Search

This article investigates the relationship between intellectual capital, supply chain learning, and supply chain adaptability. Specifically, relying on organizational learning theory, a research model is proposed linking intellectual capital (consisting of the trichotomy of human, organizational, and social capital), supply chain learning (consisting of supplier learning and customer learning) and supply chain adaptability. We scrutinize these relationships in two culturally-diverse contexts, China and USA, and develop hypotheses concerning the differences in the relative strengths of these relationships. Data from 300 Chinese and 229 USA manufacturers in high-tech industries are used to test these hypotheses. While the relationships are generally supported, especially insightful are the results where they differ between the two countries. While human capital is more important in influencing organizational capital in USA, social capital is more important in China. Social capital also plays a more significant role in influencing customer learning in China, while no statistical differences are detected in social capital's influence on supplier learning across the two countries. The divergence observed can be explained by the cultural differences between the two countries. Implications are provided for managers in both countries to improve supply chain adaptability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study builds on recent work investigating the process of migration channeling between analogous sectors of the Mexican and U.S. labor markets. In this study, the authors take up the question of whether channeling between Mexico and the United States promotes immigrants’ economic integration. Drawing on previous research on channeling, and using insights from human capital theory, the authors test the hypothesis that immigrants who are able to use their industry-specific knowledge, skills, and abilities acquired in Mexico within the same industry in the United States achieve higher levels of economic integration. Using a sample of Mexican immigrants from the New Immigrant Survey, we find that industrially channeled immigrants experience a wage premium of over $5,000, on average, in the United States. Our study concludes with a discussion of what industrial channeling means for Mexican immigrants’ broader integration into U.S. society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Responding to demands for transformed farming practices requires new forms of knowledge. Given their scale and complexity, agricultural problems can no longer be solved by linear transfers in which technology developed by specialists passes to farmers by way of extension intermediaries. Recent research on alternative approaches has focused on the innovation systems formed by interactions between heterogeneous actors. Rather than linear transfer, systems theory highlights network facilitation as a specialized function. This paper contributes to our understanding of such facilitation by investigating the networks in which farmers discuss science. We report findings based on the study of a pastoral farming experiment collaboratively undertaken by a group of 17 farmers and five scientists. Analysis of prior contact and alter sharing between the group’s members indicates strongly tied and decentralized networks. Farmer knowledge exchanges about the experiment have been investigated using a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods. Network surveys identified who the farmers contacted for knowledge before the study began and who they had talked to about the experiment by 18 months later. Open-ended interviews collected farmer statements about their most valuable contacts and these statements have been thematically analysed. The network analysis shows that farmers talked about the experiment with 192 people, most of whom were fellow farmers. Farmers with densely tied and occupationally homogeneous contacts grew their networks more than did farmers with contacts that are loosely tied and diverse. Thematic analysis reveals three general principles: farmers value knowledge delivered by persons rather than roles, privilege farming experience, and develop knowledge with empiricist rather than rationalist techniques. Taken together, these findings suggest that farmers deliberate about science in intensive and durable networks that have significant implications for theorizing agricultural innovation. The paper thus concludes by considering the findings’ significance for current efforts to rethink agricultural extension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]