No abstract

PurposeSeeks to understand how differences in national cultures impact on the understanding and meaning of the concept of self‐leadership and its application.Design/methodology/approachFirst, research at the intersection of culture and leadership and Hofstede's culture framework are reviewed. Then the main components of self‐leadership theory are introduced, and how Hofstede's framework can be used to re‐analyze them given differences across cultures is discussed.FindingsWhile self‐leadership remains, in general, a valid concept, its understanding and application is likely to differ across cultures. Specifically, high power distance raises the importance of the symbolic value of tasks and correspondent covert processes of self‐leadership, high uncertainty avoidance makes more explicit the importance of non‐rational and intuition‐based thought processes, collectivism shows the relevance of social relations, femininity reiterates the importance of social relations and non‐rational processes, and long‐term orientation introduces the importance of making time an explicit element.Research limitations/implicationsThere is a need for further research on self‐leadership that investigates the roles of social and cultural relations, communication and language, multilevel interdependencies, and ethics. Empirically there is need for developing a self‐leadership instrument that is relevant and applicable across cultures.Practical implicationsThis paper should facilitate appreciation of a contingency perspective of self‐leadership that requires different modes of application across cultures.Originality/valueThis paper helps fill a gap in the self‐leadership literature. In particular, it can facilitate greater understanding of this concept in cultures other than the USA, where it originated.

We study two prevailing types of take‐back schemes for electrical and electronic equipment waste recycling: monopolistic and competitive. We address key market and operating factors that make one scheme preferable to the other from the viewpoints of recyclers, manufacturers, and consumers. To this end, we model competitive decision making in both take‐back schemes as two‐stage sequential games between competing manufacturers and recyclers. Deriving and computing equilibria, we find that the competitive take‐back scheme often accomplishes a win–win situation, that is, lower product prices, and higher recycler and manufacturer profits. Exceptionally, recyclers prefer the monopolistic scheme when the substitutability level between the manufacturers' original products is high or economies of scale in recycling are very strong. We show that consolidation of the recycling industry could benefit all stakeholders when the economies of scale in recycling are strong, provided that manufacturer's products are not highly substitutable. Higher collection rates also render recycler consolidation desirable for all stakeholders. We also identify a potential free rider problem in the monopolistic scheme when recyclers differ in operational efficiency, and propose mechanisms to eliminate the discrepancy. We show that our results and insights are robust to the degree of competition within the recycling industry.

Cooperation among humanitarian organizations has attracted increasing attention to enhance effectiveness and efficiency of relief supply chains. Our research focuses on horizontal cooperation in inventory management which is currently implemented in the United Nations Humanitarian Response Depot (UNHRD) network. The present work follows a two‐step research approach, which involves collection of empirical data and quantitative modeling to examine and overcome the coordination challenges of the network. Our interviews with members of the network identified several managerial issues for sustainable cooperative inventory management that the UNHRD network pursues. Using a newsvendor model in the context of non‐cooperative game theory, our research has explored member humanitarian organizations' incentive of joining the network, a coordination mechanism which achieves system optimality, and impacts of members' decisions about stock rationing. Our results indicate that behaviors of member HOs do not necessarily align with the UNHRD's expectation. Our results suggest that for system optimality, a system coordinator should carefully assess the circumstances, including demand coefficient and stock rationing. Our research also proposes a policy priority for the first‐best system optimal inventory management.

Faced with large humanitarian emergencies like the earthquakes in Haiti and Japan, aid agencies have to decide how to collect money for their relief work. They can either decide to establish a special fund for the emergency and allow for earmarked donations or they can only allow for unearmarked donations. In this paper, we analyze impacts of this decision on donors, aid agencies, and policy makers. To this end, we compare two prevalent fundraising modes using optimization models: fundraising with the option of earmarking donations and fundraising without an earmarking option. In the earmarked case, we consider a new fundraising challenge, excessive funds raised for certain disaster relief projects. We find that desirable fundraising modes for donors, aid agencies, and policy makers differ depending on levels of several parameters, including an aid agency's utility of a dollar raised, the fundraising cost factor, and donors' unit utility of donations. Allowing for earmarking leads to a lower overall fundraising cost percentage. For emergencies with strong media attention and donor interest, allowing for earmarking of donations is likely to reduce fundraising activities of organizations with low fundraising costs, while it is likely to encourage fundraising activities among organizations with high fundraising costs.