@article{roehrich_davies_tyler_mishra_bendoly_2024, title={Large interorganizational projects (LIPs): Toward an integrative perspective and research agenda on interorganizational governance}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1280}, DOI={10.1002/joom.1280}, abstractNote={Organizations are becoming more reliant on projects to adapt and survive in an increasingly volatile, fast-moving, and competitive environment (e.g., Ramasesh & Browning, 2014; Roehrich et al., 2023; Tatikonda & Rosenthal, 2000). Terms such as “projectification” (Midler, 1995), “project society” (Lundin et al., 2015), and “project economy” (Nieto-Rodriguez, 2021) have been introduced to describe the growth of projects involved in delivering a large share of temporary interorganizational activities such as research and development (R&D), technology and new product development (NPD), capital goods and services, infrastructure, events, and organizational change. Some scholars have even suggested that projects have replaced continuous process structures (especially in the Western world), such as manufacturing activities, as the dominant form of organization in the 21st century (e.g., Nieto-Rodriguez, 2021; Shenhar & Dvir, 2007). While a large body of literature has identified that projects vary considerably in their complexity, novelty, uncertainty, and dynamism (Davies & Hobday, 2005; Loch et al., 2006), and that an increasing number are massive in scale (Flyvbjerg et al., 2003; Miller & Lessard, 2000; Scott et al., 2011), research on how multiple organizations in large interorganizational projects (LIPs) are governed is still in its infancy. This special issue (SI) of the Journal of Operations Management explores the key challenges and tensions involved in governing LIPs. We use the adjective “large” loosely to refer to interorganizational projects conducted at scale (here we loosely refer to factors such as physical size, impact, duration, as well as number of people and organizations involved), rather than focus on projects above an arbitrarily chosen value (e.g., $1 billon). Projects are “interorganizational” when comprised of multiple (often a mix of public, private, non-for-profit) organizations, working jointly to coordinate the production of unique, or customized, products and/or services in uncertain and dynamic environments (Jones & Lichtenstein, 2008; Sydow & Braun, 2018). LIPs are the organizational form most often used to produce basic science, create new products (or solutions), build public infrastructure, tackle problems related to social, economic, political, or environmental issues, and respond to natural disasters (e.g., Roehrich & Kivleniece, 2022). LIPs deliver transformational outcomes for communities and societies (Flyvbjerg, 2014) and are increasingly important in many industries and sectors such as healthcare, defense, aerospace, mining, telecommunications, information technology (IT), transport, utilities, “big science” experiments, and major cultural and sporting events (Bendoly & Chao, 2016; Caldwell et al., 2017; Mishra et al., 2020). Although projects are generally considered an important topic in operations and supply chain management (OSCM; e.g., Bendoly & Swink, 2007; Bendoly, 2014; Roehrich & Lewis, 2014; Mishra & Browning, 2020; Mishra et al., 2020; Salvadore et al., 2021), much of the research on LIPs has been undertaken by scholars in project management (PM) or adjacent disciplines (e.g., innovation management) using a variety of theoretical lenses to understand management, organizational, institutional, and governance arrangements. This research has often deployed a range of labels to describe LIPs, including “major projects” (Morris, 1994, 2013), “large engineering projects” (Miller & Lessard, 2000), “system of systems” projects (Davies & Hobday, 2005; Shenhar & Dvir, 2007), “megaprojects” of $1 billion or more (Flyvbjerg, 2017), “interorganizational projects” (Sydow & Braun, 2018), and “global projects” (Scott et al., 2011). We bring together prior studies under the label of LIPs to offer clarity and coherence moving forward with governance discussions. We draw attention to the fact that further OSCM research on LIPs is needed to address many unresolved interorganizational governance challenges. The governance of LIPs is particularly challenging in environments that are increasingly complex, novel, uncertain, and rapidly changing, giving rise to unresolved theoretical questions with important implications for practice and policy (Chakkol et al., 2018; Ramasesh & Browning, 2014; Shenhar, 2001). LIPs face significant governance challenges requiring contractual and relational governance and forms of collaboration among multiple organizations with often disparate goals, diverging interests, and varying levels of capabilities and resources (Roehrich & Lewis, 2014; Zheng et al., 2008). Research in PM, and related disciplines, has identified the challenges involved in organizing and managing LIPs in different environments (e.g., Davies et al., 2023; Shenhar & Dvir, 2007), and is beginning to address interorganizational project governance (e.g., Müller et al., 2023). Drawing upon a variety of theoretical perspectives on the governance of projects, programs, and project-based organizations (Müller et al., 2023), however, PM research on the governance of projects has, with a few exceptions (e.g., Levitt et al., 2019), neglected to consider how key concepts of collaboration (e.g., Gulati et al., 2012), relational and contractual governance (Bercovitz & Tyler, 2014; Poppo & Zenger, 2002; Roehrich & Lewis, 2014), and coopetition (Bengtsson & Kock, 2000) apply to LIPs. To fill this gap, management and OSCM scholars have recently explored the governance of LIPs including how collaboration is required to build cooperation between parties, control and coordinate interdependent tasks, and align the goals and interests of the different parties involved in LIPs (e.g., Aben et al., 2021; Hartmann et al., 2014; Oliveira & Lumineau, 2017; Tee et al., 2019; Zheng et al., 2008). Such inquiries are few however, and further research on the governance of LIPs is needed to understand how to align incentives, allocate decision rights and responsibilities, and ensure information flows and knowledge exchange to meet common goals (economic and social) values, and performance targets (Roehrich et al., 2020; Sarafan et al., 2022). Our goal with the present discussion is to encourage scholars to conduct further research on the nature, challenges, and dynamics of governance in LIPs. In particular, we encourage scholars to draw on insights from general management, OSCM, PM, and adjacent literatures to develop novel and interesting theoretical contributions with implications for how to improve the performance of large-scale endeavors and tackle grand challenges facing societies in the 21st century (George et al., 2016). The four papers appearing in this SI highlight a variety of theoretical perspectives, units of analysis, and methodologies to deepen our understanding of the governance of LIPs. They examine projects in a variety of industries, institutional contexts and settings, and explore practices across and within LIPs that have (or have not) been successful. With these studies as a backdrop, and guided by the discussion that follows, we are hopeful that future, concerted efforts to study LIPs will further advance conceptual, theoretical, and methodological contributions and support the advancement of science, practice, and policy in this vital area. To provide a foundation for assessing the state of knowledge in this domain, we begin with some relevant distinctions across the associated literatures. Notably, we distinguish between projects and other operational structures, identify key dimensions used to classify projects, and consider recent research addressing the increasing size of projects. In doing so, our discourse provides a relevant conceptualization of LIPs, critical to developing impactful theoretical and practical contributions. Although it is widely agreed that projects are temporary organizational structures designed to terminate on completion of their task, they are defined and approached in different ways in research published in OSCM, PM, and other management disciplines. PM researchers have traditionally emphasized the uniqueness of project endeavors (Pinto, 2010). In the Project Management Institute's (PMI) guide to the “Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK)” a project is defined as “a temporary endeavor undertaken once to create a unique product, service, or result,” and the management of a project is the “application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet project requirements” (PMI, 2021: 4). Many PM scholars draw a sharp distinction between unique, discrete, non-routine project tasks and standardized, ongoing, and repetitive process activities. Although it has long been established that projects contain “repetitive elements” (PMI, 2008: 5), until recently PM researchers emphasized that the element of repetitiveness does not undermine the “fundamental uniqueness of project work” (PMI, 2008: 5). Traditionally, PM textbooks and professional bodies have assumed that projects are essentially the same and can be managed by a “one-size-fits-all” approach using standardized processes and organizational arrangements (for a critique of this approach see Shenhar & Dvir, 2007). Such a standardized model assumes that projects are predictable, fixed, and relatively simple, and can be decoupled from environmental changes. However, scholars (e.g., Davies et al., 2023; Maylor et al., 2018; Morris, 1994) and professional bodies (e.g., PMI, 2021) have moved beyond this traditional approach, recognizing that many projects are uncertain, complex, and strongly affected by the dynamics of the environment, and that plans have to be flexible and projects adjusted during execution to situations that cannot be foreseen at the outset. In OSCM research, projects are often viewed as one-off, low-volume, unit stages of production at the opposite end of a spectrum from repetitive or steady-state processes, where at the extreme the same task is performed continuously (Figure 1; Hayes & Wheelwright, 1984; Wheelwright & Clark, 1992; Browning, 2017). In the OSCM literature, projects involve anything from new product development to IT implementation, from asset and process maintenance efforts to large-scale quality management initiatives. In short, they can be highly specific and localized, or broadly cross-cutting. They can be critical to the initiation of repetitive processes, or critical to their later stage augmentation. Accordingly, they are associated with the production of low-volume artifacts (enterprise installations, a new product, fixes to things), each of considerable variety. In contrast with the assumption often found in PM literature that projects are unique and the “antithesis of repetition” (Pinto, 2010: 25), OSCM research recognizes that projects include standardized tasks, recipes, or templates that can be replicated, or contain elements that are well understood and repeated in other projects (Browning, 2017; Holweg & Maylor, 2018; Maylor et al., 2018). While the product, service, or outcome of a project may be unique, its production may involve a collection of common, and even standardized, processes and best practices (Davies & Brady, 2000). In recent OSCM work, considerable attention has, therefore, been afforded to processes involved in executing projects (Bendoly et al., 2014; Browning, 2010; Browning & Ramasesh, 2007; Mishra & Browning, 2020), such as the information exchange among members of a project team (e.g., Bendoly, 2014; Bendoly et al., 2010), dynamics of prioritization and monitory within project teams (Bendoly et al., 2014), and the experience and information uses to select and manage project teams (Bendoly & Swink, 2007; Salvadore et al., 2021). Which is to say, projects can vary greatly, but common theoretical phenomena, broadly generalized, can transcend project contexts. As a result, common theoretical lenses have also proven powerful across a range of project types. At the same time, scholars have found value in leveraging a variety of such lenses even in a single project context. R&D and NPD project activities have been examined under both organizational (Verma et al., 2011) and interorganizational collaborative (Mishra et al., 2015; Mishra & Shah, 2009) perspectives. Research connecting project work to more continuous processes has focused on the dynamics of back-peddling on technology implementation projects (Bendoly & Cotteleer, 2008). Such perspectives and dynamics represent only a handful of phenomena that various theoretical lenses and empirical efforts have uncovered (and have still yet to uncover) with relevance to the OSCM community. In addition to PM and OSCM research, projects have also attracted the attention of scholars working in a variety of sub-disciplines of management, particularly organization studies (e.g., Lundin et al., 2015) and innovation management (e.g., Shenhar & Dvir, 2007), and many topics addressed in general management have a bearing on projects (Browning, 2017). In an influential article defining projects as a form of temporary organization, Lundin and Söderholm (1995) suggested that although the result of every project is a unique (or one-off), customized product, process, and/or service, the tasks performed range from unique to repetitive. Building on this formulation, innovation scholars distinguish between unique and repetitive projects (Davies & Brady, 2016; Davies & Hobday, 2005). A unique project performs innovative, non-recurring, and highly uncertain tasks such as developing a new product or complex system, whereas a repetitive project performs standardized, routine, and predictable tasks that will be repeated in the future (e.g., projects based on mature product lines; Davies & Brady, 2000). At any particular time, an organization may perform a variety of unique and repetitive projects, including hybrid projects combining unique and repetitive tasks. With this in mind, and given the various roles of projects discussed to this point, we can now unpack the different environmental dimensions shaping how alternate types of projects are organized, managed, and governed. Informed by contingency theory (Burns & Stalker, 1961) and strategy research (Wheelwright & Clark, 1992), scholars recognize that distinct organizational processes and structures are required in order to properly accommodate four key project attributes: novelty, uncertainty, pace, and complexity (Davies & Hobday, 2005; Geraldi et al., 2011; Shenhar & Dvir, 2007; Stinchcombe & Heimer, 1985). Let us consider each of these dimensions in turn. Projects are often distinguishable according to the degree of novelty in the products and processes they give rise to, on a continuum from incremental to radical or breakthrough innovation (Wheelwright & Clark, 1992). Projects also vary in terms of the uncertainty involved, ranging from routine projects utilizing risk management, contingency planning, and instructions for dealing with foreseeable uncertainties (or “known unknowns”) to highly innovative projects (Bahemia & Roehrich, 2023; Loch et al., 2006) facing unforeseeable uncertainties (or “unknown unknowns”) (Phillips et al., 2023; Pich et al., 2002; Ramasesh & Browning, 2014). Pace (or, sometimes, urgency) describes how much time is afforded (often tied to how much is available) to complete project work (Lindkvist et al., 1998; Shenhar & Dvir, 2007). Finally, the degree of complexity and interdependencies among tasks in a project system hierarchy can range from single component or product assembly (in a manufacturing process project), through a system comprising many components and subsystems, and to the most complex “system of systems” projects (Hobday, 1998; Shenhar, 2001). Complexity is the dimension most frequently used to classify LIPs, with operationalization of complexity typically based on system scope and interorganizational structure (Davies & Hobday, 2005; Shenhar, 2001). Efforts to define complex projects often refer to Simon's (1962) influential view that organization structures should mirror the complexity of systems they are producing, based on a hierarchy of interacting components (e.g., Davies & Mackenzie, 2014). Building on this idea, Hirschman (1967) emphasized that the complexity challenge is not the size itself, but the difficulty of establishing organizational and governance structures to coordinate, adjust, and fit together components of a project into a coherent whole and adjust to changing conditions and unforeseeable interdependencies. Shenhar (2001) identified three types of projects based on their increasing degree of complexity (and associated increases in scale): assembly, system, and array. A relatively simple “assembly project” (a single component, subsystem, product or service) is often conducted in-house by a small development team. A “system project” is more complex because it consists of many interacting components and subsystems and is often arranged in a platform, with multiple functions that together meet a particular user or operational requirement such as an aircraft or mobile communication network. The most complex “array projects” involve a large collection of systems, each providing a specific function that work together to accomplish a common goal such as large-scale airports, high-speed railways, or the staging of the Olympics. Whereas assembly projects tend to be smaller in scale and conducted internally by a team in collaboration with specialized suppliers, increasingly complex projects require larger and more elaborate forms of interorganizational governance to cope with the challenges of coordinating the integration of multiple components, managing interfaces, and dealing with interdependent tasks (Davies & Mackenzie, 2014; Roehrich et al., 2023; Shenhar & Dvir, 2007). In this perspective, LIPs are often system or array projects, which are typically managed as a large interorganizational “program” of interrelated projects to deliver strategic objectives beyond what individual projects can do alone (Davies & Mackenzie, 2014; Turner & Müller, 2003). System projects are often initiated and managed by a client or prime contractor, with a central project (or program) office established to coordinate the large network(s) of in-house departments and external suppliers, all involved in the design and production of the system project. Systems integration is considered a core capability that organizations must acquire or develop to understand the whole system, manage the interfaces among components and subsystems, and deliver a system that is ready for operations (Bendoly & Cotteleer, 2008; Hobday et al., 2005; Tee et al., 2019; Whyte & Davies, 2023). Array projects, in contrast to system projects, require a large standalone umbrella organization (typically a client, prime contractor, or joint venture delivery partner) established on a temporary basis for the duration of the project (Shenhar, 2001; Shenhar & Dvir, 2007). This organization deals with financial, legal, and political issues, engages with multiple stakeholders (beyond external suppliers to also include organizations such as chambers of commerce, higher educational institutions, and citizens interest groups—Kalra & Roehrich, 2019). It acts as a “meta-systems integrator” to coordinate work undertaken by many contractors within the program (consisting of a multitude of differently sized, interrelated projects with varying degrees of complexity; Davies & Mackenzie, 2014). During the construction of the London 2012 Olympics, for example, the umbrella organization consisted of a client and delivery partner responsible for managing the overall program, along with contractors and suppliers responsible for individual systems projects within the array (Davies & Mackenzie, 2014). Over the past few decades, researchers have used different labels to categorize a new species of increasingly large-scale projects that are immensely important for society but associated with high rates of failure. Morris (1994, 2013) suggested that the capabilities required to manage “major projects” often exceed those of the organizations contracted to deliver them, and successful outcomes depend on careful planning during the front-end phase (see also Lewis et al., 2023). Research on “large engineering projects” around the world found that inadequate front-end strategizing and poor governance contributed significantly to the poor performance (Miller & Hobbs, 2005; Miller & Lessard, 2000). In their studies of “global projects,” Scott et al. (2011) and Levitt et al. (2019) find that stakeholder alignment is difficult to obtain when multiple parties become involved in large and often cross-national and public–private projects. Research on “megaprojects” costing $1+ billion (Flyvbjerg et al., 2003; Merrow, 2011) has shown that the majority of these are delayed and over budget because of unrealistic assumptions, deception, and optimism bias about initial budgets and schedules. In each research stream, projects are characterized as large and interorganizational because they involve many organizations needing to work together to deliver high-value, complex, one-off products and/or services (Bakker et al., 2016; Jones & Lichtenstein, 2008). The fastest growing, and arguably most influential, body of research on LIPs can be attributed to these megaproject examinations (typically system and array projects; e.g., Flyvbjerg, 2014). In most megaprojects, a single client—under public or private ownership—contracts a large engineering firm or joint venture delivery partner to build cooperation and coordinate the interdependent tasks and subprojects performed by networks of organizations (Denicol et al., 2020; Jones & Lichtenstein, 2008). Research on megaprojects has addressed aspects associated with interorganizational governance such as program management (Denicol & Davies, 2022), risk and uncertainty (Sanderson, 2012), collaboration and relational contracting (Davies et al., 2016; Gil & Tether, 2011; Tee et al., 2019), interorganizational architectures (Denicol et al., 2021), and public–private relationships (Kwak et al., 2009). The PM literature tends to use the concept of governance as an umbrella category to describe how relationships among parties in LIPs are arranged and organized (e.g., Denicol et al., 2020), often focusing on practical concerns such as strategy, control, and performance systems (e.g., Bourne et al., 2023). Some PM scholars have, however, started to recognize that there is a need to advance our theoretical understanding of interorganizational project governance (e.g., Müller et al., 2023). As a case in point, the successful set-up and execution of LIPs depend on multiple organizations collaborating over a defined time-period (Roehrich et al., 2023; Roehrich & Lewis, 2014). To grapple with this challenge, it is critical to have a solid theoretical understanding of what this entails. For example, here collaboration refers to organizations voluntarily helping their partners to achieve common (and private) goals (Castañer & Oliveira, 2020). Two facets of collaboration are worth distinguishing both theoretically and practically: (i) building “cooperation” among parties with interdependent tasks and (ii) achieving the “coordination” of those interdependent tasks (Gulati et al., 2012). Cooperation ensures that varying priorities, incentives, and interests are aligned to implement the required interdependent tasks to reach a common goal. Related to cooperation, coopetition refers to the simultaneous pursuit of cooperation and competition to create value (Gnyawali & Park, 2011; Wilhelm, 2011). On the other hand, coordination refers to the effective alignment and adjustment of partners' actions and tasks to jointly accomplish a common goal (Gulati et al., 2012). Collaboration, cooperation/coopetition, and coordination in LIPs are supported and stimulated by governance mechanisms. Contractual governance refers to legally binding, formal agreements specifying the roles and responsibilities of exchange partners (Cao & Lumineau, 2015; Poppo & Zenger, 2002; Roehrich et al., 2020). Contracts are legally enforceable and used primarily to control and coordinate exchange relationships (Ring & Van de Ven, 1992; Williamson, 1985) which includes the delegation of authority, power, decision rights, formal rules and regulations, roles and responsibilities, and standard operating procedures (Cao & Lumineau, 2015; Poppo & Zenger, 2002; Roehrich et al., 2021). While a contract's control clauses (e.g., termination, monitoring, incentives, and disincentives) focus on ensuring that the other party in a relationship will perform in accordance with one's expectations, coordination clauses (e.g., frequency and nature of meetings, specifying roles) support the management of a myriad of interdependent tasks and activities between organizations (Caniëls et al., 2012; Roehrich et al., 2023). Various organizational structures and roles (e.g., lead organizations, hierarchical authority, integrated project teams, advisory boards, and relationship managers) are established as additional governance structures to better support LIPs. Their roles are highly elaborate, relatively stable, and well defined (although flexible) in the contracts governing LIPs (Bercovitz & Tyler, 2014; March & Simon, 1958). Often complementing contractual governance by addressing its shortcomings (Cao & Lumineau, 2015; Oliveira & Lumineau, 2017; Roehrich et al., 2020; Zheng et al., 2008), relational governance refers to emerging, socially derived “arrangements” emphasizing, for example, the emergence of communication and decision-making channels supporting parties' efforts to coordinate and control their actions (Poppo & Zenger, 2002; Roehrich & Lewis, 2014). Relational governance embraces more trust-based social (and moral) norms and rules (Cao & Lumineau, 2015; Roehrich et al., 2020). Social norms and rules are considered to be behavioral guidelines that enforce social obligations in the relationship (Caldwell et al., 2017). The related term of relational contract refers to the shared norms of cooperation and obligation that parties establish informally to control and coordinate exchange processes among parties (Caniëls et al., 2012; Macneil, 1980). Pervasive among a myriad of highly interdependent parties engaging in multiple, sequential, complex transactions, relational contracts build trust among parties (Claggett & Karahanna, 2018) by reducing information asymmetry (Liu et al., 2009), and helping them design more effective contracts in support of collaboration (Mayer & Argyres, 2004). Taken together, contractual and relational governance mechanisms have the potential to completement each other. For instance, organizations engaged in long-term relationships in LIPs become more familiar with each other (Gulati, 1995) and learn to specify more detailed contracts (Poppo & Zenger, 2002; Ryall & Sampson, 2009). Also, specifying rules and responsibilities during the negotiation phase in a relationship may help organizations to get to know each other, build up trust, and have a “knowledge repository” (i.e., the contract) for later phases of the project (e.g., Roehrich et al., 2021; Zheng et al., 2008). Governance mechanisms working in combination may improve the relationship and LIP performance, although their interaction may also lead to increased transaction costs, conflicts, and coordination problems (e.g., Aben et al., 2021; Howard et al., 2019; Kalra et al., 2021; Oliveira & Lumineau, 2017). For example, the study by Caniëls et al. (2012) argues that contractual incentives, hierarchical mechanisms based on authority, and relational or trust-based mechanisms smooth the coordination process and drive efficiencies by reducing transaction or governance costs. This suggests that governance mechanisms must be jointly developed and tailored to each other to obtain improvements in performance and avoid potential negative interactions (Olsen et al., 2005; Roehrich et al., 2020). Despite the potential value that various structures and mechanisms of governance can yield, independently and in concert, the development and application of various governance structures and mechanisms are certainly not without their own challenges. Several distinct, yet interrelated, challenges in particular present promising avenues for future LIP research: (i) the cooperation/coopetition challenge, (ii) the coordination challenge, (iii) the challenge in combining contractual and relational governance mechanisms, and (iv) the governance dynamics challenge. We discuss each of these in turn. As mentioned earlier, collaboration in LIPs depends, among other factors, on cooperation and, by extension, on the resolution of possible conflicts among parties (Bouazzaoui et al., 2023; Caldwell et al., 2009; Engelhart et al., 2023). One of the biggest cooperation challenges in LIPs is, however, aligning participants who have possibly not worked together before, who have limited time available to build cooperation before delivering vital products and/or services for the LIP, and who may also have limited opportunities to work together again in the future. The development of cooperation among parties in LIPs is shaped by “temporal embeddedness” (Jones & Lichtenstein, 2008; Sydow et al., 2004). LIPs are temporary (even when occurring over a long duration of years or even decades) because they have a beginning (including an often long front-end phase—e.g., Lewis et al., 2023) and a defined endpoint. Despite often being standalone and relatively autonomous from the parent organization, each LIP is embedded in a wider organizational and institutional context within which it is undertaken and must be understood in relation to past and future projects (Engwall, 2003). Project-based firms may address this temporal embeddedness by developing project capabilities and routines in-house to sup}, journal={Journal of Operations Management}, author={Roehrich, Jens K. and Davies, Andrew and Tyler, Beverly B. and Mishra, Anant and Bendoly, Elliot}, year={2024}, month={Jan} }
 @article{tyler_lahneman_cerrato_cruz_beukel_spielmann_minciullo_2023, title={Environmental practice adoption in SMEs: The effects of firm proactive orientation and regulatory pressure}, url={https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2023.2218435}, DOI={10.1080/00472778.2023.2218435}, abstractNote={Even with proven benefits of engaging in sustainability, and stakeholder and regulatory pressure to do so, small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) seldom adopt environmental practices beyond those required. To investigate why some SMEs adopt environmental practices while others do not, we studied the proactive orientation–environmental practices link and the moderation of regulatory pressure on this relationship. Based on a survey of 286 SMEs in the wine industry in Italy, France, Denmark, and the United States, we tested our model using regression analysis. We found support for our hypotheses on the positive proactive orientation-environmental practices link and the enhancing role of regulatory pressure. We conducted further supplementary exploratory analyses to examine these relationships among different types of environmental practices. The findings from our study offer new research directions regarding the nuanced roles of proactive orientation and regulatory pressure in motivating SMEs to adopt more environmental practices.}, journal={Journal of Small Business Management}, author={Tyler, Beverly B. and Lahneman, Brooke and Cerrato, Daniele and Cruz, Allan Discua and Beukel, Karin and Spielmann, Nathalie and Minciullo, Marco}, year={2023}, month={Jun} }
 @article{caner_tyler_appleyard_weber_2023, title={Interdisciplinary Problem Solving in Hybrid Organizations: The Implications of Scientific Reputation and Disciplinary Knowledge Diversity}, volume={11}, ISSN={["1558-0040"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2023.3328773}, DOI={10.1109/TEM.2023.3328773}, abstractNote={This research extends the problem-solving perspective of the knowledge-based view by examining the interdisciplinary publication outcomes of individual scientists in hybrid organizations. Whereas prior literature has focused on problem-solving activities in hierarchies (firms), hybrid organizations, including federally funded research programs involving interdisciplinary science, have emerged to address societal issues ranging from public health to climate change. To understand what might contribute to scientists’ performance in such hybrid settings, in this article, we theorize and empirically examine how scientists’ overall scientific reputation and their access to and familiarity with various disciplinary knowledge domains influence their publication output in interdisciplinary journals. We focus specifically on 169 researchers in the eight Nanomedicine Development Centers funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Our analysis reveals that scientists’ scientific reputation is positively related to their subsequent number of publications in interdisciplinary journals. However, scientists’ disciplinary knowledge diversity has a more nuanced association with their number of interdisciplinary publications, contributing more when moderate than when high or low. These findings will help hybrid organizations such as universities and research institutes understand how individual attributes contribute to interdisciplinary research.}, journal={IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT}, author={Caner, Turanay and Tyler, Beverly B. and Appleyard, Melissa M. and Weber, Griffin M.}, year={2023}, month={Nov} }
 @article{pizzo_fosgaard_tyler_beukel_2022, title={Information acquisition and cognitive processes during strategic decision-making: Combining a policy-capturing study with eye-tracking data}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278409}, DOI={10.1371/journal.pone.0278409}, abstractNote={Policy-capturing (PC) methodologies have been employed to study decision-making, and to assess how decision-makers use available information when asked to evaluate hypothetical situations. An important assumption of the PC techniques is that respondents develop cognitive models to help them efficiently process the many information cues provided while reviewing a large number of decision scenarios. With this study, we seek to analyze the process of answering a PC study. We do this by investigating the information acquisition and the cognitive processes behind policy-capturing, building on cognitive and attention research and exploiting the tools of eye-tracking. Additionally, we investigate the role of experience in mediating the relationship between the information processed and judgments in order to determine how the cognitive models of student samples differ from those of professionals. We find evidence of increasing efficiency as a function of practice when respondents undergo the PC experiment. We also detect a selective process on information acquisition; such selection is consistent with the respondents’ evaluation. While some differences are found in the information processing among the split sample of students and professionals, remarkable similarities are detected. Our study adds confidence to the assumption that respondents build cognitive models to handle the large amounts of information presented in PC experiments, and the defection of such models is not substantially affected by the applied sample.}, journal={PLOS ONE}, author={Pizzo, Alice and Fosgaard, Toke R. and Tyler, Beverly B. and Beukel, Karin}, year={2022}, month={Dec} }
 @article{spielmann_cruz_tyler_cerrato_2022, title={Signaling stewardship and the value of family in a brand heritage Identity: A cross-cultural study of wineries}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.08.017}, DOI={10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.08.017}, abstractNote={Brand heritage identity (BHI) has been examined in single corporate cases, often of family firms, in a specific country, to reveal a deep theoretical understanding of the concept and how BHIs are created. Our study complements this research by providing a large-scale empirical study of BHI in family firms across countries. Specifically, using signaling theory as a framework, this study investigates how country-level importance of family values, as well as firm age, influence the use of BHI and drive marketing performance for family businesses. BHI is a signal that helps stakeholders resolve market asymmetries and this signal is bolstered in countries where family is deemed more important. Firm age is an important moderator. The findings demonstrate that in countries where family, as a key social unit, is more important, firms signal competitiveness via BHI, which in turn relates positively to marketing performance.}, journal={Journal of Business Research}, author={Spielmann, Nathalie and Cruz, Allan Discua and Tyler, Beverly B. and Cerrato, Daniele}, year={2022}, month={Dec} }
 @article{andersen_beukel_tyler_2021, title={Learning to Litigate: the Relationship Between Past Litigation Experience and Litigation Outcomes in the Chinese Intellectual Property System}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41471-021-00118-4}, DOI={10.1007/s41471-021-00118-4}, abstractNote={Abstract}, journal={Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research}, author={Andersen, Kristina Vaarst and Beukel, Karin and Tyler, Beverly B.}, year={2021}, month={Dec} }
 @article{spielmann_cruz_tyler_beukel_2021, title={Place as a nexus for corporate heritage identity: An international study of family-owned wineries}, volume={129}, ISSN={["1873-7978"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.05.024}, DOI={10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.05.024}, abstractNote={This paper uncovers the dynamic and reciprocal relationship between corporate heritage identities and corporate heritage brands. Through an examination of the role of place in the marketing strategies of seven family-owned wineries, in six countries, we explain how these wineries use their place to create and incorporate consistency with change in their marketing strategies. The cross-cultural case analysis of multigenerational and long-established, as well as novel and fledgling wineries, showcases how multiple role identities of wineries interact with the relative invariance of place to infuse corporate heritage identities and corporate heritage brands, and vice-versa. The results build on corporate heritage literature by providing an in-depth illustration of the role of place and corporate heritage identity interactions in the development of a firm's marketing strategy. The results are especially relevant for firms offering products anchored in a geographic origin.}, journal={JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH}, author={Spielmann, Nathalie and Cruz, Allan Discua and Tyler, Beverly B. and Beukel, Karin}, year={2021}, month={May}, pages={826–837} }
 @article{gimenez-fernandez_beukel_tyler_spielmann_cerrato_cruz_minciullo_2020, title={Should we patent it or keep it a secret? The moderating role of proactive orientation in family versus non-family SMEs}, volume={10}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266242620965394}, DOI={10.1177/0266242620965394}, abstractNote={We investigate how family and non-family small-and-medium size enterprises (SMEs) differ in their preference for patenting over secrecy as a means to protect value of intellectual property, and how proactive orientation moderates this relationship. Because secrecy carries more risks for spillover than patenting, we propose and provide evidence to suggest that family SMEs are more likely to use patents than secrecy relative to non-family SMEs as a mechanism to protect value. However, proactive orientation can weaken this relationship, since SMEs with a proactive orientation will avoid the disclosure of information required for patenting. Using a sample of 300 SMEs from four countries in the wine industry, we find support for our hypotheses and contribute to both the intellectual property (IP) and SME literatures by explaining how family SMEs relative to non-family SMEs protect the value of IP.}, journal={International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Gimenez-Fernandez, Elena M and Beukel, Karin and Tyler, Beverly B and Spielmann, Nathalie and Cerrato, Daniele and Cruz, Allan F Discua and Minciullo, Marco}, year={2020}, month={Oct}, pages={026624262096539} }
 @article{vogel_tyler_2019, title={Interdisciplinary, cross-sector collaboration in the US intelligence community: lessons learned from past and present efforts}, volume={34}, ISSN={["1743-9019"]}, DOI={10.1080/02684527.2019.1620545}, abstractNote={ABSTRACT How does one design and sustain interdisciplinary, cross-sector collaboration to improve intelligence results for twenty-first century security threats? This paper will analyse five past and present initiatives designed to create interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral collaboration within different agencies of the US Intelligence Community (IC). We will discuss key features of each effort, their successes and challenges, identify common themes and, propose which collaborative model might be most advantageous for a particular type of project based on project constraints. In so doing, we provide direction for IC leaders seeking to improve academia–industry–intelligence partnerships for future planning on intelligence-funded collaborations.}, number={6}, journal={INTELLIGENCE AND NATIONAL SECURITY}, author={Vogel, Kathleen M. and Tyler, Beverly B.}, year={2019}, pages={851–880} }
 @article{sme managers’ perceptions of competitive pressure and the adoption of environmental practices in fragmented industries: a multi-country study in the wine industry_2018, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1086026618803720}, DOI={10.1177/1086026618803720}, abstractNote={ This study explains how managers’ perceptions of pressure from competitors and industry associations to adopt environmental practices are associated with the adoption of such practices, and firm performance in small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in fragmented industries. First, we hypothesize, in fragmented industries, perceived weaker competitive pressure focuses SME managers’ attention on opportunities associated with the adoption of environmental practices, resulting in further adoption of such practices. We also hypothesize that perceived stronger competitive pressure focuses managers’ attention on competitive threats and efforts to maximize value creation from adopted practices, thus, positively moderating the relationship between adopted environmental practices and financial performance. We test our hypotheses with survey data from wineries and vineyards in Italy, France, Denmark, and the United States, and find support for both hypotheses. These findings deepen our understanding of how SMEs in fragmented industries respond to perceived competitive pressure to adopt environmental practices. }, journal={Organization & Environment}, year={2018}, month={Oct} }
 @article{vogel_jameson_tyler_joines_evans_rendon_2017, title={The Importance of Organizational Innovation and Adaptation in Building Academic–Industry–Intelligence Collaboration: Observations from the Laboratory for Analytic Sciences}, volume={19}, ISSN={2380-0992 2380-100X}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23800992.2017.1384676}, DOI={10.1080/23800992.2017.1384676}, abstractNote={ABSTRACT This article discusses the establishment and development of the Laboratory for Analytic Sciences (LAS), a unique site of academic–industry–intelligence collaboration, established in 2013 by the National Security Agency (NSA) and located on the campus of North Carolina State University. Since 2014, the authors have been participant-observers of LAS research teams. This article describes how inter-institutional, interdisciplinary collaboration has developed at LAS, drawing on multi-year data involving observations, surveys, and interviews that the authors have collected. LAS provides an opportunity to study the operationalization of an academic–intelligence collaboration and gather lessons learned in order to inform future collaborative efforts by the U.S. intelligence community. What this article reveals is the importance of organizational innovation and adaptation in light of various challenges that emerge in inter-institutional and interdisciplinary collaboration.}, number={3}, journal={The International Journal of Intelligence, Security, and Public Affairs}, publisher={Informa UK Limited}, author={Vogel, Kathleen M. and Jameson, Jessica Katz and Tyler, Beverly B. and Joines, Sharon and Evans, Brian M. and Rendon, Hector}, year={2017}, month={Sep}, pages={171–196} }
 @article{tyler_caner_2016, title={New product introductions below aspirations, slack and R&D alliances: A behavioral perspective}, volume={37}, ISSN={["1097-0266"]}, DOI={10.1002/smj.2367}, abstractNote={We develop hypotheses based on behavioral theory that explain how high technology firms' new product introduction (NPI) performance below aspiration levels impact the number of R&D alliances, and how slack moderates this relationship. Using panel data of U.S. biopharmaceutical firms, we find that as firms' NPI performance below historical aspiration levels increases the number of R&D alliances they form increases and slack intensifies this relationship. We contribute to alliance research by providing theory and empirical evidence that increases in the distance of NPI below aspirations serve as a motivation for increases in R&D alliances, and empirically to behavioral theory by revealing that NPI goals act similarly to financial performance goals in their impact on firms' actions and slack intensifies this relationship.}, number={5}, journal={STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL}, author={Tyler, Beverly B. and Caner, Turanay}, year={2016}, month={May}, pages={896–910} }
 @inbook{strategic intent_2016, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_398-1}, DOI={10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_398-1}, booktitle={The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Strategic Management}, year={2016} }
 @article{tong_reuer_tyler_zhang_2015, title={HOST COUNTRY EXECUTIVES' ASSESSMENTS OF INTERNATIONAL JOINT VENTURES AND DIVESTITURES: AN EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH}, volume={36}, ISSN={["1097-0266"]}, DOI={10.1002/smj.2210}, abstractNote={A large body of research examines the modes by which multinational firms enter foreign markets, yet little work has considered how host country executives evaluate alternative modes of accepting inward foreign direct investment (FDI). This study adopts the host country firm's perspective to investigate the factors that affect Chinese executives' assessments of international joint ventures (IJVs) and divestitures as different modes for engaging inward FDI opportunities. We use an experimental approach to test our argument that executives' preferences for IJVs versus divestitures are driven by multinational firms' resources as well as potential transaction hazards and available remedial mechanisms. This study complements extant research on firms' entry mode choice by offering a direct test of comparative economic organization by explicitly comparing the attractiveness of alternative modes.}, number={2}, journal={STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL}, author={Tong, Tony W. and Reuer, Jeffrey J. and Tyler, Beverly B. and Zhang, Shujun}, year={2015}, month={Feb}, pages={254–275} }
 @misc{lawson_tyler_potter_2015, title={Strategic Suppliers' Technical Contributions to New Product Advantage: Substitution and Configuration Options}, volume={32}, ISSN={["1540-5885"]}, DOI={10.1111/jpim.12235}, abstractNote={Current theory lacks clarity on how different kinds of resources contribute to new product advantage, or how firms can combine different resources to achieve a new product advantage. While several studies have identified different firm‐specific resources that influence new product advantage, comparatively little research has explored the contribution of strategic supplier resources. Combining resource‐based and relational perspectives, this study develops a theoretical model investigating how a strategic supplier's technical capabilities impact focal firm new product advantage and how firms combine different resources to gain this advantage. The model is tested using detailed survey data collected from 153 interorganizational new product development projects in the United Kingdom within which a strategic supplier had been extensively involved. Empirical results support our research hypotheses. First, supplier technical performance is shown to have a significant positive impact on new product advantage. Next, we show that while supplier technical capabilities have a positive influence on supplier technical performance, the a priori nature of the supplier's task moderates the relationship. Finally, our data support our hypotheses related to the positive relationship between relationship‐specific absorptive capacity and new product advantage, and the proposed negative moderation of supplier technical capabilities on this relationship. Based upon these findings, we encourage managers to recognize that strategic suppliers' with greater technical capabilities perform better regardless of the degree of creativity required by their task; but that strategic suppliers with lower technical capabilities may partially compensate (substitute) for their lack of technical capabilities, if they are able to respond to high problem‐solving task requirements. Furthermore, we suggest that the firm's development of relationship‐specific absorptive capacity is much more important when a strategic supplier is less technically capable. A buying firm's relationship‐specific absorptive capacity can, according to our data, substitute for low supplier technical capabilities. On the other hand, where the supplier has strong technical capabilities, investments in relationship‐specific absorptive capacity have no effect on new product advantage. Our findings reinforce recent calls for research on how firms can combine different resources and capabilities to achieve superior performance.}, number={5}, journal={JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT}, author={Lawson, Benn and Tyler, Beverly B. and Potter, Antony}, year={2015}, month={Sep}, pages={760–776} }
 @article{the effects of knowledge depth and scope on the relationship between r&d alliances and new product development_2015, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12224}, DOI={10.1111/jpim.12224}, abstractNote={In this study, we extend the new product development (NPD) literature that proposes that firms' knowledge depth, defined as the reuse of well understood technical knowledge, and scope, defined as the use of newly acquired technical knowledge, and new knowledge accessed from R&D alliances all positively impact NPD. Building on the knowledge‐based view of the firm, we posit that the impact of firms' R&D alliances is limited when their internal knowledge depth and scope are adequate for NPD needs. We suggest that although firms form R&D alliances to gain the right to access external knowledge of R&D alliance partners, they are not obligated to invest in resources to integrate external knowledge from R&D alliances. We propose that they wait to see if their internal knowledge depth and scope prove sufficient for NPD. If the external knowledge proves to be unnecessary, firms choose not to invest the resources required to integrate this knowledge with their internal knowledge. Alternatively, we suggest an increased impact of R&D alliances on NPD when firms are more limited in their internal knowledge depth and scope. We propose that when knowledge depth and scope prove insufficient, firms make the additional investments required to integrate external knowledge from R&D alliances with their internal knowledge stock. This reasoning is consistent with real options theory as it has been applied in alliance research, where strategic alliances are characterized as real options. We find support for our hypotheses using panel data of 738 firm year observations for 143 U.S. biopharmaceutical firms operating in 2007. Our study contributes to the NPD literature and suggests new directions for future research.}, journal={Journal of Product Innovation Management}, year={2015}, month={Oct} }
 @article{bercovitz_tyler_2014, title={Who I Am and How I Contract: The Effect of Contractors' Roles on the Evolution of Contract Structure in University-Industry Research Agreements}, volume={25}, ISSN={["1047-7039"]}, DOI={10.1287/orsc.2014.0917}, abstractNote={ In this exploratory study of university–industry sponsored research agreements, we investigate how organizational roles direct the relational learning of contracting personnel, which subsequently influences contract evolution. Integrating theory with comments from field interviews, we posit that as scientists gain contracting experience with an exchange partner their focus of attention on knowledge creation supports the establishment of a relationship based on technical competence, behavioral experience, and operational routines that cause the enforcement terms of subsequent contracts to become less detailed. We also submit that contract administrators, because of their focus on knowledge protection (mitigating opportunism and enforcement), primarily accumulate joint governance experience and establish administrative routines that cause the enforcement terms of subsequent contracts to become more detailed. Rich content analysis of monitoring and intellectual property terms of sponsored research agreements supports our theoretically grounded hypotheses. }, number={6}, journal={ORGANIZATION SCIENCE}, author={Bercovitz, Janet E. L. and Tyler, Beverly B.}, year={2014}, pages={1840–1859} }
 @article{alliance portfolio r&d intensity and new product introduction_2013, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/19355181311314761}, DOI={10.1108/19355181311314761}, abstractNote={PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine whether alliance portfolio R&D intensity contributes to biopharmaceutical firms' number of new product approvals and whether alliance portfolio R&D intensity is more positively related to the number of new product approvals for pharmaceutical firms than for biotechnology firms.}, journal={American Journal of Business}, year={2013}, month={Apr} }
 @article{reuer_tong_tyler_arino_2013, title={EXECUTIVE PREFERENCES FOR GOVERNANCE MODES AND EXCHANGE PARTNERS: AN INFORMATION ECONOMICS PERSPECTIVE}, volume={34}, ISSN={["1097-0266"]}, DOI={10.1002/smj.2064}, abstractNote={This study investigates how executives address information asymmetry and adverse selection surrounding international joint ventures (IJVs) and acquisitions. We argue that executives can address such exchange hazards not only through their governance decisions, as prior research indicates, but also through their selection of exchange partners. Our experimental design complements prior research on firms' governance choices in three ways: (1) by incorporating multiple potential exchange partners rather than taking a single partner as given for a realized transaction; (2) by accommodating multiple potential entry modes to address interdependencies across governance structures; and (3) by providing direct evidence on executives' assessments of IJVs and acquisitions. We join together organizational governance research and decision‐making research on IJV partner selection, two literatures that have largely developed separately. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.}, number={9}, journal={STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL}, author={Reuer, Jeffrey J. and Tong, Tony W. and Tyler, Beverly B. and Arino, Africa}, year={2013}, month={Sep}, pages={1104–1122} }
 @misc{reuer_tyler_tong_wu_2012, title={Executives' Assessments of International Joint Ventures in China: A Multi-Theoretical Investigation}, volume={8}, ISSN={["1740-8784"]}, DOI={10.1111/j.1740-8784.2011.00254.x}, abstractNote={Despite the rich set of theories that have developed on international joint ventures (IJVs), little is known about what theoretical criteria senior executives actually incorporate in their judgments of IJV opportunities and partners. Empirical studies have often applied individual theories in a particularistic fashion, rather than recognizing the different theoretical perspectives that boundedly-rational executives may incorporate into their decision models. In this article, we combine decision criteria associated with multiple theories rooted in organizational economics to investigate how top executives process information on IJV opportunities in China. Using an established experimental technique known as policy capturing, we examine how executives cognitively weigh criteria from four prominent theories when making initial assessments of IJVs (i.e., the resource-based view, transaction cost economics, information economics, and real options theory). Our arguments and findings on executives' IJV decision models contribute to decision-making research on alliances and IJVs in China.}, number={2}, journal={MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION REVIEW}, author={Reuer, Jeffrey J. and Tyler, Beverly B. and Tong, Tony W. and Wu, Cheng-Wei}, year={2012}, month={Jul}, pages={311–340} }
 @article{tyler_gnyawali_2009, title={Managerial Collective Cognitions: An Examination of Similarities and Differences of Cultural Orientations}, volume={46}, ISSN={["1467-6486"]}, DOI={10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00795.x}, abstractNote={abstract Using the context of market orientation, we examine how an exemplary business's market orientation culture is reflected in managers' mental models, evaluate how mental models and perceived behaviours differ across hierarchical levels and functions, and compare the cognitive values and beliefs or the cognitive aspects of market orientation culture with behavioural aspects. Results from a rich, multi‐method, case study suggest that while managers in the business share core beliefs regarding the customer dimension of market orientation, their beliefs regarding competitors, technology and inter‐functional coordination dimensions vary widely across the levels and functions of the business. We found differences in terms of both the integration between the four dimensions of market orientation and the depth of knowledge within the dimensions. Our findings reveal that customer rather than competitor beliefs are the most important commonly shared beliefs in successful companies, leading us to encourage cognitive researchers to move beyond competitor analysis when examining managerial cognition. Another implication for future research is that a strong market orientation implies common core beliefs regarding customer dimensions but does not imply that all beliefs will be or should be shared. From the methodological standpoint, we find that cognitive mapping techniques provide rich insights into a business's market orientation culture that are not gained from behavioural methods alone.}, number={1}, journal={JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES}, author={Tyler, Beverly B. and Gnyawali, Devi R.}, year={2009}, month={Jan}, pages={93–126} }
 @article{lawson_tyler_cousins_2008, title={Antecedents and consequences of social capital on buyer performance improvement}, volume={26}, ISSN={["1873-1317"]}, DOI={10.1016/j.jom.2007.10.001}, abstractNote={Abstract}, number={3}, journal={JOURNAL OF OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT}, author={Lawson, Benn and Tyler, Beverly B. and Cousins, Paul D.}, year={2008}, month={May}, pages={446–460} }
 @article{terpend_tyler_krause_handfield_2008, title={BUYER–SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS: DERIVED VALUE OVER TWO DECADES}, volume={44}, ISSN={1523-2409 1745-493X}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493x.2008.00053.x}, DOI={10.1111/j.1745-493x.2008.00053.x}, abstractNote={This paper reviews studies of buyer–supplier relationships published in four prominent U.S.‐based academic journals between 1986 and 2005. Our review revealed that the focus of academic researchers on types of value being extracted from buyer–supplier relationships changed between 1986 and 2005, as did their interest in the buyer mechanisms implemented to create value in these relationships. Although emphasis has changed over time, we found that scholars have primarily investigated four types of value derived from buyer–suppler relationships: operational performance improvements, integration‐based improvements, supplier capability‐based improvements and financial performance outcomes. The review also noted that researchers considered more buyer–supplier mutual efforts since 1996 than the earlier decade, but the number of studies investigating buyer practices has declined as a percentage of total publications. We conclude with a discussion of the review's implications for future research and practice.}, number={2}, journal={The Journal of Supply Chain Management}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Terpend, Regis and Tyler, Beverly B. and Krause, Daniel R. and Handfield, Robert B.}, year={2008}, month={Apr}, pages={28–55} }
 @misc{krause_handfield_tyler_2007, title={The relationships between supplier development, commitment, social capital accumulation and performance improvement}, volume={25}, ISSN={["1873-1317"]}, url={http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-33847682667&partnerID=MN8TOARS}, DOI={10.1016/j.jom.2006.05.007}, abstractNote={Abstract}, number={2}, journal={JOURNAL OF OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT}, author={Krause, Daniel R. and Handfield, Robert B. and Tyler, Beverly B.}, year={2007}, month={Mar}, pages={528–545} }
 @article{lawson_tyler_cousins_2006, title={SOCIAL CAPITAL EFFECTS ON RELATIONAL PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT: AN INFORMATION PROCESSING PERSPECTIVE.}, volume={2006}, ISSN={0065-0668 2151-6561}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2006.27175418}, DOI={10.5465/ambpp.2006.27175418}, abstractNote={Little is known about how social capital accumulates and contributes to relational performance improvements in buyer-supplier relationships. In an effort to understand this process, this study uses an information processing perspective to consider how relational and structural embeddedness contribute to performance improvement in buyer-supplier relationships. Using data provided by 111 procurement executives from the United Kingdom, we find that relational embeddedness and structural embeddedness (reflected in formal and informal communication) are both related to relational performance improvement.}, number={1}, journal={Academy of Management Proceedings}, publisher={Academy of Management}, author={Lawson, Benn and Tyler, Beverly B. and Cousins, Paul D.}, year={2006}, month={Aug}, pages={E1–E6} }
 @inbook{gnyawali_tyler_2005, title={Cause Mapping in Strategic Management Research: Processes, Issues, and Observations}, volume={2}, ISBN={0762312084}, ISSN={1479-8387}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1479-8387(05)02010-2}, DOI={10.1016/s1479-8387(05)02010-2}, abstractNote={Our primary objective is to provide method-related broad guidelines to researchers on the entire spectrum of issues involved in cause mapping and to encourage researchers to use causal mapping techniques in strategy research. We challenge strategists to open the black box and investigate the mental models that depict the cause and effect beliefs of managers, “walk” readers through the causal mapping process by discussing the “nuts and bolts” of cause mapping, provide an illustration, and outline “key issues to consider.” We conclude with a discussion of some promising research directions.}, booktitle={Research Methodology in Strategy and Management}, publisher={Emerald (MCB UP )}, author={Gnyawali, Devi R. and Tyler, Beverly B.}, year={2005}, month={Dec}, pages={225–257} }
 @article{tyler_gnyawali_2002, title={Mapping managers' market orientations regarding new product success}, volume={19}, ISSN={["0737-6782"]}, DOI={10.1016/S0737-6782(02)00144-3}, abstractNote={Research shows that managers' cognitive structures influence their decisions and firm outcomes, and that managers' shared understanding is critical to new product success. Yet, little is known about the content and structure of managers' knowledge regarding their business's market orientation (MO) and how such orientation relates to new product development. By drawing from research on managerial cognition, we suggest that an examination of managers' cognitive maps of their business's MO can provide valuable insights. First, cognitive maps provide information regarding the relative ranking of concepts that managers consider important to new product success. Second, they offer insights about the relationship among concepts by illustrating the causal logic flow, centrality, and strength of the association between concepts. Finally, cognitive maps reveal a gestalt or pattern of managers' understandings. This pattern provides an overall view of their perceptions of their firms' MO. Accordingly, the purpose of this article is to begin developing theory to explain the nature and extent of the sharing of managers' understanding of their business's MO across a company within the context of new product development. We develop several theoretical propositions using established research on market orientation and an exploratory investigation of the cognitive maps of a stratified sample of thirty managers of a highly successful frozen food division of a multinational company. We argue that managers of innovative companies with a history of successful new products in moderately dynamic industries will have established market orientations, as reflected in cognitive maps, which emphasize customer orientations more than competitor or technological orientations. Moreover, we suggest that managers will consistently recognize the importance of interfunctional coordination because it influences the firm's orientations towards customers, competitors, and technology by facilitating sharing of important market information necessary for successful new product development. Furthermore, we propose that the division of labor and functional specialization in a company will result in predictable differences across cognitive maps of managers in different functions and levels of the organization. For example, senior managers are likely to have a more balanced and integrated MO than junior managers, due to their knowledge of organization wide issues. The article also proposes an agenda for scholars interested in investigating the relationship between managers' cognitive maps of their company's market orientation and new product success. We note the importance of studying managers' cognitive structures in different types of industries over time, and how managers' cognitive structures may relate to their company's ability to learn. Managers could use cognitive mapping to recognize and evaluate beliefs that inhibit the sharing and interpretation of information between managers, departments, and levels and could design appropriate interventions.}, number={4}, journal={JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT}, author={Tyler, BB and Gnyawali, DR}, year={2002}, month={Jul}, pages={259–276} }
 @article{tyler_gnyawali_2002, title={Mapping managers' market orientations regarding new product success}, volume={19}, ISSN={0737-6782 1540-5885}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.1940259}, DOI={10.1111/1540-5885.1940259}, abstractNote={Research shows that managers' cognitive structures influence their decisions and firm outcomes, and that managers' shared understanding is critical to new product success. Yet, little is known about the content and structure of managers' knowledge regarding their business's market orientation (MO) and how such orientation relates to new product development. By drawing from research on managerial cognition, we suggest that an examination of managers' cognitive maps of their business's MO can provide valuable insights. First, cognitive maps provide information regarding the relative ranking of concepts that managers consider important to new product success. Second, they offer insights about the relationship among concepts by illustrating the causal logic flow, centrality, and strength of the association between concepts. Finally, cognitive maps reveal a gestalt or pattern of managers' understandings. This pattern provides an overall view of their perceptions of their firms' MO. Accordingly, the purpose of this article is to begin developing theory to explain the nature and extent of the sharing of managers' understanding of their business's MO across a company within the context of new product development.}, number={4}, journal={Journal of Product Innovation Management}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Tyler, Beverly B. and Gnyawali, Devi R.}, year={2002}, month={Jul}, pages={259–276} }
 @misc{tyler_2001, title={The complementarity of cooperative and technological competencies: a resource-based perspective}, volume={18}, ISSN={["1879-1719"]}, DOI={10.1016/S0923-4748(00)00031-X}, abstractNote={Firms today are finding it more and more challenging to maintain a competitive advantage. This paper proposes a middle range, meso-theory that argues that valuable cooperative competencies can complement technological competencies and increase the probability of original technological innovation in dynamic and uncertain industries. Using a resource-based analysis, it is argued that above average cooperative capabilities (i.e. competencies relevant to information processing, communication, knowledge transfer, intra- and interunit coordination, the ability to develop trusting relationships, and negotiation) typically result from unique historical conditions, are ambiguous, and are socially complex. Therefore, they can be expected to provide firms with a competitive advantage that is not easily imitated or competed away.}, number={1}, journal={JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT}, author={Tyler, BB}, year={2001}, month={Mar}, pages={1–27} }
 @article{tyler_steensma_1998, title={The effects of executives' experiences and perceptions on their assessment of potential technological alliances}, volume={19}, ISSN={["1097-0266"]}, DOI={10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199810)19:10<939::AID-SMJ978>3.3.CO;2-Q}, abstractNote={Researchers have only begun to provide explanations of how top executives' experiences and perceptions influence organizational decisions. Drawing from a broad theoretical base, this study tests the contention that top executives' personal experiences (age, educational background, and work experience), their perceptions of their firms' attitudes toward technology and risk, and their perceptions regarding their firms' past success with collaborative technological development influence their cognitive assessments of potential technological alliances. Results from the study suggest that top executives with a technical education place more weight on the opportunities provided by the alliance than those with other types of education. Moreover, executives from firms that are perceived to emphasize technology and to have had success with technological alliances in the past tend to focus more on the opportunities provided by the alliance and less on the riskiness of the venture. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd}, number={10}, journal={STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL}, author={Tyler, BB and Steensma, HK}, year={1998}, month={Oct}, pages={939–965} }
 @article{tyler_steensma_1998, title={The effects of executives’ experiences and perceptions on their assessment of potential technological alliances}, volume={19}, ISSN={0143-2095 1097-0266}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199810)19:10<939::aid-smj978>3.0.co;2-z}, DOI={10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199810)19:10<939::aid-smj978>3.0.co;2-z}, abstractNote={Researchers have only begun to provide explanations of how top executives' experiences and perceptions influence organizational decisions. Drawing from a broad theoretical base, this study tests the contention that top executives' personal experiences (age, educational background, and work experience), their perceptions of their firms' attitudes toward technology and risk, and their perceptions regarding their firms' past success with collaborative technological development influence their cognitive assessments of potential technological alliances. Results from the study suggest that top executives with a technical education place more weight on the opportunities provided by the alliance than those with other types of education. Moreover, executives from firms that are perceived to emphasize technology and to have had success with technological alliances in the past tend to focus more on the opportunities provided by the alliance and less on the riskiness of the venture. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd}, number={10}, journal={Strategic Management Journal}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Tyler, Beverly B. and Steensma, H. Kevin}, year={1998}, month={Oct}, pages={939–965} }
 @article{hitt_dacin_tyler_park_1997, title={Transnational examination of strategic management}, volume={18}, DOI={10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199702)18:2<159::aid-smj870>3.0.co;2-x}, abstractNote={Competitive positioning in a global market requires an understanding of the decision processes and behavioral attributes of executives from different countries. These attributes reflect the executives’ cultural background, the national policies under which they have worked, and their home country’s level of economic development (institutional context). The current research compared strategic decision models of U.S. and Korean executives and the results suggest that criteria employed by the executives from the two countries differ. Differences in institutional context between Korea and the U.S.A. were reflected in the weightings of objective criteria used by the executives. Korean executives emphasized industry attractiveness, sales and market share (because of policies that encourage growth) and U.S. executives emphasized projected demand, discounted cash flow and ROI (because of policies and institutions that focus on profitability). The results suggest the importance of understanding the strategic orientations of international competitors, partners in international strategic alliances and managers of international subsidiaries or divisions. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.}, number={2}, journal={Strategic Management Journal}, author={Hitt, M. A. and Dacin, T. and Tyler, Beverly and Park, D.}, year={1997}, pages={159–167} }
 @misc{tyler_steensma_1995, title={EVALUATING TECHNOLOGICAL COLLABORATIVE OPPORTUNITIES - A COGNITIVE MODELING PERSPECTIVE}, volume={16}, ISSN={["1097-0266"]}, DOI={10.1002/smj.4250160917}, abstractNote={Academic scholars, practitioners, and the public press have reported a number of factors believed to be relevant to decisions regarding technological collaboration. However, little is known about how executives actually weigh and integrate the available information during the evaluation process. This exploratory study uses policy capturing to examine managerial and economic information top executives consider when evaluating scenarios representative of cooperative technology development opportunities. Top executives are found to incorporate information associated with several prominent theories in the strategy literature (e.g., normative strategy, transaction cost economics, options theory). Executive cognitive limitations were also found to influence the evaluations. The study's results suggest a preliminary integrated behavioral model of the factors managers use in assessments of technological collaborative opportunities. Implications for research and practice are set forth.}, journal={STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL}, author={TYLER, BB and STEENSMA, HK}, year={1995}, pages={43–70} }
 @article{understanding strategic intent in the global marketplace_1995, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/ame.1995.9506273265}, DOI={10.5465/ame.1995.9506273265}, abstractNote={In this article we underscore how important it is for corporate players in the world's competitive arena to understand the strategic orientation and intent of competitors, partners, and one's own often nationally diverse management team. We offer several examples to illustrate what it takes to succeed in this arena, and include some advice for companies interested in revising their perceptual maps. Such revisions have become imperative as competition in global industries intensifies, as more companies learn to manage across borders, and as the economies of nation states become interlinked.}, journal={Academy of Management Perspectives}, year={1995}, month={May} }
 @inbook{daft_bettenhausen_tyler_1993, place={New York, NY}, title={Top Manager's Communication Choices for Strategic Decision Making:  Organization Design Implications}, booktitle={Organizational Change, Redesign, and Effectiveness}, publisher={Oxford University Press}, author={Daft, R.L. and Bettenhausen, K.L. and Tyler, B.B.}, editor={Huber, G.P. and Glick, W.H.Editors}, year={1993}, pages={112–146} }
 @inbook{barney_tyler_1992, place={CT}, title={Top Management Team Attributes and Sustained Competitive Advantage}, volume={1}, booktitle={High Technology Management Research Series}, publisher={JAI Press, Inc}, author={Barney, J.B. and Tyler, B.B.}, editor={Gomez-Mejia, L.R. and Lawless, M.W.Editors}, year={1992}, pages={33–47 ,} }
 @article{strategic decision models: integrating different perspectives_1991, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250120502}, DOI={10.1002/smj.4250120502}, abstractNote={Abstract}, journal={Strategic Management Journal}, year={1991}, month={Jul} }
 @article{hitt_taylor_park_1990, title={A cross-cultural examination of strategic decision models: Comparison of Korean and U.S. executives}, volume={1990}, ISSN={0065-0668 2151-6561}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.1990.4978217}, DOI={10.5465/ambpp.1990.4978217}, abstractNote={Competitive positioning in a global market requires an understanding of the decision processes and behavioral attributes of executives from different countries. The current research compared strate...}, number={1}, journal={Academy of Management Proceedings}, publisher={Academy of Management}, author={Hitt, Michael A. and Taylor, Beverly B. and Park, Daewoo}, year={1990}, month={Aug}, pages={111–115} }
 @inbook{hoskisson_hitt_turk_tyler_1989, title={Balancing Corporate Strategy and Executive Compensation:  Agency Theory and Corporate Governance}, volume={7}, url={http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ecn&AN=0256681&site=ehost-live&scope=site}, note={Retrieved from}, booktitle={Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management}, publisher={A Research Annual}, author={Hoskisson, R.E. and Hitt, M.A. and Turk, T.A. and Tyler, B.B.}, editor={Ferris, G.R. and Rowland, K.M.Editors}, year={1989}, pages={25–57} }
 @article{tyler_bettenhausen_daft_1989, title={The Use of Low and High Rich Information Sources and Communication Channels in Developing and Implementing Competitive Business Strategy.}, volume={1989}, ISSN={0065-0668 2151-6561}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.1989.4981011}, DOI={10.5465/ambpp.1989.4981011}, abstractNote={This paper examines how executives of 28 companies gather and distribute information about low cost or differentiation strategies. Low and high rich information sources were used less in more turbu...}, number={1}, journal={Academy of Management Proceedings}, publisher={Academy of Management}, author={Tyler, Beverly B. and Bettenhausen, Kenneth L. and Daft, Richard L.}, year={1989}, month={Aug}, pages={245–249} }