IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fgv/eaerae/v52y2012i5a30420.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Teoria da ação racional na competência de melhoria contínua: abordagem comportamental

Author

Listed:
  • Yen-Tsang, Chen
  • Csillag, João Mário
  • Siegler, Janaina

Abstract

The importance of interaction between Operations Management (OM) and Human Behavior has been recently re-addressed. This paper introduced the Reasoned Action Theory suggested by Froehle and Roth (2004) to analyze Operational Capabilities exploring the suitability of this model in the context of OM. It also seeks to discuss the behavioral aspects of operational capabilities from the perspective of organizational routines. This theory was operationalized using Fishbein and Ajzen (F/A) behavioral model and a multi-case strategy was employed to analyze the Continuous Improvement (CI) capability. The results posit that the model explains partially the CI behavior in an operational context and some contingency variables might influence the general relations among the variables involved in the F/A model. Thus intention might not be the determinant variable of behavior in this context.

Suggested Citation

  • Yen-Tsang, Chen & Csillag, João Mário & Siegler, Janaina, 2012. "Teoria da ação racional na competência de melhoria contínua: abordagem comportamental," RAE - Revista de Administração de Empresas, FGV-EAESP Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo (Brazil), vol. 52(5), September.
    • Handle: RePEc:fgv:eaerae:v:52:y:2012:i:5:a:30420
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/ojs/index.php/rae/article/view/30420
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Takehiko Isobe & Shige Makino & David Montgomery, 2008. "Technological capabilities and firm performance: The case of small manufacturing firms in Japan," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 413-428, September.
    2. Choi, Ty, 1995. "Conceptualizing continuous improvement: Implications for organizational change," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 607-624, December.
    3. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    4. Gero Schwenk & Guido Möser, 2009. "Intention and behavior: a Bayesian meta-analysis with focus on the Ajzen–Fishbein Model in the field of environmental behavior," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 743-755, September.
    5. John Boudreau & Wallace Hopp & John O. McClain & L. Joseph Thomas, 2003. "On the Interface Between Operations and Human Resources Management," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 179-202, September.
    6. Rachel Croson & Karen Donohue, 2006. "Behavioral Causes of the Bullwhip Effect and the Observed Value of Inventory Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 323-336, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Karen Donohue & Özalp Özer, 2020. "Behavioral Operations: Past, Present, and Future," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 191-202, January.
    2. Perez-Franco, R. & Phadnis, S. & Caplice, C. & Sheffi, Y., 2016. "Rethinking supply chain strategy as a conceptual system," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 384-396.
    3. Tom F. Tan & Bradley R. Staats, 2020. "Behavioral Drivers of Routing Decisions: Evidence from Restaurant Table Assignment," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(4), pages 1050-1070, April.
    4. Francesca Gino & Gary Pisano, 2008. "Toward a Theory of Behavioral Operations," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 676-691, March.
    5. Michael Becker‐Peth & Kai Hoberg & Margarita Protopappa‐Sieke, 2020. "Multiperiod Inventory Management with Budget Cycles: Rational and Behavioral Decision‐Making," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(3), pages 643-663, March.
    6. Malodia, Suresh & Dhir, Amandeep & Mishra, Mahima & Bhatti, Zeeshan Ahmed, 2021. "Future of e-Government: An integrated conceptual framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    7. Srinagesh Gavirneni & Yusen Xia, 2009. "Anchor Selection and Group Dynamics in Newsvendor Decisions---A Note," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 87-97, June.
    8. Feng-Hsu Liu & Hung-Tai Tsou & Lu-Jui Chen, 2013. "The impact of OEM supplier initiatives on buyer competence development: The moderating roles of collaborative relationship and competitive environment," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 1285-1303, December.
    9. Swen Nadkarni & Reinhard Prügl, 2021. "Digital transformation: a review, synthesis and opportunities for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 233-341, April.
    10. Panagiotis Trivellas & Georgios Malindretos & Panagiotis Reklitis, 2020. "Implications of Green Logistics Management on Sustainable Business and Supply Chain Performance: Evidence from a Survey in the Greek Agri-Food Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-29, December.
    11. Jiatong Yu & Jiajue Wang & Taesoo Moon, 2022. "Influence of Digital Transformation Capability on Operational Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-20, June.
    12. Chin‐jung Luan & Chengli Tien & Pei‐hua Wu, 2013. "Strategizing Environmental Policy and Compliance for Firm Economic Sustainability: Evidence from Taiwanese Electronics Firms," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(8), pages 517-546, December.
    13. Adrian Gourlay & Jonathan Seaton, 2004. "The determinants of firm diversification in UK quoted companies," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(18), pages 2059-2071.
    14. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    15. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.
    16. Filippo Carlo Wezel & Gino Cattani & Johannes M. Pennings, 2006. "Competitive Implications of Interfirm Mobility," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(6), pages 691-709, December.
    17. Christiana Müller & Stefan Vorbach, 2015. "Enabling Business Model Change: Evidence from High-Technology Firms," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 11(1), pages 53-75.
    18. Muhammad Farooq Islam & Ozge Can, 2024. "Integrating digital and sustainable entrepreneurship through business models: a bibliometric analysis," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, December.
    19. Cécile Fonrouge & Cécile Ayerbe, 2005. "Les transitions entre innovations : études de cas et proposition d'une grille d'interprétation," Post-Print halshs-00696111, HAL.
    20. Helena Holter Antonsen & Dag Øivind Madsen, 2021. "Developing a Maturity Model for the Compliance Function of Investment Firms: A Preliminary Case Study from Norway," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-34, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fgv:eaerae:v:52:y:2012:i:5:a:30420. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Núcleo de Computação da FGV EPGE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eagvfbr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.