What Drives Strategic Behavior? A Framework to Explain and Predict SMEs' Transition to Sustainable Production Systems
AbstractThe strategic choices of Small and Medium Enterprises in the agribusiness sector are fraught with large cost and revenue uncertainties. The transition to a new production system implies that SMEs must re-allocate resources and develop new strategies to achieve market goals. We highlight the agricultural, marketing and management literature on decision-making under risk for strategic decisions. Subsequently we discuss the various elicitation techniques to measure decision-makers' utility functions. That review indicates that one is able to measure the global utility function in a reliable and valid way. Particularly the measures based on experiments and rooted in expected utility framework seem to perform well. Furthermore, we develop various research propositions that deal with the factors that influence SMEs strategic decision whether or not to switch to sustainable production systems. We propose to investigate the global shape of the utility function of SMEs as it drives strategic decisions, and the factors that influence these decisions.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association) in its series 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA with number 21354.
Date of creation: 2006
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Matthew Rabin., 2000.
"Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem,"
Economics Working Papers
E00-279, University of California at Berkeley.
- Matthew Rabin, 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1281-1292, September.
- Matthew Rabin, 2001. "Risk Aversion and Expected Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7667, David K. Levine.
- Matthew Rabin, 2001. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Method and Hist of Econ Thought 0012001, EconWPA.
- Rabin, Matthew, 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt731230f8, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Pennings, J.M.E. & Smidts, A., 2002. "The Shape of Utility Functions and Organizational Behavior," Research Paper ERS-2002-18-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus Uni.
- Nicholas Barberis, 2001. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1247-1292, 08.
- Jehoshua Eliashberg, 1980. "Consumer Preference Judgments: An Exposition with Empirical Applications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 60-77, January.
- Matthew Rabin & Richard H. Thaler, 2001. "Anomalies: Risk Aversion," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 219-232, Winter.
- Joost M. E. Pennings, 2004. "Channel Contract Behavior: The Role of Risk Attitudes, Risk Perceptions, And Channel Members' Market Structures," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 77(4), pages 697-724, October.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
- Roosen, Jutta & Hennessy, David A., 2003.
"Tests for the Role of Risk Aversion on Input Use,"
Staff General Research Papers
10071, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- L. J. Bourgeois, III & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 1988. "Strategic Decision Processes in High Velocity Environments: Four Cases in the Microcomputer Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(7), pages 816-835, July.
- Atwood, Joseph A. & Buschena, David E., 2003. "Evaluating the magnitudes of financial transactions costs on risk behavior," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 75(2-3), pages 235-249.
- Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2001. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns," NBER Working Papers 8190, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Joost M.E. Pennings & Raymond M. Leuthold, 2000. "The Role of Farmers' Behavioral Attitudes and Heterogeneity in Futures Contracts Usage," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 908-919.
- Lindner, Robert K. & Gibbs, Melissa, 1990. "A Test Of Bayesian Learning From Farmer Trials Of New Wheat Varieties," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 34(01), April.
- Joost M.E. Pennings & Philip Garcia, 2001. "Measuring Producers' Risk Preferences: A Global Risk-Attitude Construct," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(4), pages 993-1009.
- Peter Wakker & Daniel Deneffe, 1996. "Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern Utilities When Probabilities Are Distorted or Unknown," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(8), pages 1131-1150, August.
- Mohammed Abdellaoui, 2000. "Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utility and Probability Weighting Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(11), pages 1497-1512, November.
- Schoemaker, Paul J H, 1982. "The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 529-63, June.
- Sarin, Rakesh K. & Weber, Martin, 1993. "Risk-value models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 135-149, October.
- Just, Richard E. & Pope, Rulon D., 1978. "Stochastic specification of production functions and economic implications," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 67-86, February.
- Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. " Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(2), pages 103-23, Se.
- Elke U. Weber & Richard A. Milliman, 1997. "Perceived Risk Attitudes: Relating Risk Perception to Risky Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 123-144, February.
- Levy, H & Markowtiz, H M, 1979. "Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(3), pages 308-17, June.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.