Output analysis research (panel discussion): why bother?

John M. Charnes,John S. Carson,Merriel Dewsnup,Andrew F. Seila,Jeffrey D. Tew,Randall P. Sadowski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5555/193201.194093

1994-01-01

Abstract:No abstract available.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Output Analysis Research - Why Bother - A Panel Discussion

Jm Charnes,Js Carson,M Dewsnup,Af Seila,Jd Tew,Rp Sadowski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/WSC.1994.717212

1994-01-01

Abstract:In the last two decades, many different techniques have been developed and investigated by researchers for summarizing the output and drawing conclusions from simulation experiments. The lack of practitioner interest in using these techniques has been ignored by some researchers but has become a source of great existential angst among others. Some have suggested that the root cause of this disinterest is a lack of communication between researchers and practitioners. It seems appropriate to look at the different views of output analysis research. This paper is an attempt to (i) determine the level of practitioner usage in the methods developed by output analysis researchers, (ii) find out how the output analytic research is perceived by practitioners of simulation, and (iii) find out what topics simulation practitioners think are important for further investigation or development by researchers. The intent is to discuss these three main issues as well as any other relevant issues.
Resource Allocation in Multi-Divisional Multi-Product Firms

Gong Binlei,Sickles Robin C.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-020-00595-5

2021-01-01

Journal of Productivity Analysis

Abstract:This paper is concerned with specifying and estimating the productive characteristics of multidivisional multiproduct companies at the divisional level. In order to accomplish this, we augment division-level information with inputs that are imputed based on profit-maximizing allocations within each division. This study builds on work by De Loecker et al. ( 2016 ) as well as Olley and Pakes ( 1996 ), Levinsohn and Petrin ( 2003 ) and Ackerberg et al. ( 2015 ), and extends this work by lifting a key assumption that single- and multi-product/division firms have the same production technique for the same product/segment. We estimate the production function and impute input allocations simultaneously in the absence of this key assumption as well as the constant share constraint of the input portfolio. Finally, our approach is applied to estimate the division-specific productivity of firms that compete in five segments of the global oilfield market to better understand the motivation of firms’ investment, divestment, mergers and acquisitions (M&A).
Non-structural and Structural Models in Productivity Analysis: Study of the British Isles During the 2007–2009 Financial Crisis

Binlei Gong,Robin C. Sickles

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-019-00571-8

2020-01-01

Journal of Productivity Analysis

Abstract:The paper compares unrestricted and restricted reduced-form estimates of productivity and efficiency performance constructed from non-structural stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) and the structural models of Olley–Pakes (OP), Ackerberg–Caves–Frazer (ACF), Pakes–McGuire (PM), and Midrigan–Xu (MX). These methods are used to estimate changes in firm-level manufacturing productivity in the British Isles before and after the 2007–2009 financial crisis using the Financial Analysis Made Easy (FAME) data set over the period 2005–2012. The empirical results indicate that overall technical efficiency was not impacted to any substantial degree by the financial crisis, according to all models. The empirical results also indicate substantial agreement in the predictions of productivity growth for the three models. The SFA framework (and related DEA approaches) is used internationally to set tariffs in regulated industries. To have SFA, and the OP/ACF/PM/MX models that are more highly leveraged on economic optimizing assumptions, provide comparable estimates of productivity and efficiency change is reassuring. However, it also would suggest that structural approaches may not provide regulators much new information about efficiency and productivity than would less structural approaches such as SFA, while being less transparent and more difficult to justify to regulators as well as to the courts to which regulated firms often turn for relief from tariffs they perceive to be unfair or onerous.
THE APPLICATION OF CLUSTER ANALYSIS IN STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: AN ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUE

D. Ketchen,Christopher L. Shook

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199606)17:6<441::AID-SMJ819>3.0.CO;2-G

1996-06-01

Abstract:Cluster analysis is a statistical technique that sorts observations into similar sets or groups. The use of cluster analysis presents a complex challenge because it requires several methodological choices that determine the quality of a cluster solution. This paper chronicles the application of cluster analysis in strategic management research, where the technique has been used since the late 1970s to investigate issues of central importance. Analysis of 45 published strategy studies reveals that the implementation of cluster analysis has been often less than ideal, perhaps detracting from the ability of studies to generate knowledge. Given these findings, suggestions are offered for improving the application of cluster analysis in future inquiry.

Computer Science,Business
The Use of Online Panel Data in Management Research: A Review and Recommendations

Christopher O. L. H. Porter,Ryan Outlaw,Jake P. Gale,Thomas S. Cho

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318811569

IF: 13.5

2018-11-21

Journal of Management

Abstract:Management scholars have long depended on convenience samples to conduct research involving human participants. However, the past decade has seen an emergence of a new convenience sample: online panels and online panel participants. The data these participants provide—online panel data (OPD)—has been embraced by many management scholars owing to the numerous benefits it provides over “traditional” convenience samples. Despite those advantages, OPD has not been warmly received by all. Currently, there is a divide in the field over the appropriateness of OPD in management scholarship. Our review takes aim at the divide with the goal of providing a common understanding of OPD and its utility and providing recommendations regarding when and how to use OPD and how and where to publish it. To accomplish these goals, we inventoried and reviewed OPD use across 13 management journals spanning 2006 to 2017. Our search resulted in 804 OPD-based studies across 439 articles. Notably, our search also identified 26 online panel platforms (“brokers”) used to connect researchers with online panel participants. Importantly, we offer specific guidance to authors, reviewers, and editors, having implications for both micro and macro management scholars.

management,business,psychology, applied
Discussion: The NoMax Strategy and Correlated Outputs

Warren Hare,Jason Loeppky,Brian Williams

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1507.08241

2015-07-30

Abstract:This is a discussion of the paper "Modeling an Augmented Lagrangian for Improved Blackbox Constrained Optimization," (Gramacy, R.~B., Gray, G.~A., Digabel, S.~L., Lee, H.~K.~H., Ranjan, P., Wells, G., and Wild, S.~M., Technometrics, 61, 1--38, 2015).

Optimization and Control
Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle.

Michael Diehl,Wolfgang Stroebe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.497

IF: 8.46

1987-09-01

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract:We conducted four experiments to investigate free riding, evaluation apprehension, and production blocking as explanations of the difference in brainstorming productivity typically observed between real and nominal groups. In Experiment 1, we manipulated assessment expectations in group and individual brainstorming. Although productivity was higher when subjects worked under personal rather than collective assessment instructions, type of session still had a major impact on brainstorming productivity under conditions that eliminated the temptation to free ride. Experiment 2 demonstrated that inducing evaluation apprehension reduced productivity in individual brainstorming. However, the failure to find an interaction between evaluation apprehension and type of session in Experiment 3 raises doubts about evaluation apprehension as a major explanation of the productivity loss in brainstorming groups. Finally, by manipulating blocking directly, we determined in Experiment 4 that production blocking accounted for most of the productivity loss of real brainstorming groups. The processes underlying production blocking are discussed, and a motivational interpretation of blocking is offered.

psychology, social
Panel Data Analysis: A Nontechnical Introduction for Marketing Researchers

Arnd Vomberg,Simone Wies

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_19-1

2021-01-01

Abstract:The analysis of panel data is now part of the standard repertoire of marketers and marketing researchers. Compared to the analysis of cross-sectional data, panel data allow marketers to alleviate endogeneity concerns when linking an independent variable (e.g., price) to an outcome variable (e.g., sales volume). The more accurate estimates that result from panel data analysis help improve marketers’ decision-making in focal areas such as price setting and marketing budget allocation. Besides, panel data allow marketers to track customer behavior changes and distinguish real loyalty effects (i.e., same customer repeatedly buys a brand) from spurious effects (i.e., the same number of, but each time different set of, customers buys a brand). This chapter provides a nontechnical introduction to panel data analysis. Marketers will learn how to manage and analyze panel datasets in Stata. They will learn about the focal panel data estimators (pooled OLS, fixed effects, and random effects estimator), their underlying assumptions, advantages, and pitfalls. Besides, we introduce the between effects estimator, the combined approach, the Hausman-Taylor approach, and the first differences estimator as further techniques to analyze panel data. Finally, readers will receive an introduction to advanced topics such as dynamic panel models, panel data multilevel modeling, and using panel data to address measurement errors.
Panel Analysis in Transportation Planning : An Overview

R. Kitamura

Abstract:The advantages, disadvantages, and issues involved in the panel analysis of travel behavior a e discussed. Increased statistical efficiency, possibility of improved prediction, and the ability to observe changes and examine b havioral dynamics, are among the advantages panel data offer. Their disadvantages, on the other hand, stem from the added biases and costs of panel survey, and increased complexity involved in the analysis. Following a discussion f response lags, leads, and other dynamic elements of travel behavior, the paper offers a brief review of statistical methods available for the analysis of panel data. Use of panel data and dynamic models for demand forecasting is then described, followed by sample size, interview frequency, and other considerations in panel survey design and administration.

Engineering,Economics
Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies

Balazs Aczel,Barnabas Szaszi,Gustav Nilsonne,Olmo R van den Akker,Casper J Albers,Marcel ALM van Assen,Jojanneke A Bastiaansen,Daniel Benjamin,Udo Boehm,Rotem Botvinik-Nezer,Laura F Bringmann,Niko A Busch,Emmanuel Caruyer,Andrea M Cataldo,Nelson Cowan,Andrew Delios,Noah NN van Dongen,Chris Donkin,Johnny B van Doorn,Anna Dreber,Gilles Dutilh,Gary F Egan,Morton Ann Gernsbacher,Rink Hoekstra,Sabine Hoffmann,Felix Holzmeister,Juergen Huber,Magnus Johannesson,Kai J Jonas,Alexander T Kindel,Michael Kirchler,Yoram K Kunkels,D Stephen Lindsay,Jean-Francois Mangin,Dora Matzke,Marcus R Munafò,Ben R Newell,Brian A Nosek,Russell A Poldrack,Don van Ravenzwaaij,Jörg Rieskamp,Matthew J Salganik,Alexandra Sarafoglou,Tom Schonberg,Martin Schweinsberg,David Shanks,Raphael Silberzahn,Daniel J Simons,Barbara A Spellman,Samuel St-Jean,Jeffrey J Starns,Eric Luis Uhlmann,Jelte Wicherts,Eric-Jan Wagenmakers,Noah N N van Dongen,Ann Dreber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72185

IF: 7.7

2021-11-09

eLife

Abstract:Any large dataset can be analyzed in a number of ways, and it is possible that the use of different analysis strategies will lead to different results and conclusions. One way to assess whether the results obtained depend on the analysis strategy chosen is to employ multiple analysts and leave each of them free to follow their own approach. Here, we present consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting such multi-analyst studies, and we discuss how broader adoption of the multi-analyst approach has the potential to strengthen the robustness of results and conclusions obtained from analyses of datasets in basic and applied research.

biology
A Marginal Effects Approach to Interpreting Main Effects and Moderation

John R. Busenbark,Scott D. Graffin,Robert J. Campbell,Eric Young Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120976838

IF: 8.247

2021-01-05

Organizational Research Methods

Abstract:This Short Methodological Report builds on research about moderation practices by focusing on a marginal effects approach to interpreting how a main effect is informed by the presence of a moderating variable. Following a content analysis of published studies and a survey of management researchers, our findings suggest there is a great deal of confusion about the ways in which to interpret how a main effect may fluctuate owing to a moderating variable. We therefore provide explicit instructions on how to implement and interpret a marginal effects approach that depicts the nature of a main effect in the presence of a moderator. We use different scenarios and examples to illustrate how researchers can employ the marginal effects technique, which provides an indication of the relationship between the independent and dependent variables over different values of the moderator. We argue and demonstrate that the marginal effects approach helps resolve conflicting findings that may arise from using other prevailing techniques to interpret both main effects and moderation.
The importance of research teams with diverse backgrounds: Research collaboration in the Journal of Productivity Analysis

Hyun-do Choi,Dong-hyun Oh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-019-00567-4

2019-11-07

Journal of Productivity Analysis

Abstract:The Journal of Productivity Analysis (JPA) is a pioneering academic journal that aims to develop new methodologies for efficiency and productivity measurement and apply them into various fields. Collaboration between the contributing authors in JPA who are from various countries, institutes, and disciplines/fields makes it possible to affect the quality of articles. Drawing from bibliographic article information, this paper finds stylized facts from author and keyword networks, and the efficiency of JPA's major authors. We then examine research collaboration effects in JPA by using a research impact measurement technique. Empirical findings show that author and keyword networks changed over time, and that collaboration across various authors, institutional types and continents is positively associated with research impact.

economics,social sciences, mathematical methods,business
Subjective evidence evaluation survey for many-analysts studies

Alexandra Sarafoglou,Suzanne Hoogeveen,Don van den Bergh,Balazs Aczel,Casper J Albers,Tim Althoff,Rotem Botvinik-Nezer,Niko A Busch,Andrea M Cataldo,Berna Devezer,Noah N N van Dongen,Anna Dreber,Eiko I Fried,Rink Hoekstra,Sabine Hoffman,Felix Holzmeister,Jürgen Huber,Nick Huntington-Klein,John Ioannidis,Magnus Johannesson,Michael Kirchler,Eric Loken,Jan-Francois Mangin,Dora Matzke,Albert J Menkveld,Gustav Nilsonne,Don van Ravenzwaaij,Martin Schweinsberg,Hannah Schulz-Kuempel,David R Shanks,Daniel J Simons,Barbara A Spellman,Andrea H Stoevenbelt,Barnabas Szaszi,Darinka Trübutschek,Francis Tuerlinckx,Eric L Uhlmann,Wolf Vanpaemel,Jelte Wicherts,Eric-Jan Wagenmakers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.240125

2024-07-24

Abstract:Many-analysts studies explore how well an empirical claim withstands plausible alternative analyses of the same dataset by multiple, independent analysis teams. Conclusions from these studies typically rely on a single outcome metric (e.g. effect size) provided by each analysis team. Although informative about the range of plausible effects in a dataset, a single effect size from each team does not provide a complete, nuanced understanding of how analysis choices are related to the outcome. We used the Delphi consensus technique with input from 37 experts to develop an 18-item subjective evidence evaluation survey (SEES) to evaluate how each analysis team views the methodological appropriateness of the research design and the strength of evidence for the hypothesis. We illustrate the usefulness of the SEES in providing richer evidence assessment with pilot data from a previous many-analysts study.
Empirical Accounting Seminars: Elephants in the Room

James A. Ohlson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ael-2021-0067

2023-05-11

Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium

Abstract:Attendees of accounting empirical research seminars all too often come to view the conclusions presented in the papers as non-persuasive. This disappointing situation indicates that researchers employ data analysis methodologies which inherently support conclusions they are looking for. Such issues are rarely discussed because many participants have relied on the same methodologies – thus they have firsthand knowledge about the inherent deficiencies. The mantra becomes: "We are all aware of uncomfortable aspects of the methodologies used in our research, so why dwell on it?" Because these potential questions tend to be outside normal and acceptable bounds, I term them "elephants in the room". Five such cases are delineated to illustrate incontrovertible problems therein. To sum it up, the elephants highlight that the purported substantive contents of most published papers will be taken with a grain of salt for the foreseeable future.
On the “Realities” of Investor‐Manager Interactivity: Baudrillard, Hyperreality, and Management Q&A Sessions

Matthew Bamber,Santhosh Abraham

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12539

IF: 3.6

2020-03-11

Contemporary Accounting Research

Abstract:This paper draws on extensive fieldwork to explore the nature, scope, and implications of management preparations for the question and answer session (Q&A) that occurs during a firm's results presentation. Prior literature has associated the value of this encounter with investor–manager interactivity. As such, it is assumed that there are high levels of managerial authorship, ownership, and spontaneity as executives face questions from analysts. Following on, it is generally assumed that this translates into an increased risk of unintended disclosure, through verbal and non‐verbal messaging. However, our data indicate that management engages in vast preparatory work to mitigate the risks associated with real ("original," natural, spontaneous, un‐staged) interactivity. Instead, the Q&A is carefully planned, organized, scripted, and rehearsed. As such, the event is transformed into a hyperreal encounter in the Baudrillardian sense. Despite this, the value of the Q&A is not necessarily impaired. Instead, these managerial backstage preparations arguably make the encounter realer than real. We suggest that the Q&A that we observe (the "copy") is more useful than the original might have been. Our work provides evidence and discussion of two inter‐connected paradoxes: perfection and self‐reference. This study not only raises important questions, challenges, and opportunities for researchers interested in the study of investor–manager interactions, but also speaks to those with an interest in workplace meetings and Q&A more broadly.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

business, finance
Working Paper Series Enhancing Productivity : The Role of Management Practices

Peer-Olaf Siebers,Uwe Aickelin,G. Battisti,Helen Celia,Chris Clegg,Xiaolan Fu,Rafael E. De Hoyos,Alfonsina Iona,Alina M Petrescu,Adriano Porto Peixoto

2008-01-01

Abstract:There is no doubt that management practices are linked to the productivity and performance of a company. However, research findings are mixed. This paper provides a multi-disciplinary review of the current evidence of such a relationship and offers suggestions for further exploration. We provide an extensive review of the literature in terms of research findings from studies that have been trying to measure and understand the impact that individual management practices and clusters of management practices have on productivity at different levels of analysis. We focus our review on Operations Management (OM) and Human Resource Management (HRM) practices as well as joint applications of these practices. In conclusion, we can say that taken as a whole, the research findings are equivocal. Some studies have found a positive relationship between the adoption of management practices and productivity, some negative and some no association whatsoever. We believe that the lack of universal consensus on the effect of the adoption of complementary management practices might be driven either by measurement issues or by the level of analysis. Consequently, there is a need for further research. In particular, for a multi-level approach from the lowest possible level of aggregation up to the firm-level of analysis in order to assess the impact of management practices upon the productivity of firms.
Analyzing Analyst Research: A Review of Past Coverage and Recommendations for Future Research

Matthias Brauer,Margarethe Wiersema

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317734900

IF: 13.5

2017-10-12

Journal of Management

Abstract:As visible and knowledgeable experts who constantly collect, analyze, and disseminate information about the future prospects of publicly listed firms, financial analysts fulfill an important information brokerage and monitoring function for investors. By providing investment advice, financial analysts also influence the demand for a firm’s stock and thus its price. Executives pay close attention to financial analysts’ earnings forecasts and recommendations, so much so that they are frequently criticized for excessive focus on their forecasts at the expense of the long-term interests of the firm. But while research on analysts in strategic management is steadily growing, we lack a coherent understanding of the extent and nature of analysts’ diverse influences on executives’ and investors’ decision making and the context in which analysts operate. This is largely due to the fragmentation of the literature and the absence of prior reviews or meta-analyses of the topic. By organizing, synthesizing, and analyzing extant research efforts on analysts in the various domains of strategic management research, we aim to advance our knowledge on the influence of analysts on firms and investors. Further, we hope that our analyses and recommendations help further increase research coverage on this important organizational stakeholder.

management,business,psychology, applied
Influence Analysis with Panel Data

Annalivia Polselli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.05700

2023-12-10

Abstract:The presence of units with extreme values in the dependent and/or independent variables (i.e., vertical outliers, leveraged data) has the potential to severely bias regression coefficients and/or standard errors. This is common with short panel data because the researcher cannot advocate asymptotic theory. Example include cross-country studies, cell-group analyses, and field or laboratory experimental studies, where the researcher is forced to use few cross-sectional observations repeated over time due to the structure of the data or research design. Available diagnostic tools may fail to properly detect these anomalies, because they are not designed for panel data. In this paper, we formalise statistical measures for panel data models with fixed effects to quantify the degree of leverage and outlyingness of units, and the joint and conditional influences of pairs of units. We first develop a method to visually detect anomalous units in a panel data set, and identify their type. Second, we investigate the effect of these units on LS estimates, and on other units' influence on the estimated parameters. To illustrate and validate the proposed method, we use a synthetic data set contaminated with different types of anomalous units. We also provide an empirical example.

Econometrics,Methodology
Throughput Analysis of Production Systems: Recent Advances and Future Topics

Jingshan Li,Dennis E. Blumenfeld,Ning Huang,Jeffrey M. Alden

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540701829752

IF: 9.018

2009-01-01

International Journal of Production Research

Abstract:Throughput analysis is important for the design, operation and management of production systems. A substantial amount of research has been devoted to developing analytical methods to estimate the throughput of production systems with unreliable machines and finite buffers. In this paper we summarise the recent studies in this area. In addition to the performance evaluation of serial lines, approximation methods for more complex systems, such as assembly/disassembly systems, parallel lines, split and merge, closed-loop systems, etc., are discussed. Moreover, we propose future research topics from the automotive manufacturing systems perspective.
A Guide to Corporate Risk Management

Gordon M. Bodnar,Erasmo Giambona,John R. Graham,Campbell R. Harvey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2479483

2014-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:A number of theories have been proposed to explain why firms hedge. Unfortunately, these theories are hard to test: While we might observe the hedges, it is hard to answer the question of “why” hedging occurs. Our paper addresses the “why” by directly questioning the managers that make the risk management decisions. Our results present a fresh, inside view of corporate risk management. Rather than hedging being conducted solely by “firms”, our results suggest that personal risk aversion in combination with other executive traits plays a key role in whether a company hedges. As such, our results suggest an important deficiency in many modern theories of risk management which ignore the role of the individual manager. These presentation slides are based on our paper "A View Inside Corporate Risk Management". The research paper is available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2438884.

Output analysis research (panel discussion): why bother?

Output Analysis Research - Why Bother - A Panel Discussion

Resource Allocation in Multi-Divisional Multi-Product Firms

Non-structural and Structural Models in Productivity Analysis: Study of the British Isles During the 2007–2009 Financial Crisis

THE APPLICATION OF CLUSTER ANALYSIS IN STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: AN ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUE

The Use of Online Panel Data in Management Research: A Review and Recommendations

Discussion: The NoMax Strategy and Correlated Outputs

Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle.

Panel Data Analysis: A Nontechnical Introduction for Marketing Researchers

Panel Analysis in Transportation Planning : An Overview

Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies

A Marginal Effects Approach to Interpreting Main Effects and Moderation

The importance of research teams with diverse backgrounds: Research collaboration in the Journal of Productivity Analysis

Subjective evidence evaluation survey for many-analysts studies

Empirical Accounting Seminars: Elephants in the Room

On the “Realities” of Investor‐Manager Interactivity: Baudrillard, Hyperreality, and Management Q&A Sessions

Working Paper Series Enhancing Productivity : The Role of Management Practices

Analyzing Analyst Research: A Review of Past Coverage and Recommendations for Future Research

Influence Analysis with Panel Data

Throughput Analysis of Production Systems: Recent Advances and Future Topics

A Guide to Corporate Risk Management