Antecedents of attitude towards online mediation

Turel, Ofir; Yuan, Yufei; Rose, Joe

doi:10.1007/s10726-007-9085-7

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This would require a sufficient sample over many years. A similar process may also be conducted for related fields such as organizational learning (Bontis et al , 2000a, b, 2002), intellectual capital (O'Regan et al , 2001; O'Donnell et al , 2004, 2006, Seleim et al , 2004; Cleary et al , 2007), leadership (Bart et al , 2001; Boehnke et al , 2003), and technology management (McKnight and Bontis, 2002; Chauhan and Bontis, 2004; Serenko et al , 2007; Turel et al , 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cluster analysis of the KM field

Mehrizi

Bontis

2009

Management Decision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The main purpose of this study is to review the knowledge management literature from a content-related perspective using cluster analysis. Design/methodology/approach -A critical analysis of previous review articles in KM provided a conceptual framework with nine dimensions. A survey was then administered to 120 KM authors asking them to review which dimensions they considered in their own research. Findings -Three clusters of KM research were identified as follows: the socialization school, the collaboration school, and the codification school.Research limitations/implications -The study does not consider the dimension of strategic versus operational KM issues nor does it consider any non-Anglophonic research. Practical implications -The three identified clusters accrued from the review provide both scholars and practitioners with a more holistic perspective and better understanding of the main thrusts of their KM initiatives. Originality/value -The research is the first systematic and comprehensive review of KM that provides a cluster analysis approach. Keywords Knowledge management, Literature, Cluster analysisPaper type Literature review IntroductionThe burst of attention paid to knowledge management (KM) in academia over the past several years, and the increasing importance of knowledge assets in today's competitive markets are two major drivers behind the emergence of KM as a critically important domain for both academic researchers and practitioners. The steep increase in the number of publications in the KM domain (Despres and Chauvel, 1998;Serenko and Bontis, 2004) and the large number of practical initiatives in the field of KM (Rigby and Bilodeau, 2007) have created a resurgence of interest. Clearly, in today's knowledge era, intellectual capital and intangible assets play a major role in sustaining competitive advantage (Mayo and

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cluster analysis of the KM field

Mehrizi

Bontis

2009

Management Decision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While some websites, such as eBay, 1 started offering ODR mechanisms through third party service providers (Bunnell and Luecke 2000;Gonzalez 2003;Katsh and Rifkin 2001), there are many other ODR services (listed on http://www.odr.info/ providers.php) that have not prevailed for various reasons. Given that the needed technology is, for the most part, in place (including typically simple secured communication spaces), the usage challenges pertain mostly to the commercialization of the technologies, and to user acceptance of these mechanisms and their corresponding intentions to use the technology (Turel 2006;Turel and Yuan 2005, 2007aTurel et al 2007Turel et al , 2008.…”

Section: A Key Challenge: the Adoption Of Odr Services By Usersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, services that can demonstrate higher fairness, would be better at building trust with users, and ultimately will be more likely to be used (Turel et al 2008). It has been further demonstrated that users decompose online mediation 1 http://www.ebay.com/ services into the human-mediator component and the system component, and use different attributions toward these components (Turel et al 2007).…”

Section: A Key Challenge: the Adoption Of Odr Services By Usersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Online Dispute Resolution Services: Justice, Concepts, and Challenges

Turel¹,

Yuan²

2020

Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Online dispute resolution (ODR) services are e-justice service conduits that utilize, implicitly or explicitly, electronic negotiation systems. They are a key mechanism that may provide a viable solution to the flood of e-disputes, and even for face-to-face disputes that can be resolved without being colocated (e.g., see how courts resolve cases during the COVID-19 pandemic). Justice is important in negotiation processes. It is therefore suggested that ODR services are a viable means to serve justice on the web. In this chapter, we describe the state of e-justice and introduce the need for ODR services. We then present the concept of ODR, its different forms, and its association with negotiation support systems. To this end, we portray a classification of ODR services, give examples of different types of services, and specifically discuss one of the promising types, namely, principle-based dispute resolution services. The chapter concludes with

show abstract

“…This argument rests upon the assumptions of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) that the "perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use" (Davis, 1989, p. 333) of a system is, at least partly, responsible for the benefits it can provide to its users. Consequently, it is argued that the features of a NSS are related to its acceptance of the supported negotiators, which should influence their perceptions of the system and impact their behaviors when using the system (Turel, Yuan, & Rose, 2007). In a recent study, it was further shown that the perceived ease of use and the perceived usefulness of a NSS are interrelated, however, it was also shown that neither perceived ease of use nor perceived usefulness are significantly related to negotiator satisfaction (Wang et al, 2010).…”

Section: Potential Impacts Of Decision Support On Emotional Expressionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A DSS User is a Happy Negotiator

Hippmann

2014

International Journal of Decision Support System Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present work states that the analysis and design of decision support systems should consider their impacts on the emotional behaviors of negotiators. This paper provides a brief literature review with respect to this issue, and an outline of a research framework, which explains how to assess and analyze the dynamics of emotional behaviors in text-based negotiations. Subsequently, it provides some results, which show that a decision support system does not mitigate but intensifies emotional behaviors, toward the end of successful as well as failed text-based online negotiations. It is concluded that the research and design of decision support systems should focus more on the impact such systems have on the emotional behaviors of the supported negotiators.

show abstract

Antecedents of attitude towards online mediation

Cited by 12 publications

References 38 publications

A cluster analysis of the KM field

A cluster analysis of the KM field

Online Dispute Resolution Services: Justice, Concepts, and Challenges

A DSS User is a Happy Negotiator

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About