IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/zbw/tuisbw/12021.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

Fairness bei der Performancebewertung in Supply Chains: Eine mehrstufige Literaturanalyse zum State of the Art

Author

Listed:
  • Wöhlert, Lydia

Abstract

Der vorliegende Arbeitsbericht soll den aktuellen Stand der Forschung zum Thema Fairness bei der Performancebewertung in Supply Chains abbilden. Im Mittelpunkt stehen die Fragen, wodurch eine faire Performancebewertung in Supply Chains gekennzeichnet ist und warum die Fairness in diesem Zusammenhang von Bedeutung ist. Durch Berücksichtigung des Fairnessaspekts wird die Supply-Chain-Management-Forschung, die sich traditionell auf die Rationalitätsannahme stützt, um verhaltensökonomische Erkenntnisse bereichert. Im Rahmen der systematischen Literaturrecherche wurde ein nahezu weißer Fleck auf der derzeitigen Forschungslandkarte festgestellt. Um übertragbare Theorien und empirische Erkenntnisse zu identifizieren, wurde der Betrachtungshorizont bei der Recherche anschließend ausgeweitet. Die Methodik und Ergebnisse der mehrstufigen systematischen Literaturrecherche werden im Arbeitsbericht ausführlich dargelegt. Im Zuge der inhaltlichen Literaturanalyse werden diverse Einflussfaktoren auf die individuelle Fairnesswahrnehmung bei Performancebewertungen zusammengetragen. Final werden Wege für die zukünftige Forschung aufgezeigt.

Suggested Citation

  • Wöhlert, Lydia, 2021. "Fairness bei der Performancebewertung in Supply Chains: Eine mehrstufige Literaturanalyse zum State of the Art," Ilmenauer Schriften zur Betriebswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre, volume 1, number 12021.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuisbw:12021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/250055/1/1787983617.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katok, Elena, 2011. "Using Laboratory Experiments to Build Better Operations Management Models," Foundations and Trends(R) in Technology, Information and Operations Management, now publishers, vol. 5(1), pages 1-86, November.
    2. Bruno S. Frey, 1997. "Not Just for the Money," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1183.
    3. Ransikarbum, Kasin & Mason, Scott J., 2016. "Goal programming-based post-disaster decision making for integrated relief distribution and early-stage network restoration," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 324-341.
    4. Joel H. Steckel & Sunil Gupta & Anirvan Banerji, 2004. "Supply Chain Decision Making: Will Shorter Cycle Times and Shared Point-of-Sale Information Necessarily Help?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(4), pages 458-464, April.
    5. Karen Donohue & Özalp Özer, 2020. "Behavioral Operations: Past, Present, and Future," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 191-202, January.
    6. Cohen-Charash, Yochi & Spector, Paul E., 2001. "The Role of Justice in Organizations: A Meta-Analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 278-321, November.
    7. Christoph H. Loch & Yaozhong Wu, 2008. "Social Preferences and Supply Chain Performance: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1835-1849, November.
    8. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2002. "Why Social Preferences Matter -- The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition, Cooperation and Incentives," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 1-33, March.
    9. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    10. 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.
    11. Mohammad Amirkhan & Hosein Didehkhani & Kaveh Khalili-Damghani & Ashkan Hafezalkotob, 2018. "Measuring Performance of a Three-Stage Network Structure Using Data Envelopment Analysis and Nash Bargaining Game: A Supply Chain Application," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(05), pages 1429-1467, September.
    12. Gjerdrum, Jonatan & Shah, Nilay & Papageorgiou, Lazaros G., 2002. "Fair transfer price and inventory holding policies in two-enterprise supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(3), pages 582-599, December.
    13. Chow, Pui-Sze & Wang, Yulan & Choi, Tsan-Ming & Shen, Bin, 2015. "An experimental study on the effects of minimum profit share on supply chains with markdown contract: Risk and profit analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PA), pages 85-97.
    14. Jack, Lisa & Florez-Lopez, Raquel & Ramon-Jeronimo, Juan Manuel, 2018. "Accounting, performance measurement and fairness in UK fresh produce supply networks," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 17-30.
    15. Fulk, Janet & Brief, Arthur P. & Barr, Steve H., 1985. "Trust-in-supervisor and perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 301-313, August.
    16. Chun, Jinseok S. & Brockner, Joel & De Cremer, David, 2018. "How temporal and social comparisons in performance evaluation affect fairness perceptions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 1-15.
    17. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Why Social Preferences Matter - The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition," IEW - Working Papers 084, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    18. I. Jawahar, 2007. "The Influence of Perceptions of Fairness on Performance Appraisal Reactions," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 735-754, September.
    19. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    20. Greenberg, Jerald & Ashton-James, Claire E. & Ashkanasy, Neal M., 2007. "Social comparison processes in organizations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 22-41, January.
    21. Krista Foster & Pooja Penninti & Jennifer Shang & Sunder Kekre & Gajanan G. Hegde & Arvind Venkat, 2018. "Leveraging Big Data to Balance New Key Performance Indicators in Emergency Physician Management Networks," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 27(10), pages 1795-1815, October.
    22. Burney, Laurie L. & Henle, Christine A. & Widener, Sally K., 2009. "A path model examining the relations among strategic performance measurement system characteristics, organizational justice, and extra- and in-role performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 305-321, April.
    23. P. R. Blake & K. McAuliffe & J. Corbit & T. C. Callaghan & O. Barry & A. Bowie & L. Kleutsch & K. L. Kramer & E. Ross & H. Vongsachang & R. Wrangham & F. Warneken, 2015. "The ontogeny of fairness in seven societies," Nature, Nature, vol. 528(7581), pages 258-261, December.
    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. Arunachalam Narayanan & Brent B. Moritz, 2015. "Decision Making and Cognition in Multi-Echelon Supply Chains: An Experimental Study," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 24(8), pages 1216-1234, August.
    2. Li Chen & Hau L. Lee, 2012. "Bullwhip Effect Measurement and Its Implications," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 771-784, August.
    3. Yang, Y. & Lin, J. & Liu, G. & Zhou, L., 2021. "The behavioural causes of bullwhip effect in supply chains: A systematic literature review," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    4. Cantor, David E. & Katok, Elena, 2012. "Production smoothing in a serial supply chain: A laboratory investigation," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 781-794.
    5. Sarkar, Sourish & Kumar, Sanjay, 2015. "A behavioral experiment on inventory management with supply chain disruption," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 169-178.
    6. Li Chen & A. Gürhan Kök & Jordan D. Tong, 2013. "The Effect of Payment Schemes on Inventory Decisions: The Role of Mental Accounting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 436-451, September.
    7. Enrique Holgado de Frutos & Juan R Trapero & Francisco Ramos, 2020. "A literature review on operational decisions applied to collaborative supply chains," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-28, March.
    8. Wang, Xun & Disney, Stephen M., 2016. "The bullwhip effect: Progress, trends and directions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(3), pages 691-701.
    9. Zhao, Yingshuai & Zhao, Xiaobo, 2015. "On human decision behavior in multi-echelon inventory management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 116-128.
    10. Ancarani, A. & Di Mauro, C. & D'Urso, D., 2013. "A human experiment on inventory decisions under supply uncertainty," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 61-73.
    11. Haines, Russell & Hough, Jill & Haines, Douglas, 2017. "A metacognitive perspective on decision making in supply chains: Revisiting the behavioral causes of the bullwhip effect," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 7-20.
    12. Yufei Ren & Rachel Croson, 2013. "Overconfidence in Newsvendor Orders: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(11), pages 2502-2517, November.
    13. Kim, Ilhyung & Springer, Mark, 2008. "Measuring endogenous supply chain volatility: Beyond the bullwhip effect," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 172-193, August.
    14. Carlo Borzaga & Ermanno Tortia, 2004. "Worker involvement in entrepreneurial nonprofit organizations. Toward a new assessment of workers' perceived satisfaction and fairness," Department of Economics Working Papers 0409, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    15. Ma, Yungao & Wang, Nengmin & He, Zhengwen & Lu, Jizhou & Liang, Huigang, 2015. "Analysis of the bullwhip effect in two parallel supply chains with interacting price-sensitive demands," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(3), pages 815-825.
    16. Lin, Jinchai & Fan, Ruguo & Tan, Xianchun & Zhu, Kaiwei, 2021. "Dynamic decision and coordination in a low-carbon supply chain considering the retailer's social preference," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    17. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2019. "How Do Social Preferences and Norms of Reciprocity affect Generalized and Particularized Trust?," CLTS Working Papers 8/19, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 10 Oct 2019.
    18. Xuanming Su, 2008. "Bounded Rationality in Newsvendor Models," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 566-589, May.
    19. Rana Azghandi & Jacqueline Griffin & Mohammad S. Jalali, 2018. "Minimization of Drug Shortages in Pharmaceutical Supply Chains: A Simulation-Based Analysis of Drug Recall Patterns and Inventory Policies," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-14, December.
    20. Brice Corgnet & Brian Gunia & Roberto Hernán González, 2021. "Harnessing the power of social incentives to curb shirking in teams," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 139-167, February.

    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:zbw:tuisbw:12021. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwtuide.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.