No abstract

The coordination required to successfully implement supply chain initiatives suggest that supply chain management change processes may possess some unique characteristics. Yet, empirical studies are scarce to support this logic. Using an empirical design and data obtained from managers, and drawing largely from Lewin's change process conceptualization, this study compares the process of supply chain management change to non‐supply chain management change. Further investigation into monitoring and control of supply chain management change is advised.

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to investigate follow‐up as a salient factor in achieving results from organizational self‐assessment.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from 14 organizations involved in self‐assessment. Qualitative methods were used to analyze the follow‐up patterns in high and low achievers to discern key factors of follow‐up and their relationship to self‐assessment outcomes.FindingsThe paper finds that high achievers appeared to engage in a consistent set of follow‐up activities. These activities included top management team dialogue that set the tone for follow‐up, a planning process that generated a large, documented action plan, and incentive and monitoring‐based implementation controls using existing structure.Research limitations/implicationsSmall sample size limits the generalizability of the findings. Larger empirical studies could evaluate the strength of the relationships between the factors of follow‐up and outcomes. Future research should also investigate why some organizations undertake follow‐up while others do not. Plausibly, degree of follow‐up might relate to uncertainty facing the organization, or the extent to which managers understand organizational processes.Practical implicationsAn organization can execute a picture perfect self‐assessment analysis and still realize little benefit if it does not effectively follow‐up on the findings. Effective follow‐up is driven by top‐management and cannot be delegated.Originality/valueThis paper extends the literature by elaborating the role of follow‐up in the self‐assessment process.

Although the relevance of management control systems to successful change achievement has been conceptually acknowledged, empirical matters such as measuring the contribution of control systems to effective change implementation lack practical investigation. Using data obtained from managers in 22 organizations, we explore the extent to which managers believe their management control systems are employed when implementing planned change. Relationships between commonly employed management controls and implementation success are also estimated. Results indicated that managers used management control systems less extensively than other elements of change process, although usage of control systems increased with implementation. A strong relationship was found between the use of control systems based on outcomes monitoring and implementation success. However, there was no significant relationship between the use of behavior-based controls and implementation success. Overall, the findings suggest that many organizations may underutilize formal controls, particularly those related to outcomes monitoring, when managing change.

The purpose of this article is to review the literature on three prominent theories in consumer financial behavior. The theories are the life‐cycle theory, prospect theory, and theory of consumer socialization. The review of literature is interdisciplinary in nature (e.g. papers are reviewed from family and consumer science, economics, business, and other related disciplines). Each theory is explained and the major applications of each theory are described. Suggestions for future research are proposed.