- Email: [email protected]
On the importance of revisiting what we (thought we) already knew
Journal of Operations Management 41 (2016) 62
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Operations Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jom
Editorial
On the importance of revisiting what we (thought we) already knew a b s t r a c t In this JOM Forum article, three operations management scholars and production geography pioneers Kasra Ferdows, Ann Vereecke, and Arnoud De Meyer discuss the challenge and the complexity of managing geographically dispersed operations. © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
In this JOM Forum article, three production geography pioneersdKasra Ferdows, Ann Vereecke, and Arnoud De Meyerdargue that the operations management (OM) literature has struggled with keeping up with the growing complexity of global production networks. I fully concur with this assessment, and it is reminiscent of Brynjolfsson and Saunders' (2009, p. 95) observation that “we know less about the sources of value than we did 25 years ago.” The problem is not scarcity of research attention; the challenge lies in the fact that the speed at which the real world changes may well outpace our research efforts. This important realization confirms the part of JOM's editorial policy that suggests that novel contributions are not limited to emerging, new phenomena. Instead, we can find much novelty in examinations of well-established research questions as well. Production geography is a great example. Starting with their early work on geographically dispersed operations almost 30 years ago, Kasra, Ann, and Arnoud have devoted a good part of their careers to helping OM scholars and practitioners understand the complexity of within-firm production networks (e.g., Ferdows, 1989, 2006; Vereecke et al., 2006). The fundamental question is simple, yet its implications complex: What do firms know and how should the within-firm production network be designed and structured to leverage this knowhow? There is much to like about this framing of the production geography question. Most importantly, it is empirically rigorous and disciplined, because it is precisely how authentic managers actually think about the issues. Perhaps the idea that managers make location decisions by “ranking” various location-based factorsdanother prominent approach to production geographydis not how the question
DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2015.11.006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2015.11.007 0272-6963/© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
should be addressed, particularly if the goal is to understand authentic, complex decision situations. In this paper, the authors suggestdas they have emphasized in their work throughout their careersda rather different, although by no means mutually exclusive approach. The research strategy promoted is important particularly because of all the research approaches to production geography, this particular one can shed light on how decisionmakers in authentic managerial situations cope with the complexity of the challenge. This has paved the way for managerially relevant research in the past, and I hope this contribution to the Forum encourages OM scholars to continue contributing to this important research program in the future as well. References Brynjolfsson, E., Saunders, A., 2009. What the GDP gets wrong (Why managers should care). MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 51, 95e96. Ferdows, K., 1989. Mapping international factory networks. In: Ferdows, K. (Ed.), Managing International Manufacturing. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp. 3e21. Ferdows, K., 2006. Transfer of changing production know-how. Prod. Opera. Manag. 6, 1e9. Vereecke, A., Van Dierdonck, R., De Meyer, A., 2006. A typology of plants in global manufacturing networks. Manag. Sci. 52, 1737e1750.
Mikko Ketokivi IE Business School - IE University, Spain E-mail address: [email protected]. 16 November 2015
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Operations Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jom
Editorial
On the importance of revisiting what we (thought we) already knew a b s t r a c t In this JOM Forum article, three operations management scholars and production geography pioneers Kasra Ferdows, Ann Vereecke, and Arnoud De Meyer discuss the challenge and the complexity of managing geographically dispersed operations. © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
In this JOM Forum article, three production geography pioneersdKasra Ferdows, Ann Vereecke, and Arnoud De Meyerdargue that the operations management (OM) literature has struggled with keeping up with the growing complexity of global production networks. I fully concur with this assessment, and it is reminiscent of Brynjolfsson and Saunders' (2009, p. 95) observation that “we know less about the sources of value than we did 25 years ago.” The problem is not scarcity of research attention; the challenge lies in the fact that the speed at which the real world changes may well outpace our research efforts. This important realization confirms the part of JOM's editorial policy that suggests that novel contributions are not limited to emerging, new phenomena. Instead, we can find much novelty in examinations of well-established research questions as well. Production geography is a great example. Starting with their early work on geographically dispersed operations almost 30 years ago, Kasra, Ann, and Arnoud have devoted a good part of their careers to helping OM scholars and practitioners understand the complexity of within-firm production networks (e.g., Ferdows, 1989, 2006; Vereecke et al., 2006). The fundamental question is simple, yet its implications complex: What do firms know and how should the within-firm production network be designed and structured to leverage this knowhow? There is much to like about this framing of the production geography question. Most importantly, it is empirically rigorous and disciplined, because it is precisely how authentic managers actually think about the issues. Perhaps the idea that managers make location decisions by “ranking” various location-based factorsdanother prominent approach to production geographydis not how the question
DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2015.11.006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2015.11.007 0272-6963/© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
should be addressed, particularly if the goal is to understand authentic, complex decision situations. In this paper, the authors suggestdas they have emphasized in their work throughout their careersda rather different, although by no means mutually exclusive approach. The research strategy promoted is important particularly because of all the research approaches to production geography, this particular one can shed light on how decisionmakers in authentic managerial situations cope with the complexity of the challenge. This has paved the way for managerially relevant research in the past, and I hope this contribution to the Forum encourages OM scholars to continue contributing to this important research program in the future as well. References Brynjolfsson, E., Saunders, A., 2009. What the GDP gets wrong (Why managers should care). MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 51, 95e96. Ferdows, K., 1989. Mapping international factory networks. In: Ferdows, K. (Ed.), Managing International Manufacturing. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp. 3e21. Ferdows, K., 2006. Transfer of changing production know-how. Prod. Opera. Manag. 6, 1e9. Vereecke, A., Van Dierdonck, R., De Meyer, A., 2006. A typology of plants in global manufacturing networks. Manag. Sci. 52, 1737e1750.
Mikko Ketokivi IE Business School - IE University, Spain E-mail address: [email protected]. 16 November 2015