Grabbing pizza with coworkers isn’t just fun — it could boost your teamwork skills
Study highlights benefits of shared experiences among different employee groups
Binghamton University
image:
New research from Binghamton University reveals that grabbing pizza with your coworkers i.e. having shared memories can improve teamwork.
view moreCredit: Binghamton University, State University of New York
BINGHAMTON, N.Y. -- In an office full of new coworkers, someone suggests going out for pizza. One person is extra hungry and gobbles up a slice too fast, burning the roof of his mouth in the process.
Has something like this ever happened to you? It’s an embarrassing moment at first, but later on, it becomes a story you joke about at the office – and possibly, it could mean much more.
Forming memories around shared experiences, whether something fun like grabbing a pizza or as emotionally straining as an employee strike, has a way of binding people together. But, as Binghamton University, State University of New York Assistant Professor Matthew Lyle helped uncover in a new study, it could also motivate those performing different roles within the same company to socialize more and strengthen their working relationships.
The study’s results could help managers understand the importance of encouraging shared memories in cross-occupational coordination at their workplace. In other words: it’s a good idea for employees to form shared memories with their colleagues.
“One major takeaway from this research is that, for larger projects involving people in different occupations or experience levels within the same company, you’ll need some kind of shared experience that enables them not only to work more effectively together but also be more comfortable sharing their ideas,” said Lyle, an expert in organizational strategy. “It could also be like a double-edged sword in a way because, if the event is strong enough to bring people together, it could also disrupt established groups.”
The study, “‘We Can Win This Fight Together’: Memory and Cross-Occupational Coordination,” was published in the Journal of Management Studies.
How a strike in South Korea helped researchers
Lyle and fellow researchers framed their study around the case of a 170-day strike in 2012 at a South Korean public broadcaster, which they anonymized as “TelvCorp” for the study. Over the years, the broadcaster employed multiple occupations and garnered prestigious awards, won primarily by reporters.
The strike happened after reporters viewed action by South Korea’s then-recently-elected conservative government in 2008 as a threat, believing their CEO had been replaced by a pro-administration figure to gain more favorable coverage. The new CEO, a former TelvCorp employee, was accused by staff of promoting executives and managers to monitor news programs and remove content perceived as critical of the government. Reporters decided to strike.
Lyle’s study noted that TelvCorp’s non-reporters were initially hesitant to participate fully due to their memories of reporters having been self-serving and ego-driven during past strikes. However, the CEO’s decision to fire union leaders, which those across occupational boundaries discussed and commonly remembered as a “call to arms,” catalyzed intense collaboration. These different groups had become what researchers call a “mnemonic community,” or group that remembers together, that endured long after the strike ended.
Unfortunately, the news was not all positive. Lyle and fellow researchers found a divide had emerged between those who went on strike and those who didn’t.
“When the strike was over, the situation became more complicated because things were unlikely to go back to the way they were at that workplace,” he said. “Now, there’s a new group after the strike, with some people saying they could no longer see colleagues who chose an opposite side in the strike as good people.”
How this research helps improve office teamwork
While Lyle and his fellow researchers reached these conclusions by studying a single organization, he believes there are lessons to be pulled from their analysis that might broadly aid organizations.
For instance, Lyle said a strong, perhaps unorthodox experience is more likely to encourage collaborative work. For example, in describing a hypothetical company retreat, Lyle mentioned how remembering “when Jenny fell off the rope swing, or when Jim face-planted trying to do that” could form a core memory that makes members more willing to work together.
While Lyle admitted those types of memories may sound juvenile or unnecessary, they form the basis of shared memories that help when people sit down at work to decide how to tackle a problem together. The gobbling of the hot pizza, then, could become a memory with lasting implications.
“When you’re in the in-group, you’re more likely to help each other out and have each other’s backs,” Lyle said. “We know we can create those things artificially, but why not create them around some shared experience that makes a memory, that makes people want to work together?”
Journal
Journal of Management Studies
Method of Research
Data/statistical analysis
Subject of Research
People
Article Title
‘We Can Win this Fight Together’: Memory and Cross-Occupational Coordination
How retailers change ordering strategy when a supplier starts its own direct channel
Researchers from Erasmus University and KU Leuven published a new Journal of Marketing study that examines how retailers respond when suppliers establish direct channels to reach end-consumers and how suppliers can take steps to avoid a backlash.
The study, forthcoming in the Journal of Marketing, is titled “How Retailers Change Ordering Strategies When Suppliers Go Direct” and is authored by Michiel Van Crombrugge, Els Breugelmans, Femke Gryseels, and Kathleen Cleeren.
Recently, Sony began selling PlayStation products through its PlayStation Direct online store in the UK, which includes many products available at major retail stores such as Currys and Argos. This is an example of encroachment, when suppliers like Sony, Nike, and Lego establish their own direct channels to reach end-consumers. Such direct channels offer suppliers visibility and control over the customer experience, but they potentially come at the cost of upsetting downstream retail partners who may perceive the direct channel as competition.
This raises an important question for suppliers: Will retailers change their ordering strategies at the encroaching supplier, and if so, how?
Should retailers respond adversely and disengage from the retailer-supplier relationship, typically leading to decreased orders and higher wholesale prices (i.e., an exit response)? Or should they respond cooperatively and engage in constructive discussions with the supplier to seek improved terms of trade, typically leading to lower wholesale prices and increased orders (i.e., a voice response)?
This new study analyzes the ordering strategy responses of nearly 2,000 retailers that were confronted with a supplier’s launch of their own webshop in the toy industry. The research team finds that, on average, retailers choose an exit response to a supplier direct channel introduction.
Van Crombrugge states, “our findings show that, on average, retailers disengage from the retailer–supplier relationship. The average retailer decreases the number of distinct SKUs ordered, which is met by the wholesaler increasing prices, possibly reflecting the worsened terms of trade.” Specifically, retailers decrease the number of distinct SKUs ordered by 15 (or 18.75%) in the period after the direct channel entry. Possibly due to these fewer orders, they also pay a higher average wholesale price of €.79 (or 20.84%). The increased wholesale price, however, does not compensate for the loss in quantity ordered. The total order value for the average retailer at the supplier decreases by €399.50 (or 11.69%) in the first six months after the direct channel entry.
The Importance of Retailer Power
Such an adverse reaction is troublesome for the encroaching supplier, yet not all retailers respond the same way. “Our studies provide clear evidence that retailer power is a key driver of ordering strategy responses,” Breugelmans says, “such that larger, powerful retailers are much less likely to exit the retailer–supplier relationship than less powerful retailers. In fact, for the largest retailers, we observe no change in order value.”
Gryseels explains that, “one mechanism underlying this finding is confidence from powerful retailers that the supplier will continue to support their retail operations despite the introduction of the direct channel.” Specialist retailers differ from generalist retailers in their ordering response depending on two countervailing forces.
- Specialists experience higher switching costs because these specialized, go-to retailers cannot afford to exclude the brands of important suppliers, which makes it harder to disengage from the relationship.
- On the flip side, specialists perceive more channel conflict than generalists because the direct channel threatens their core business, which can evoke stronger emotional inclinations to disengage.
The weights of these two mechanisms determine the specialist retailer’s ultimate decision. Cleeren adds that, “we find the relationship quality between the supplier and retailer to have a substantially lower effect on a retailer’s response than expected. Only when the relationship is particularly strong are we able to find the expected mitigating effect on a retailer’s exit response.”
Lessons for Chief Marketing Officers
These findings offer important insights and caveats to suppliers that consider selling directly to end-consumers.
- Introducing direct channels may provide suppliers with opportunities to get closer to their end-customers, but the backlash by retailers makes this step risky because retailers may significantly reduce their orders.
- Smaller retailers with less power are more likely to disengage from the relationship after encroachment, driven mainly by their lack of confidence in the supplier.
- Suppliers should pay special attention to smaller retailers and design specific incentives and stimuli to increase their confidence and convince them to keep placing orders. This will sacrifice some short-term profits, but it provides retailers with a credible signal that the supplier wants to minimize the potential harm from the direct channel.
The supplier might reduce the competition created by the direct channel through differentiation. The extent to which channels compete depends on their similarity, in terms of product, price, and/or service. This means the supplier can clearly differentiate what it offers through retailers versus through its direct channel (e.g., channel-specific exclusives, online-only personalization services) to limit competition.
Full article and author contact information available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429241266576
About the Journal of Marketing
The Journal of Marketing develops and disseminates knowledge about real-world marketing questions useful to scholars, educators, managers, policy makers, consumers, and other societal stakeholders around the world. Published by the American Marketing Association since its founding in 1936, JM has played a significant role in shaping the content and boundaries of the marketing discipline. Shrihari (Hari) Sridhar (Joe Foster ’56 Chair in Business Leadership, Professor of Marketing at Mays Business School, Texas A&M University) serves as the current Editor in Chief. https://www.ama.org/jm
About the American Marketing Association (AMA)
As the leading global professional marketing association, the AMA is the essential community for marketers. From students and practitioners to executives and academics, we aim to elevate the profession, deepen knowledge, and make a lasting impact. The AMA is home to five premier scholarly journals including: Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Journal of International Marketing, and Journal of Interactive Marketing. Our industry-leading training events and conferences define future forward practices, while our professional development and PCM® professional certification advance knowledge. With 70 chapters and a presence on 350 college campuses across North America, the AMA fosters a vibrant community of marketers. The association’s philanthropic arm, the AMA’s Foundation, is inspiring a more diverse industry and ensuring marketing research impacts public good.
AMA views marketing as the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerings that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large. You can learn more about AMA’s learning programs and certifications, conferences and events, and scholarly journals at AMA.org.
Journal
Journal of Marketing
Article Title
How Retailers Change Ordering Strategies When Suppliers Go Direct
Research shows managers of firms handling recalls should review media scrutiny before deciding whether to lobby
Lobbying can help companies reduce costs related to product recall, but it can also have a negative impact on the firm’s image. Research published in Strategic Management Journal offers clear data on the phenomenon, suggesting that managers should pay careful attention to the reputational cues from the media to determine when lobbying may be problematic and to refrain from the practice.
Firms can use lobbying to influence the government, which in turn potentially limits their costs during product recall crises. Previous research has shown that when a firm increases its lobbying spending by approximately $417,014, which has been found to lead to one less recall, it can save the firm millions of dollars. Each recall conservatively costs about $12 million. Such lobbying can, however, draw scrutiny from the media if the lobbying gives the impression that companies would rather save costs than focus on safety, which can come across as hypocritical.
The researchers — Jinsil Kim of the College of New Jersey, Miranda J. Welbourne Eleazar of the University of Iowa, and Seung-Hyun Lee of the University of Texas at Dallas — wanted to better understand how firms could resolve the tension around lobbying. They hypothesized that the greater the negative publicity of a firm's product safety recalls, the less likely that firm would be to lobby for recall-related issues.
The researchers used auto firms' lobbying responses to news about product recalls and lobbying. They tapped multiple data sources and a sample of 3,747 manufacturer-recall observations related to auto recalls and lobbying in the U.S. between 2008 and 2022. They also conducted 15 interviews with lobbyists and heads of external affairs overseeing firms' lobbying activities.
“As there is more and more attention around this issue, and we've come long past the era when the focus was only on the gains from corporate political action, firms are increasingly considering this tension as well,” Kim says. “We asked what the triggers or signals that firms look out for in their decision regarding CPA (corporate political action) management: whether to go ahead with lobbying or strategically eschew it.”
Upon analysis of the data and interviews, they found that companies are more likely to strategically refrain from lobbying to minimize additional, unwanted media spotlight and its associated negative repercussions when they receive negative media coverage of product recalls, or recall-related lobbying. While lobbying can reduce costs related to product recalls, the repercussions to firm reputation appear to not be worth the savings.
“From our field interviews with corporate lobbyists and head of external affairs, we learned that practitioners are aware — to a certain extent — of the impact of media and pay much attention to what goes on in the media, and make lobbying decisions accordingly,” Kim says. “We view that our paper would reinforce their tendencies to exercise caution. It may be challenging to accurately anticipate the costs and benefits upfront, but we've made a first step by showing that gauging the media temperature is important.”
To read the full context of the study and its methods, access the full paper available in the Strategic Management Journal.
About the Strategic Management Society
The Strategic Management Society (SMS) is the leading global member organization fostering and supporting rigorous and practice-engaged strategic management research. SMS enjoys the support of 3,000 members, representing more than 1,100 institutions and companies in more than 70 countries. SMS publishes three leading academic journals in partnership with Wiley: Strategic Management Journal, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, and Global Strategy Journal. These journals publish top-quality work applicable to researchers and practitioners with complementary access for all SMS Members. The SMS Explorer offers the latest insights and takeaways from the SMS Journals for business practitioners, consultants, and academics.
Click here to subscribe to the monthly SMS Explorer newsletter.
Click here to learn more about the programs and opportunities SMS has to offer.
Journal
Strategic Management Journal
Method of Research
Data/statistical analysis
Subject of Research
People
Article Title
The influence of media scrutiny on firms' strategic eschewal of lobbying
