IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/proeco/v142y2013i1p37-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do personal traits influence inventory management performance?—The case of intelligence, personality, interest and knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Strohhecker, Jürgen
  • Größler, Andreas

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of four personal traits (intelligence, knowledge, personality and interests) on performance in a structurally simple, yet dynamically complex inventory management task. We base our model on PPIK theory from cognitive psychology and ground the experiment we conduct on the tradition of dynamic decision making research. Findings are that intelligence is the strongest predictor of inventory management performance, while the analysis shows weaker but significant relations between the other traits and performance. Regarding interests, we find that a strong interest for social issues leads to higher cost and, thus, worse performance. A similar detrimental impact on performance has a personality that is open for new experiences. Implications for research comprise investigating the relationship between the four traits and accounting for different task complexities. While obviously intelligence or personality of inventory managers cannot easily be changed, this research can help identifying favorable combinations of psychological traits that can be used in personnel selection. The value of this paper lies in contributing to behavioral theory building in operations management by describing and interpreting the psychological foundations for one of the most notorious tasks: controlling a stock of finished products and adapting its inflow to its outflow.

Suggested Citation

  • Strohhecker, Jürgen & Größler, Andreas, 2013. "Do personal traits influence inventory management performance?—The case of intelligence, personality, interest and knowledge," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 37-50.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:142:y:2013:i:1:p:37-50
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.08.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925527312003362
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.08.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. U Benzion & Y Cohen & R Peled & T Shavit, 2008. "Decision-making and the newsvendor problem: an experimental study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1281-1287, September.
    2. Smith, Vernon L, 1982. "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 923-955, December.
    3. Erling Moxnes, 1998. "Not Only the Tragedy of the Commons: Misperceptions of Bioeconomics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1234-1248, September.
    4. Cronin, Matthew A. & Gonzalez, Cleotilde & Sterman, John D., 2009. "Why don't well-educated adults understand accumulation? A challenge to researchers, educators, and citizens," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 116-130, January.
    5. Selten, Reinhard & Stoecker, Rolf, 1986. "End behavior in sequences of finite Prisoner's Dilemma supergames A learning theory approach," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 47-70, March.
    6. Gary E. Bolton & Elena Katok, 2008. "Learning by Doing in the Newsvendor Problem: A Laboratory Investigation of the Role of Experience and Feedback," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 519-538, September.
    7. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    8. Depositario, Dinah Pura T. & Nayga Jr., Rodolfo M. & Wu, Ximing & Laude, Tiffany P., 2009. "Should students be used as subjects in experimental auctions?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 122-124, February.
    9. Smith, Vernon L, 1976. "Experimental Economics: Induced Value Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 274-279, May.
    10. al-Nowaihi, Ali & Dhami, Sanjit, 2006. "A note on the Loewenstein-Prelec theory of intertemporal choice," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 99-108, July.
    11. Maurice E. Schweitzer & Gérard P. Cachon, 2000. "Decision Bias in the Newsvendor Problem with a Known Demand Distribution: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(3), pages 404-420, March.
    12. John D. Sterman & Linda Booth Sweeney, 2002. "Cloudy skies: assessing public understanding of global warming," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 18(2), pages 207-240, June.
    13. Feng, Tianjun & Keller, L. Robin & Zheng, Xiaona, 2011. "Decision making in the newsvendor problem: A cross-national laboratory study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 41-50, January.
    14. Xuanming Su, 2008. "Bounded Rationality in Newsvendor Models," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 566-589, May.
    15. Hau L. Lee & V. Padmanabhan & Seungjin Whang, 1997. "Information Distortion in a Supply Chain: The Bullwhip Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 546-558, April.
    16. Sterman, John & Booth Sweeney, Linda, 2002. "Cloudy Skies: Assessing Public Understanding of Global Warming," Working papers 4361-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    17. George Loewenstein & Drazen Prelec, 1992. "Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice: Evidence and an Interpretation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(2), pages 573-597.
    18. Diehl, Ernst & Sterman, John D., 1995. "Effects of Feedback Complexity on Dynamic Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 198-215, May.
    19. Guala,Francesco, 2005. "The Methodology of Experimental Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521618618.
    20. Peterson, Robert A, 2001. "On the Use of College Students in Social Science Research: Insights from a Second-Order Meta-analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(3), pages 450-461, December.
    21. Urban, Timothy L., 2005. "Inventory models with inventory-level-dependent demand: A comprehensive review and unifying theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(3), pages 792-804, May.
    22. Lurie, Nicholas H. & Swaminathan, Jayashankar M., 2009. "Is timely information always better? The effect of feedback frequency on decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 315-329, March.
    23. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    24. Rachel Croson & Karen Donohue, 2006. "Behavioral Causes of the Bullwhip Effect and the Observed Value of Inventory Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 323-336, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hendijani, Rosa, 2021. "The effect of thinking style on dynamic systems performance: The mediating role of stock-flow understanding," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    2. Strohhecker, Jürgen & Leyer, Michael, 2019. "How stock-flow failure and general cognitive ability impact performance in operational dynamic control tasks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(3), pages 1044-1055.
    3. Manuel Brauch & Andreas Größler, 2022. "Holistic versus analytic thinking orientation and its relationship to the bullwhip effect," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 38(2), pages 121-134, April.
    4. Haines, Russell & Hough, Jill & Haines, Douglas, 2017. "A metacognitive perspective on decision making in supply chains: Revisiting the behavioral causes of the bullwhip effect," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 7-20.
    5. Jürgen Strohhecker, 2016. "Factors influencing strategy implementation decisions: an evaluation of a balanced scorecard cockpit, intelligence, and knowledge," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 89-119, February.
    6. Dafnis N. Coudounaris & Henrik G.S. Arvidsson, 2021. "Relationships between the Big-5 Model and Effectuation versus Causation Logics of Entrepreneurs in New Ventures: The Estonian IT Sector," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-25, September.
    7. Castañeda, Jaime Andrés & Gonçalves, Paulo, 2018. "Ordering behavior in a newsstand experiment," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 186-196.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Özalp Özer & Yanchong Zheng & Yufei Ren, 2014. "Trust, Trustworthiness, and Information Sharing in Supply Chains Bridging China and the United States," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(10), pages 2435-2460, October.
    2. Zhao, Yingshuai & Zhao, Xiaobo, 2015. "On human decision behavior in multi-echelon inventory management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 116-128.
    3. Strohhecker, Jürgen & Leyer, Michael, 2019. "How stock-flow failure and general cognitive ability impact performance in operational dynamic control tasks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(3), pages 1044-1055.
    4. Karen Donohue & Özalp Özer, 2020. "Behavioral Operations: Past, Present, and Future," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 191-202, January.
    5. Yang, Y. & Lin, J. & Liu, G. & Zhou, L., 2021. "The behavioural causes of bullwhip effect in supply chains: A systematic literature review," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    6. Jürgen Strohhecker & Andreas Größler, 2012. "Implementing Sustainable Business Strategies," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 547-570, November.
    7. Li Chen & A. Gürhan Kök & Jordan D. Tong, 2013. "The Effect of Payment Schemes on Inventory Decisions: The Role of Mental Accounting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 436-451, September.
    8. Yufei Ren & Rachel Croson, 2013. "Overconfidence in Newsvendor Orders: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(11), pages 2502-2517, November.
    9. Arunachalam Narayanan & Brent B. Moritz, 2015. "Decision Making and Cognition in Multi-Echelon Supply Chains: An Experimental Study," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 24(8), pages 1216-1234, August.
    10. Michael Becker‐Peth & Kai Hoberg & Margarita Protopappa‐Sieke, 2020. "Multiperiod Inventory Management with Budget Cycles: Rational and Behavioral Decision‐Making," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(3), pages 643-663, March.
    11. Villa, Sebastián & Castañeda, Jaime Andrés, 2018. "Transshipments in supply chains: A behavioral investigation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(2), pages 715-729.
    12. Diego D’Urso & Ferdinando Chiacchio & Evangelia Demerouti, 2021. "Measuring How Decision Support Systems Improve Newsvendors’ Performance: The Subjects’ Version," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-16, September.
    13. Leopold-Wildburger, Ulrike & Strohhecker, Jürgen, 2017. "Strategy map concepts in a balanced scorecard cockpit improve performanceAuthor-Name: Hu, Bo," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 664-676.
    14. Haines, Russell & Hough, Jill & Haines, Douglas, 2017. "A metacognitive perspective on decision making in supply chains: Revisiting the behavioral causes of the bullwhip effect," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 7-20.
    15. Haresh Gurnani & Karthik Ramachandran & Saibal Ray & Yusen Xia, 2014. "Ordering Behavior Under Supply Risk:An Experimental Investigation," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 61-75, February.
    16. Paulo Gonçalves & Mohammad Moshtari, 2021. "The impact of information visibility on ordering dynamics in a supply chain: a behavioral perspective," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 37(2-3), pages 126-154, April.
    17. Tony Haitao Cui & Guangwen Kong & Behrooz Pourghannad, 2020. "Is Simplicity the Ultimate Sophistication? The Superiority of Linear Pricing," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(7), pages 1767-1788, July.
    18. Arango, Santiago & Moxnes, Erling, 2012. "Commodity cycles, a function of market complexity? Extending the cobweb experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 321-334.
    19. Özalp Özer & Yanchong Zheng & Kay-Yut Chen, 2011. "Trust in Forecast Information Sharing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1111-1137, June.
    20. Xuanming Su, 2008. "Bounded Rationality in Newsvendor Models," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 566-589, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:142:y:2013:i:1:p:37-50. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpe .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.