Why be first if it doesn’t pay? The case of early adopters of C-TPAT supply chain security certification

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to focus on adoption of certified management standards, specifically public standards. Such standards play an increasingly important role in today’s business environment. However, to generate adoption benefits, they must be first widely accepted – a situation where they have become viewed as the de facto norms. For this state to occur early adopters play a critical role. Past research has argued that early adopters, in exchange for assuming more risk, are rewarded with higher economic returns. Yet, these findings are based on private, not public standards. With public standards, early adopters do not receive such benefits. There is evidence that public standards are becoming more important. This situation leads to a simple but important question addressed in this study – if early adopters assume the risks of embracing a new public standard without economic benefits, then what is their motivation? To resolve this question, this study draws on agency theory and prospect theory. The authors argue that early adopters embrace such standards because of their desire to minimize risk resulting from failure to support the goal at the heart of the public standards. Design/methodology/approach Data were obtained from the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) Partners Cost Benefit Survey and analyzed through structural equation modeling. Findings Early adopters of public standards are not driven by economic benefits but rather by the need to minimize their exposure to the risks associated with failing to satisfy the goals associated with a public standard. In other words, they were motivated by the need to minimize costs. In the case of C-TPAT, these costs are those of failing to provide or improve network security. Research limitations/implications This study has shed new light on the standards adoption process by clarifying the specific motivations that drive early adoption of a public standard. In addition to identifying the loss aversion motives of early adopters and economic benefit motives of later adopters, the authors have also elaborated on the notion that standards have differing levels of precedence, particularly when comparing private with public standards. Practical implications In a world characterized by increasing demands for outcomes such as improved security and where governmental funding is falling, due to growing deficits and governments that are becoming more conservative, the authors expect the use of public standards to increase. Originality/value Different from prior research on private standard, the paper focuses on the organizations involved in the adoption and diffusion of a public standard, with special attention being devoted to the early adopters. The paper provides a theoretical explanation for the actions of early adopters of a public standard through the theoretical lens of prospect theory

Correction: Type-Specific Cell Line Models for Type-Specific Ovarian Cancer Research.

[This corrects the article on p. e72162 in vol. 8.]

Type-Specific Cell Line Models for Type-Specific Ovarian Cancer Research

<div><p>Background</p><p>Ovarian carcinomas consist of at least five distinct diseases: high-grade serous, low-grade serous, clear cell, endometrioid, and mucinous. Biomarker and molecular characterization may represent a more biologically relevant basis for grouping and treating this family of tumors, rather than site of origin. Molecular characteristics have become the new standard for clinical pathology, however development of tailored type-specific therapies is hampered by a failure of basic research to recognize that model systems used to study these diseases must also be stratified. Unrelated model systems do offer value for study of biochemical processes but specific cellular context needs to be applied to assess relevant therapeutic strategies.</p><p>Methods</p><p>We have focused on the identification of clear cell carcinoma cell line models. A panel of 32 “ovarian cancer” cell lines has been classified into histotypes using a combination of mutation profiles, IHC mutation-surrogates, and a validated immunohistochemical model. All cell lines were identity verified using STR analysis.</p><p>Results</p><p>Many described ovarian clear cell lines have characteristic mutations (including <i>ARID1A</i> and <i>PIK3CA</i>) and an overall molecular/immuno-profile typical of primary tumors. Mutations in <i>TP53</i> were present in the majority of high-grade serous cell lines. Advanced genomic analysis of bona-fide clear cell carcinoma cell lines also support copy number changes in typical biomarkers such at <i>MET</i> and <i>HNF1B</i> and a lack of any recurrent expressed re-arrangements.</p><p>Conclusions: As with primary ovarian tumors, mutation status of cancer genes like <i>ARID1A</i> and <i>TP53</i> and a general immuno-profile serve well for establishing histotype of ovarian cancer cell We describe specific biomarkers and molecular features to re-classify generic “ovarian carcinoma” cell lines into type specific categories. Our data supports the use of prototype clear cell lines, such as TOV21G and JHOC-5, and questions the use of SKOV3 and A2780 as models of high-grade serous carcinoma.</p></div

Genome-wide copy number profiles of bona-fide ovarian CCC cell lines.

<p>A large range of copy number changes are seen including typical Chr8 gains and Chr17 gains surrounding the CCC biomarker <i>HNF1B</i> gene, see also <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0072162#pone-0072162-t003" target="_blank">Table 3</a>.</p

Discriminating Features Of The Five Major Histotypes Of Ovarian Carcinoma.

<p>Discriminating Features Of The Five Major Histotypes Of Ovarian Carcinoma.</p