner through Logistics. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 20(3), 21-24. doi:10.1108/eum0000000000356McDonald’s Our Historyhttps://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/about-us/our-history.htmlXing, Liu, Wang, Shen, & Zhu. (2019). Environmental Regulation, Environmental Commitment, Sustainability Exploration/Exploitation Innovation, and Firm Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 11(21), 6001. doi:10.3390/su11216001Deloitte Global Powers of Retailing 2018https://www2.deloitte.com/ni/es/pages/consumer-business/articles/global-powers-of-retailing-2018.htmlMercadonahttps://ssrn.com/abstract=1607757Balance Gran Consumo 2016https://www.kantarworldpanel.com/es/Noticias/El-Gran-Consumo-cae-en-2016#downloadThankyouCallejo, M. B.-, & Heredero, C. de P.-. (2019). Co-innovation at Mercadona: a radically different and unique innovation model in the retail sector. Journal of Business & Retail Management Research, 13(04). doi:10.24052/jbrmr/v13is04/art-30Calabrese, A., & Scoglio, F. (2012). Reframing the past: A new approach in service quality assessment. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 23(11-12), 1329-1343. doi:10.1080/14783363.2012.733259Mercadé-Melé, P., Molinillo-Jiménez, S., & Fernández-Moralesa, A. (2014). Influencia de las prácticas de responsabilidad social corporativa en la actitud del consumidor: análisis comparado de Mercadona, Carrefour y Eroski. European Journal Of Family Business, 4(1). doi:10.24310/ejfbejfb.v4i1.5040Siro acelera su desconexión de Mercadona con la venta de la planta de Navarréshttps://www.levante-emv.com/economia/2019/11/06/siro-acelera-desconexion-mercadona-venta/1941206.html?utm_medium=rssHarris, L. C., O’Malley, L., & Patterson, M. (2003). Professional Interaction: Exploring the Concept of Attraction. Marketing Theory, 3(1), 9-36. doi:10.1177/1470593103003001002Vitasek, K., & Manrodt, K. (2012). Vested outsourcing: a flexible framework for collaborative outsourcing. Strategic Outsourcing: An International Journal, 5(1), 4-14. doi:10.1108/17538291211221924Krause, D. R., Scannell, T. V., & Calantone, R. J. (2000). A Structural Analysis of the Effectiveness of Buying Firms’ Strategies to Improve Supplier Performance. Decision Sciences, 31(1), 33-55. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2000.tb00923.xZimmer, K., Fröhling, M., & Schultmann, F. (2015). Sustainable supplier management – a review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development. International Journal of Production Research, 54(5), 1412-1442. doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1079340Wynstra, F., & Pierick, E. ten. (2000). Managing supplier involvement in new product development: a portfolio approach. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 6(1), 49-57. doi:10.1016/s0969-7012(99)00035-0Mercadona-Conservas Ubago: The Intersupplier Concepthttps://www.santelmo.org/mercadona-conservas-ubago-the-intersupplier-concept/4971Swinney, R., & Netessine, S. (2009). Long-Term Contracts Under the Threat of Supplier Default. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 11(1), 109-127. doi:10.1287/msom.1070.0199Zhu, W., & Wang, Z. (2018). The Collaborative Networks and Thematic Trends of Research on Purchasing and Supply Management for Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Review. Sustainability, 10(5), 1510. doi:10.3390/su10051510Matsuo, H. (2015). Implications of the Tohoku earthquake for Toyota׳s coordination mechanism: Supply chain disruption of automotive semiconductors. International Journal of Production Economics, 161, 217-227. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.07.010PAGELL, M., & WU, Z. (2009). BUILDING A MORE COMPLETE THEORY OF SUSTAINABLE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT USING CASE STUDIES OF 10 EXEMPLARS. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 45(2), 37-56. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.2009.03162.xStuart, I., McCutcheon, D., Handfield, R., McLachlin, R., & Samson, D. (2002). Effective case research in operations management: a process perspective. Journal of Operations Management, 20(5), 419-433. doi:10.1016/s0272-6963(02)00022-0Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550. doi:10.5465/amr.1989.4308385MAThread MAThreadhttps://mathread.com/Sabater, J. J. G., & Garcia, J. A. M. (2011). Can we still talk about continuous improvement? Rethinking enablers and inhibitors for successful implementation. International Journal of Technology Management, 55(1/2), 28. doi:10.1504/ijtm.2011.041678Paipa-Galeano, L., Bernal-Torres, C. A., Agudelo Otálora, L. M., Jarrah Nezhad, Y., & González-Blanco, H. A. (2020). Key lessons to maintain continuous improvement: A case study of four companies. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 13(1), 195. doi:10.3926/jiem.297

Introduction to the Special Issue Entrepreneurship: Global Vision and Different Dimensions

Introduction to the Special Issue Entrepreneurship: Global Vision and Different DimensionsPeris-Ortiz, M.; Rueda Armengot, C. (2014). Introduction to the Special Issue Entrepreneurship: Global Vision and Different Dimensions. Business and Management Research. 3(1):1-1. doi:10.5430/bmr.v3n1S113

Women and Entrepreneurship: A gender comparison in Spain

[EN] In the institutionalization of men s and women s roles in today s society, three key issues affect women s entrepreneurial capacity. First, women seek to balance their family and professional lives. Second, capitalist society uses male-dominated values and instrumental rationality to pre-define success. Third, according to the literature, women possess less human capital than men do. Nevertheless, this study does not corroborate the finding that women possess less human capital than men do. Furthermore, results reveal non-significant gender differences in individuals perceptions of whether women have the necessary skills to become entrepreneurs and whether society positively values entrepreneurship. This study shows that women s entrepreneurial potential is very similar to that of men. The study was carried out using data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) for the period 2001 2010.The authors acknowledge the financial support from the project PAID-06-12 (Sp 20120792) from Universitat Politècnica de València.Peris Ortiz, M.; Devece Carañana, CA.; Rueda Armengot, C.; Fuster Estruch, MV. (2014). Women and Entrepreneurship: A gender comparison in Spain. Business and Management Research. 3(4):82-88. https://doi.org/10.5430/bmr.v3n4p82S82883

Métodos de entrada en mercados internacionales

Cuando el usuario de este artículo termine su lectura será capaz de: Conocer las causas principales de la internacionalización y estudiar diferentes métodos de entrada en mercados internacionalesPeris-Ortiz, M.; Rueda-Armengot, C.; Benito-Osorio, D. (2013). Internacionalización: Métodos de entrada en mercados exteriores. http://hdl.handle.net/10251/3121

Ontological levels in the knowledge management field

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between knowledge and reality in the field of management, highlighting the importance of ontological support in the formation of knowledge. The empirical study establishes those ontological levels in large Spanish firms. The article underlines the importance of ontological support and of practice carried out in forming knowledge, and reviews different approaches. The empirical study identifies, via an exploratory factor analysis, the ontological supports of knowledge in large Spanish firms, going on to apply a confirmatory factor analysis that shows the fit of the factors obtained from the sample. The discussion carried out suggests the desirability of widening and deepening the ontological bases of knowledge. The empirical study identifies that, for the sample studied of large Spanish firms, individual-group ontological support of knowledge is significant, along with ontological organizational (and institutional) support of knowledge. The limitations of the article have to do with the difficulties involved in carrying out the fieldwork for the empirical research of all the relevant questions discussed in the theoretical framework. In so far as the process of the formation of knowledge resides in practice, when it has not yet become conceptual knowledge, the statistical empirical research of these questions presents a number of difficulties. This article broadens the perspective of Tsoukas and Spender, emphasizing the importance of practice and highlighting the fact that its consideration as the basis and source of knowledge requires the ontological bases to be broadened to include the physical and technological context.Peris-Ortiz, M.; Vivas López, S.; Rueda Armengot, C. (2013). Ontological levels in the knowledge management field. International Journal of Business. 18(1):35-47. http://hdl.handle.net/10251/59875S354718

Relación entre la transferencia de conocimiento y la innovación: resultados de un estudio empírico en industrias intensivas en conocimiento

El artículo analiza el efecto que tienen diversas variables antecedentes como son la visión holística de la organización, la gestión por competencias, el aprendizaje continuo y la infraestructura técnica de las tecnologías de la información en la transferencia de conocimiento y como ello repercute sobre el desempeño innovador. A través de una encuesta realizada a 222 empresas pertenecientes a las industrias de biotecnología y telecomunicaciones se comprueban todas las hipótesis planteadas, destacando el papel mediador que ejerce la transferencia de conocimiento. La metodología utilizada es la de los modelos de ecuaciones estructurales, y los resultados tienen aplicación práctica para los directivos de las empresas analizadas ya que para transferir conocimiento es necesario incidir en la creación de una visión holística en la organización, la gestión por competencias, el fomento del aprendizaje continuo y la mejora de la infraestructura técnica de las tecnologías de la información. Además se ha demostrado que aquellas empresas que diseminan adecuadamente su conocimiento obtienen mejores resultados en innovación.Palacios Marqués, D.; Peris-Ortiz, M.; Rueda Armengot, C. (2012). Relación entre la transferencia de conocimiento y la innovación: resultados de un estudio empírico en industrias intensivas en conocimiento. ESIC Market. 43(3):485-496. doi:10.7200/esicm.143.0433.2eS48549643

Mercado y Economía Colaborativa. Conceptos y Caso Wallapop

[ES] Este artículo aborda las cuestiones conceptuales básicas de la economía colaborativa, y una parte de su dimensión práctica mediante el caso Wallapop. La revisión de la literatura muestra que la colaboración, para tener sentido y ser explicable, tiene que cumplir una función o ser necesaria. Este es el modo en el que la colaboración añade valor. El artículo concluye que tanto la colaboración estudiada como los atributos sociales que le son inherentes, son de perfil bajo, porque las transacciones de mercado en las que intervienen, en el marco de internet, tienen en general el carácter de mercado instantáneo o spot.Peris-Ortiz, M.; Estelles Miguel, S.; Rueda Armengot, C. (2016). Mercado y Economía Colaborativa. Conceptos y Caso Wallapop. Economía Industrial. (402):19-26. http://hdl.handle.net/10251/111634S192640