In 1974 an article appeared in Science magazine with the dry-sounding title “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases” by a pair of psychologists who were not well known outside their discipline of decision theory. In it Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman introduced the world to Prospect Theory, which mapped out how humans actually behave when faced with decisions about gains and losses, in contrast to how economists assumed that people behave. Prospect Theory turned Economics on its head by demonstrating through a series of ingenious experiments that people are much more concerned with losses than they are with gains, and that framing a choice from one perspective or the other will result in decisions that are exactly the opposite of each other, even if the outcomes are monetarily the same. Prospect Theory led cognitive psychology in a new direction that began to uncover other human biases in thinking that are probably not learned but are part of our brain’s wiring.

Thinking fast and slow.

Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness

https://flora.insead.edu/fichiersti_wp/inseadwp2009/2009-44.pdf

An empirical comparison of the efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM

Variance-based SEM, also known under the term partial least squares (PLS) analysis, is an approach that has gained increasing interest among marketing researchers in recent years. During the last 25 years, more than 30 articles have been published in leading marketing journals that have applied this approach instead of the more traditional alternative of covariance-based SEM (CBSEM). However, although an analysis of these previous publications shows that there seems to be at least an implicit agreement about the factors that should drive the choice between PLS analysis and CBSEM, no research has until now empirically compared the performance of these approaches given a set of different conditions. Our study addresses this open question by conducting a large-scale Monte-Carlo simulation. We show that justifying the choice of PLS due to a lack of assumptions regarding indicator distribution and measurement scale is often inappropriate, as CBSEM proves extremely robust with respect to violations of its underlying distributional assumptions. Additionally, CBSEM clearly outperforms PLS in terms of parameter consistency and is preferable in terms of parameter accuracy as long as the sample size exceeds a certain threshold (250 observations). Nevertheless, PLS analysis should be preferred when the emphasis is on prediction and theory development, as the statistical power of PLS is always larger than or equal to that of CBSEM; already, 100 observations can be sufficient to achieve acceptable levels of statistical power given a certain quality of the measurement model.

/pdf/an-empirical-comparison-of-the-efficacy-of-covariance-based-1l7yi4l9x6.pdf

An Empirical Comparison of the Efficacy of Covariance-Based and Variance-Based SEM

Advancing formative measurement models

In recent years, there has been a resurgence of interest in the value construct among both marketing researchers and practitioners. Despite a growing body of research, it is still not clear how value interacts with related marketing constructs. Researchers have called for an investigation of the interrelationship between customer satisfaction and customer value to reduce the ambiguities surrounding both concepts. Investigates whether customer value and satisfaction represent two theoretically and empirically distinct concepts. Also addresses whether value is a better predictor of behavioral outcomes than satisfaction in a business marketing context. Two alternative models are developed and empirically tested in a cross-sectional survey with purchasing managers in Germany. The first model suggests a direct impact of perceived value on the purchasing managers' intentions. In the second model, perceived value is mediated by satisfaction. This research suggests that value and satisfaction can be conceptualized and measured as two distinct, yet complementary constructs.

Customer perceived value: a substitute for satisfaction in business markets?

Many business customers today consolidate their supply bases and implement preferred supplier programs. Consequently, vendors increasingly face the alternative of either gaining a key supplier status with their customers or being pushed into the role of a backup supplier. As product and price become less important differentiators, suppliers of routinely purchased products search for new ways to differentiate themselves in a buyer–seller relationship. This research investigates avenues for differentiation through value creation in business-to-business relationships. The results suggest that relationship benefits display a stronger potential for differentiation in key supplier relationships than cost considerations. The authors identify service support and personal interaction as core differentiators, followed by a supplier's know-how and its ability to improve a customer's time to market. Product quality and delivery performance, along with acquisition costs and operation costs, display a moderate potential to help a firm gain and maintain key supplier status. Finally, price shows the weakest potential for differentiation.

Value-Based Differentiation in Business Relationships: Gaining and Sustaining Key Supplier Status

This article examines key success factors for designing and delivering combinations of goods and services (i.e., hybrid offerings) in business markets. Goods manufacturers, unlike pure service providers, find themselves in a unique position to grow revenues through hybrid offerings but must learn how to leverage unique resources and build distinctive capabilities. Using case studies and depth interviews with senior executives in manufacturing companies, the authors develop a resource-capability framework as a basis for research and practice. Executives identify four critical resources: (1) product usage and process data derived from the firm's installed base of physical goods, (2) product development and manufacturing assets, (3) an experienced product sales force and distribution network, and (4) a field service organization. In leveraging these specific resources, successful firms build five critical capabilities: (1) service-related data processing and interpretation capability, (2) execution risk assessment and mitigation capability, (3) design-to-service capability, (4) hybrid offering sales capability, and (5) hybrid offering deployment capability. These capabilities influence manufacturers' positional advantage in two directions: differentiation and cost leadership. The authors propose a new typology of industrial services and discuss how resources and capabilities affect success across categories of hybrid offers.

Wolfgang Ulaga

Papers

Customer perceived value: a substitute for satisfaction in business markets?

Customer perceived value: a substitute for satisfaction in business markets?

Value-Based Differentiation in Business Relationships: Gaining and Sustaining Key Supplier Status

Hybrid Offerings: How Manufacturing Firms Combine Goods and Services Successfully:

Capturing value creation in business relationships: A customer perspective