CHANGING BUSINESS S P RING 2014
ReSeaRch FRoM the JohNS hoPKINS caRey buSINeSS SchooL
In A Hopeful VeIn Economic incentives have power to attract donations of blood
Le t t eR FRo M t h e de a N
tHe JoHns HopKIns trADItIon
The Johns Hopkins University represents the highest standard in research and embodies the idea that the creation and dissemination of knowledge are potent weapons against the world’s most pressing challenges.
chaNGING buSINeSS Editorial Staff: Patrick Ercolano, Sam Hopkins designer: Skelton Design
The faculty of the Carey Business School understands the power of new ideas and is dedicated to creating and spreading knowledge with the aim of helping others. Carey’s role is defined within a business context; we seek advances that mutually benefit commerce and society at large. This is what we mean when we speak of “business with humanity in mind.”
Illustrator: Stuart Bradford
We believe that our approach to the way business is taught will in turn bring positive, much-needed change to the way business is conducted. Our mission is fulfilled with a full-time faculty comprising researchers from various disciplines, collaborating with one another here at Carey and with scholars from across Johns Hopkins, as well as from other leading universities around the world. We have taken great strides in building such a faculty – one that is committed to creating new knowledge. This inaugural edition of Changing Business, a magazine about research at the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School, provides a view of the valuable work being done by our faculty researchers. The efforts of the professors featured here challenge assumptions in areas that touch countless lives. Our goal is to produce relevant, practical, translatable research that has a beneficial impact on people’s lives today and tomorrow. That is squarely in the Johns Hopkins tradition – a tradition to which the Carey Business School is proud and eager to make its distinctive contributions.
Bernard T. Ferrari Dean, Johns Hopkins Carey Business School
Email us at: firstname.lastname@example.org Reach us by mail at: Changing Business Magazine Johns Hopkins Carey Business School Marketing and Communications Ofﬁce 100 International Drive Baltimore, MD 21202-1099 Or phone: 410-234-9292
S P RIN G 2014
In A Hopeful Vein
ift cards, T-shirts, and other economic incentives can G increase public donations of blood.
4 No, I Insist, After Me
I n various contexts, business negotiators who make the first offers emerge with the best deals.
6 ADMISSION ACCOMPLISHED Rather than fight the ticket-resale industry, promoters should alter their sales methods.
8 The Little Job Engine That Doesn’t Entrepreneurial activity isn’t as strong a creator of quality jobs as many claim it is.
DEAN’S RESEARCH SCHOLARS
New program makes researchers of five Carey MBA students.
A sampling of recent research projects by Carey faculty members.
In A Hopeful VeIn
A new study builds on a body of research showing that economic incentives motivate people to donate blood.
2 â€˘ S P R I N G 2 014 C A R E Y. J H U . E d U/C H A N g I N g B U S I N E S S
Research by Mario Macis
an economic incentives such as gift cards, T-shirts, and time off from work motivate members of the public to increase their donations of blood? A team of three researchers, including Johns Hopkins Carey Business School Assistant Professor Mario Macis, says the answer is an emphatic yes. The writers cite the work of other researchers, as well as their own extensive work, which has examined incentives for blood donors in the United States, Switzerland, and Italy. In their most recent published work, Macis, Nicola Lacetera of the University of Toronto, and Robert Slonim of the University of Sydney were joined by Victor Iajya of Universidad Nacional de Tucumán for a study published in the December 2013 issue of Social Science & Medicine. The article reported on incentivized blood donations in Argentina, a middle-income country where donations are usually made among relatives and friends in times of need. The researchers sought to learn the impact of economic incentives offered to randomly selected members of the general Argentine population. Again, the results showed the effectiveness of incentives, though only those of higher value – supermarket vouchers worth AR$60 and AR$100, compared with an AR$20 voucher or a T-shirt – produced a significant increase. (AR$100 equals about 15 U.S. dollars.) In a previous study, Macis, Lacetera, and Slonim examined data from nearly 100,000 donors at 72 American Red Cross blood drives in Northern Ohio from September 2009 through August 2010. Gift cards were offered at half the blood-drive sites; no incentives were provided at the other sites, which served as study controls. They found that an advertised offer of a $5 gift card increased the likelihood of giving among people with a history of donating by 26 percent; and a $10 gift card produced a 52 percent rise. The offer of gift cards even caused people to motivate others to donate, including people who previously had never given blood. The incentives also induced regular donors to switch from their usual donation sites to locations where rewards would be available. Pointing to the large body of fresh research that supports their argument, Macis, Lacetera, and Slonim wrote last May in the journal Science that the World Health Organization and national blood collection agencies should reconsider their guidelines opposing economic incentives for much-needed donations of blood. The authors stated that such opposition has been based in part on evidence from uncontrolled studies using non-random samples, and on surveys and artificial scenarios using hypothetical questions. These tests and others typically have suggested that economic incentives can decrease intrinsic motivations to donate and might also attract blood donations with greater risks such as viruses and infectious diseases.
But field-based evidence from large, representative samples has become available, the authors wrote in Science, and the results refute the previous findings: Economic rewards have a positive effect on donations, without negative consequences for blood safety. Meantime, added Macis, advances in screening technology since the WHO guidelines were established have greatly reduced the risk of tainted or otherwise unusable blood being used later in transfusions. Macis noted in an interview that incentives could be strategically employed to attract blood donations at times when supplies are low, such as holidays and summer months. Although many people are
“This raises the question of whether pure altruism is sufficient to guarantee a sufficient, steady supply of blood.” eligible to donate blood, only a small percentage, less than 10 percent, give blood in the United States, and even fewer donate in low-income countries, where shortages have drastic consequences. “This raises the question of whether pure altruism is sufficient to guarantee a sufficient, steady supply of blood,” Macis said. The three authors concluded in their Science article, which appeared in the magazine’s “Policy Forum” section: “Debates on ethical issues around giving rewards for donations are inevitable and should be encouraged. But there should be little debate that the most relevant empirical evidence shows positive effects of offering economic rewards on donations.”
J O H N S H O P K I N S C A R E Y B U S I N E S S S C H O O L S pring 2 014 • 3
no, I InsIst, After Me
In a variety of contexts, business negotiators who make the ďŹ rst offers are found to emerge with the best deals.
4 â€˘ S P R I N G 2 014 C A R E Y. J H U . E d U/C H A N g I N g B U S I N E S S
Research by Brian Gunia
om always said: Be polite, and let the other person go first. No offense to dear old Mom, but anyone who lets the other guy go first at the negotiating table will end up at a disadvantage, according to research by Carey Business School Assistant Professor Brian Gunia. Previous studies have demonstrated that negotiators making the first offer enjoy better outcomes. Those studies were limited, however, by looking primarily at Westerners on an equal power footing who were focused on a single negotiation issue. Lead researcher Gunia and co-authors Roderick Swaab of INSEAD, Niro Sivanathan of the London Business School, and Adam Galinsky of Columbia University took a broader approach. They examined the first-offer effect in a number of contexts – in both Western and Eastern cultures, among participants with varying levels of bargaining power, and within negotiations that involved both single and multiple issues. They considered these, in particular, because some researchers have speculated that the Eastern, low-power, and multiple-issue contexts would be adverse to the first-offer effect. But, Gunia said in an interview, “The message that kept emerging from our experiments is that the first-offer effect is very robust within all those contexts. No matter what kind of curveball we tried to throw at it, the first offer was effective in every setting.” The findings appear in “The Remarkable Robustness of the FirstOffer Effect: Across Culture, Power, and Issues,” the lead article in the December 2013 issue of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Why this remarkably robust effect? Gunia explains that negotiating parties tend to enter talks without a clear starting figure. The person who makes the initial offer thus provides a point of reference that typically anchors a number to the proceedings. “People have a hard time ignoring reference points in negotiations or any complicated judgments,” Gunia said. “So the first offer becomes the information at hand. People hang onto it as the basis of their talks. Call it anchoring, or the power of suggestion.” For their research, Gunia and his colleagues conducted the following five experiments: • S ingle-culture, single-issue negotiations between pairs formed from 62 senior government officials in Thailand’s Ministry of Finance, who were enrolled in an executive-level negotiation course. •C ross-cultural, single-issue negotiations between pairs formed from 74 MBA students at an international business school, who hailed from 32 countries across six continents. • S ingle-culture, multi-issue negotiations between pairs formed from 48 Executive MBA students in Thailand.
“The first offer becomes the information at hand. People hang onto it as the basis of their talks. Call it anchoring, or the power of suggestion.” • Single-issue, unequal-power negotiations between pairs formed from 116 MBA students at a U.S. business school, with one person in each pair randomly assigned a stronger negotiating position. • And, multi-issue, uneven-power negotiations between pairs formed from 90 American MBA students, again with one person assigned an advantageous position. Determining the price in the sale of a factory is an example of a single-issue negotiation in the research. One of the multi-issue negotiations involved the syndication of a television show, which entailed discussing the sales price, financing terms, and the number of episode airings. The researchers did reveal one wrinkle in the first-offer effect: Its impact is greatest in discussions of “distributive” issues – those in which the negotiators have opposing preferences while attaching equal importance to the issues at hand, said Gunia. Think of a car deal, in which the buyer seeks a lower price than what the seller has in mind. The two other types of negotiation issues are “integrative,” in which the negotiators attach varying importance to the matters at hand, and “compatible,” in which both negotiators have the same preferences. Whatever the context, the first-offer effect turned up a winner in the research. Despite their best efforts, said Gunia, he and his colleagues could not “turn it off.” Less powerful negotiators tend to feel shy about making the first offer – and consequently pay an extra price, Gunia said, adding, “Letting the more powerful party dictate the terms of the talks is doubly bad for the less powerful person – first, because the initial offer has already been made, establishing the basis of the talks, and second, because his lower-power status will make him less likely to challenge the other party with an alternative offer.” Low-power negotiators should thus feel a special compulsion to move first, Gunia advised. The first-offer effect is so strong, so hard-wired into the human brain, that it can overcome nearly any cultural difference, power disparity, or transaction complexity that might surface at the bargaining table. “That’s the main point we’re making in this paper, and it’s the new finding in this area of study,” said Gunia. And as the paper notes, this discovery can be particularly valuable in a business world that grows increasingly global and diverse.
J O H N S H O P K I N S C A R E Y B U S I N E S S S C H O O L S pring 2 014 • 5
ADMIssIon ACCoMplIsHeD ReSeaRch by oZGe SahIN
Rather than duke it out with the ticket-resale industry, promoters could proﬁt by updating their sales methods.
6 • S P R I N G 2 014 C A R E Y. J H U . E d U/C H A N g I N g B U S I N E S S
hat are you thinking just before you click “Buy now” on a website that sells event tickets? Probably how excited you are for the chance to see your favorite band or sports team in action. But as the cursor hovers, you’re also making a series of calculations: How many of your Facebook friends say they’re going? Is the band’s tour getting good reviews? Is your team having a good season? Die-hard fans may buy, no matter what, while others will wait to decide, with the understanding that they might pay a price for the privilege. In a recent study, Carey Business School Assistant Professor Ozge Sahin and her co-authors show there’s a better way to buy event tickets – one that enables the fan to hedge against rising prices and possibly opt at the last minute not to attend. Besides these advantages for the consumer, the research suggests that event promoters and ticket retailers might capture more revenue if they adopt innovative, open approaches to ticket selling.
The paper, “Should Event Organizers Prevent Resale of Tickets?,” is forthcoming in Management Science. It was presented in 2012 at the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference in Boston and at the INFORMS Revenue Management and Pricing Conference in Berlin by Sahin and co-authors Izak Duenyas and Yao Cui, both of the University of Michigan’s Stephen M. Ross School of Business. Primary ticket sales in the U.S. generate around $20 billion in annual revenue. But major players in the primary market have been trying to capture some of the estimated $3 billion that ends up in the resale arena by selling non-transferable tickets and by lobbying for a federal ban on secondary sales. That secondary market includes hand-to-hand transactions via informal exchanges such as classified ads and through brokers such as StubHub that count major sports teams among their partners. It is believed that however the resale occurs, the original issuer misses out on the action.
The secondary ticket market includes hand-to-hand transactions via informal exchanges such as classified ads and through brokers such as StubHub. For this reason, Ticketmaster is pushing for event passes to be non-transferrable electronic tickets like those sold by airlines. In this scenario, if Joe buys a March Madness ticket and his favorite team doesn’t make it to the annual college basketball tournament, that’s his tough luck. He can’t sell the ticket to a fan of a team that reached the tournament; he simply loses the total cost of the ticket. Sahin and her co-authors say that event promoters and venue operators can profit by adopting a combination of variable, multiperiod pricing and option contracts like the ones used in financial markets. These strategies contrast with selling one seat for one static price that never changes, which is the most common sales format for concerts and athletic events. Using variable pricing and options, the primary sellers could enhance their revenues significantly and thus decrease the size of the secondary market, without resorting to restrictions on the ownership or transfer of tickets. Ticketmaster has partnered with marketing analytics firm MarketShare to implement multi-period ticket pricing. The multi-period approach, in which the cost of advance tickets might fluctuate according to demand, has been favored by sports teams that sell tickets
directly because it has increased their profits, especially for the most popular events. Today, multi-period pricing has truly gone pro, with the method used by 57 percent of National Basketball Association teams, 50 percent of Major League Baseball teams, and 37 percent of National Hockey League teams. Yet there’s a wrinkle in the multi-period pricing method, caused by speculators (scalpers) who buy tickets at the same time as die-hard fans but with the sole goal of selling at inflated prices to those who wait. The best approach for promoter and consumer alike is the ticket option, Sahin and her colleagues say. An option lets a customer pay for the right to purchase a ticket later at an agreed-upon price. If the customer subsequently decides by a specified deadline not to attend the event, he loses the option fee, but that amount is usually a fraction of the face value. The promoter can then pocket the option fee and sell the ticket to another buyer, at or above its original price. By optimally setting the option and ticket prices, promoters can decrease the arbitrage opportunity and discourage speculators from participating in the secondary market. A November 21, 2013, New York Times article, “Bidding for Super Bowl Trip, Fans Attempt an Option Play,” described the purchase of ticket options by football fans whose teams had varying chances of reaching the NFL championship. “The options are priced based on the likelihood of a team’s advancing to the Super Bowl. Options for weak teams like the Jaguars went on sale at $20, while options for strong teams like the Broncos were $100,” stated the article, which noted that only a few companies offer such options. “Ticket options should be part of every event organizer’s portfolio,” said Sahin. “They would boost the organizers’ revenue, decrease the size of the secondary market and speculator activity, and increase consumers’ welfare.” That could really give fans something to cheer about.
J O H N S H O P K I N S C A R E Y B U S I N E S S S C H O O L S pring 2 014 • 7
tHe lIttle Job engIne tHAt Doesn’t
It’s viewed as a powerful driver of employment. But entrepreneurial activity fails to create as many quality positions as is widely believed.
8 • S P R I N G 2 014 C A R E Y. J H U . E d U/C H A N g I N g B U S I N E S S
Research by Adam Seth Litwin and Phillip Phan
rom Thomas Edison to Mark Zuckerberg, entrepreneurs have been lauded as paragons of the American spirit and drivers of prosperity. The formation of new business is widely seen as a leading indicator of economic recovery, and policies from the local to the federal level might be shaped to make the entrepreneur’s journey easier. In a divided political landscape, entrepreneurship appears to be one point of unification – or at least a reliable applause line in many a public speech. Yet research by Assistant Professor Adam Seth Litwin and Professor Phillip Phan of the Carey Business School suggests that the economic kick of entrepreneurship isn’t so strong when it comes to creating quality jobs. The authors describe such jobs as those offering health care coverage and a retirement plan. As they state, “We find that due to their small scale, constrained resources, and protection from institutional pressures, start-ups do not provide their employees with either of these proxies for job quality and that their likelihood of offering health or retirement benefits increases only marginally over their first six years of operation.” The two professors’ findings are detailed in the article “Quality over Quantity: Reexamining the Link between Entrepreneurship and Job Creation,” published last July in Industrial and Labor Relations Review. In their analysis of the Kauffman Firm Survey (KFS), a dataset sponsored by the Missouri-based Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, Litwin and Phan found that of 4,928 new businesses that began operations in 2004, only 31 percent offered any form of health insurance coverage to full-time employees – including the companies’ owners – over the ensuing five years. Also, only 15 percent provided retirement benefits to their full-time workers. In contrast, across all businesses during the same 2004-2009 period, about 60 percent of employers made health insurance plans available to their full-time workers, and about 50 percent offered retirement plans. In a 2012 summary article in the journal Perspectives on Work, Litwin and Phan referred to the “near-religious belief in the small business owner as job creator.” This fervor can lead politicians sometimes to craft rules and regulations on everything from taxation to intellectual property in favor of small businesses. As larger companies struggle in times of economic weakness, incentives to entrepreneurs are boosted in the hope that they will take up the slack. But, Phan notes, this may be specious reasoning. In the context of entrepreneurship, he says, job creation is not necessarily career creation, meaning that the macroeconomic impact of a startup job is often negligible. Health insurance, retirement plan incentives, and the job security of an established operation – all traditionally offered by larger employers both public and private, nonprofit and for-profit – are often absent from
“Of 4,928 new businesses that began operations in 2004, only 31 percent offered any form of health insurance coverage to full-time employees…[and] only 15 percent provided retirement benefits to their full-time workers.”
the entrepreneurial company. Litwin and Phan are nonetheless careful to point out in their Perspectives on Work article that entrepreneurs are not necessarily bad employers despite some weaknesses in overall compensation, and that looking at the firms in the Kauffman-sponsored survey with regard to non-pecuniary rewards, such as job enrichment, job satisfaction, and autonomy, might indicate marks of high-quality employment. When it comes to picking between stimulating small firms at the cost of large ones, however, Phan advises caution, remarking that the reallocation of resources based on a notion of entrepreneurship as a superior form of job creation might, in fact, hurt or at least destabilize the economy. He refers to the example of Taiwan during the Asian financial crisis in the late 1990s to demonstrate the mixed effects of entrepreneurship. “Taiwan managed to escape most of the Asian financial crisis because 97 percent of its economy is based on small- and mediumsized, fast-growth enterprises. That’s a nice outcome. The only problem is that most of the companies that existed in 1996 were not the same companies that existed in 1998, so an entrepreneurial economy is also an economy that’s extremely unstable,” he says. In such an entrepreneur-heavy context, Phan says, “There are a lot of businesses closing down and opening up all the time, so there is a social cost of dislocation that is not calculated and is not thought of very carefully.” The professors urge continued research and constructive policy analysis based on the reality of job creation that stems from entrepreneurship. They argue against the idealized notion of the job creator who sets out to build a better mousetrap and pulls legions of workers toward a better economic horizon. Whether large corporations or intrepid individuals are creating the new positions, say Litwin and Phan, they should do so with job quality as a goal.
J O H N S H O P K I N S C A R E Y B U S I N E S S S C H O O L S pring 2 014 • 9
de a N ’ S ReS e a Rch S ch oL a RS
neW progrAM turns MbA stuDents Into reseArCHers
ipankar Chakravarti acknowledges the seeming anomaly: business student as researcher. “Some people might think that business students who do research may be branding themselves as nerds,” says the Carey Business School professor and faculty director of the school’s new Dean’s Research Scholars program. But, Chakravarti says, the varied methods of both the “thoughtful, high-end thinker” in the research lab and the “pragmatic, hard-charging decision maker” in the corporate office need not be impossible for a single business person to embrace. The program, announced in May 2013 by Dean Bernard T. Ferrari, aims to help students merge those two approaches, cultivating the spirit of investigation in future business leaders and clarifying the connection between study and action. Five students in the Carey Global MBA Class of 2014 were chosen to help pilot the program. Their research projects, begun in fall 2013, represent a variety of disciplines – marketing, economics, fi nance, consumer behavior, and management. The students have been working with faculty advisers who reflect the school’s mix of senior professors and younger assistant and associate professors, with the goal of developing research to be presented during the spring 2014 semester. The program includes a $5,000 award for each student to cover research costs, and it provides two credits toward the GMBA degree. For some of the students, as they have read and probed more deeply, their questions and hypotheses have changed. Sometimes, further inquiry has suggested halting an initial line of inquiry. But Chakravarti notes that adversity in the investigation process is instructive for an aspiring researcher. And like researchers, managers in the day-to-day world of business must confront dynamic data sets, shifting assumptions, and multiple variables, and then fi nd a way to make sense of it all. “There are many people who are good at rote learning and specific tasks,” Chakravarti explains. “It’s a much rarer breed that can think independently, conceptualize problems, and take actions that have been given the best considerations. They’re people who, in a sense, know how to place good bets. That’s a skill that research teaches.” Here’s a look at the first group of Dean’s Research Scholars and their projects:
tianci Zhang, “Shift Change Practices and Impact on Patient Safety,” with Professor Phillip Phan and visiting Professor Soo Lee
Zhang is studying hospital residents’ shift change practices and their impact
on patient safety. In 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education instituted an 80-hour work week to limit resident trainees’ fatigue and improve the quality of care. But this restriction reportedly has increased the frequency of patient handoffs and decreased ownership of care responsibilities. By focusing on
10 • S P R I N G 2 014 C A R E Y. J H U . E d U/C H A N g I N g B U S I N E S S
patient transmission information, Zhang aims to suggest methods for standardizing the shift change process in the Internal Medicine Unit of Johns Hopkins Hospital. Adam Hartmann, “Relating Social (Impact) Investments and Conventional Investments,” with Assistant Professor Jim Kyung-Soo Liew
Hartmann’s research examines the financial returns of socially responsible investing (impact investing). His line of research will determine whether impact investing should be viewed as a viable economic investment strategy, rather than as a humanitarian-focused financial activity with minimal profit potential. His primary research involves contacting intergovernmental organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and financial institutions. Amanda Creel, “Increased Frequency of MRI Usage: Impact on Length of Stay for Neurology Patients,” with Assistant Professor Mario Macis
Creel is working with two physicians from the Johns Hopkins Hospital Department of Emergency Medicine (one an attending physician, the other a fourth-year resident) to evaluate the effect of increased MRI utilization on patients’ length of stay and hospital costs. The emergency department at Johns Hopkins is one of only a few in the nation that include a radiology suite.
Alexander glogowski, “willingness to Pay: differences in Purchasing Behavior between digital and Physical Media,” with Assistant Professor Meng Zhu
Glogowski’s project looks into current consumer attitudes regarding the differences between digital and physical ownership of media. His primary question is whether user-generated rating scales can mediate differences in willingness to pay between the two media formats. After conducting a thorough literature review and creating questionnaires, Glogowski planned to run two-week studies that focused on conditions pertaining to different media types, such as music albums and books. Stephen Amatucci, “Correlates of Consumers’ Use of Speciﬁc Credit Formats,” with Professor dipankar Chakravarti
Amatucci is studying the impact of riskorientation assessment methods on eventual risk taking. A variety of approaches are commonly used for assessing consumer risk orientation (or risk tolerance) and how those predispositions affect financial decision making. Amatucci’s research examines the possibility that rather than measuring risk orientation, such assessment procedures actually alter consumers’ perceptions of their own risk attitudes and influence their subsequent decisions.
Briefs A SAMPLING OF RECENT WORK BY CAREY FACULTY MEMBERS
ECONOMICS A paper by Assistant Professor Angelo Mele , “Poisson Indices of Segregation,” appeared last year in Regional Science and Urban Economics. In addition, Mele presented the following studies: “Approximate Variational Inference for a Model of Social Interactions,” last September at the Conference on Bayesian Methods in Microeconometric Modeling, held at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, California; last October at the Midwest Econometrics Group Conference at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana; and last November at the Southern Economic Association Annual Meeting in Tampa, Florida. “A Structural Model of Segregation in Social Networks,” last June at the Choice Symposium, hosted by Erasmus University in Noordwijk, the Netherlands, and in a seminar at the University of Surrey in Guildford, England. “Viral Altruism,” in January at the American Economic Association’s annual meeting in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Mele also received a $3,000 summer research grant from the Networks, Electronic Commerce and Telecommunications (NET) Institute at New York University.
Assistant Professor Shabnam Mousavi made the following
academic presentations in 2013: “Ecological Rationality in Business Decision-Making,” in the Economics Seminar Series of Virginia Polytechnic Institute. “Overview of Financial Regulations: Processes, Mechanism and Theory,” at the Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition, the Max Planck Institute for Human Development in Berlin, Germany. “The Nature of Business Risk Involves Heuristic Judgment,” at the World Meetings of the Economic Science Association, in Zurich, Switzerland. “The Role of Gut Feeling in the Market,” at the 2013 joint conference of the Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics, the International Association for Research in Economic Psychology, and the International Confederation for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics and Economic Psychology. Mousavi also served as a co-chair and organizer of the conference, which took place in Atlanta, Georgia. “Heuristic Strategies in Business Decision-Making,” at a meeting of the Southeastern Chapter of the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences, in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.
“ Managers use heuristics [experiencebased methods for problem solving] to make financial, hiring, investment, and sales decisions. Consumers use heuristics to specify their consideration sets. CEOs’ gut feel plays a major role in capital budgeting decisions in corporations all over the world . . . . We explore the links between intuition and decision making under uncertainty. We especially look for ways in which information is processed in repeatable versus near-unique situations.” Shabnam Mousavi, with Reza Kheirandish, “The Role of Gut Feeling in the Market”
Mousavi has two articles forthcoming in the Journal of Business Research – “Risk, Uncertainty and Heuristics” and “Behind and Beyond a Shared Definition of Ecological Rationality: A Functional View of Heuristics.” Last November in Dallas, Assistant Professor Alessandro Rebucci made a presentation at a conference titled “Housing, Stability and the Macroeconomy: International Perspectives.” The event was sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, the International Monetary Fund Research Department, and the Journal of Money, Credit and Banking. Rebucci addressed the topic “Capital Flows, Housing Prices and the Macroeconomy: Evidence from Advanced and Emerging Market Economies.”
Finance Assistant Professor Jim KyungSoo Liew published the following articles in 2013: “Investing Under Inflation Risk,” in The Journal of Portfolio Management. “Spot Commodities as Inflation Protection,” in The Journal of Wealth Management. “Evidence of Momentum in Newsletter Recommendations,” in The Journal of Alternative Investments. “U.S. Equity Mean-Reversion Examined,” in Risks. Associate Professor Ken Yook published the study “Insider Trading and Firm-Specific Return Volatility” in the Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting. The article appeared in the online version of the journal in March 2013. The print publication is forthcoming. (continued on next page)
J O H N S H O P K I N S C A R E Y B U S I N E S S S C H O O L S pring 2 014 • 11
I.T. Professor William Agresti made a presentation titled “Advancing the IT Research Agenda” at the 14th Annual Conference in Information Technology Education and the 2nd Annual Conference on Research in Information Technology held jointly last October in Orlando, Florida.
Law Assistant Professor Stacey Lee published the paper “Can Incentives to Generic Manufacturers Save Doha’s Paragraph 6?” in the Summer 2013 issue of the Georgetown Journal of International Law. Lee also presented the paper in June 2013 during the annual Health Law Professors Conference at the Seton Hall University School of Law in Newark, New Jersey. The event was sponsored by the American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics. In addition, Lee reviewed the books Patently Innovative: How Pharmaceutical Firms Use Emerging Patent Law to Extend Monopolies on Blockbuster Drugs and Intellectual Property, Pharmaceuticals and Public Health: Access to Drugs in Developing Countries for the Journal of Legal Medicine. In December, The Baltimore Sun published Lee’s op-ed about a Food and Drug Administration policy on drug labeling.
MANAGEMENT The paper “Salesforce Compensation with Inventory Considerations” by Assistant Professor Tinglong Dai was published last September in the online version of Management Science. Last May, Dai won an Honorary Mention in the Best Student Paper Competition of the Production and Operations Management (POMS) College of Supply Chain Management. The $500 prize was for the study “Contracting for On-Time Performance in the U.S. Influenza Vaccine Supply Chain,” written while Dai was earning his PhD in operations management at Carnegie Mellon University. In the summer of 2013, Assistant Professor Brian Gunia received the award for Outstanding Published Journal Article from the International Association for Conflict Management at its annual conference in Tacoma, Washington. Gunia was recognized for the paper “Paying a Price: Culture, Trust, and Negotiation Consequences,” published July 2011 in the Journal of Applied Psychology. Also last year, Gunia published these articles: “Trust Me, I’m a Negotiator: Diagnosing Trust to Negotiate Effectively, Globally” in Organizational Dynamics.
12 • S pring 2 014 C A R E Y. J H U . E D U/C H A N G I N G B U S I N E S S
“Toward a Culture-by-Context Perspective on Negotiation: Negotiating Teams in the United States and Taiwan” in the Journal of Applied Psychology. “Path Toward Economic Resilience for Family Caregivers: Mitigating Household Deprivation and the Health Care Talent Shortage at the Same Time” in The Gerontologist. For more on Gunia’s research, see “No, I Insist, After Me,” on page 4 of this publication. Assistant Professor Ruxian Wang wrote three papers that appeared or were accepted for publication. “Assortment Management under the Generalized Attraction Model with a Capacity Constraint” was published last May in the Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management. “Flexible-Duration Extended Warranties with Dynamic Reliability Learning” appeared last September in the online version of Production and Operations Management. “Multi-Product Price Optimization and Competition under the Nested Logit Model with Product-Differentiated Price Sensitivities” is forthcoming in Operations Research.
MARKETING Assistant Professor Hyeongmin (Christian) Kim last year published “Situational Materialism: How Entering Lotteries May Undermine Self-Control,” in the Journal of Consumer Research; and “How Variety Seeking versus Inertial Tendency Influences the Effectiveness of Immediate versus Delayed Promotions,” in the Journal of Marketing Research. Kim also authored two papers that are forthcoming this year – “The Interactive Effect of Beliefs in Malleable Fate and Fateful Predictions on Choice,” in the Journal of Consumer Research; and “Buyer Beware of Your Shadow: How Price Moderates the Effect of Incidental Similarity on Buyer Behavior,” in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Additionally in 2013, Kim earned an Emerald Citation of Excellence Award for his article “Why Do Consumers Buy Counterfeit Luxury Brands?” which ran in the Journal of Marketing Research. The annual awards recognize the 50 most outstanding articles published by the top 300 management journals in the world.
Brian Gunia (PhD in Management and Organizations, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, 2011) is an assistant professor in the tenure track with expertise in the areas of negotiation, ethical decision making, and organizational failure. In addition, he is the founder of the Johns Hopkins Business in Government (BIG) Initiative.
Adam Seth Litwin (PhD in Management, Sloan School of
Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2008) is an assistant professor in the tenure track with expertise in employment relations and strategic human resource management. He also holds a secondary appointment as an assistant professor at the Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, and he is a research affiliate of the Employment Policy Research Network. Mario Macis (PhD in Economics, University of Chicago,
2007) is an assistant professor in the tenure track with expertise in the areas of labor and human resources economics, health economics, and experimental economics. He is also an associate faculty member at the Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, and a research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
Phillip Phan (PhD in Strategic Management, University of Washington, 1992) is a tenured professor with expertise in corporate governance, strategy, technological entrepreneurship, and regional economic development. He also serves as Executive Vice Dean of the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School, with oversight including the schoolâ€™s faculty and research functions.
Ozge Sahin (PhD in Operations Research, Columbia University, 2007) is an assistant professor in the tenure track with expertise in the areas of pricing and revenue management and supply-chain management.
JOHNS HOPKINS CAREY BUSINESS SCHOOL Spring 2014 â€˘ 13
Non-Proﬁt Org. U.S. Postage Paid Baltimore, MD Permit No. 1235 400 N. Charles Street 3 Baltimore, MD 21218
“ The oldest and remoest naions are looking here for light.” Daniel Coit Gilman
First President of the Johns Hopkins University
More than 135 years ago, Gilman’s inaugural address called for Johns Hopkins University to transform the world through education. Today, the Carey Business School is answering that call, launching innovative programs for a new generation of leaders bold enough to tackle the world’s toughest problems. Learn more about how we are fulfilling that mission. Visit us at carey.jhu.edu.
carey.jhu.edu 877-88 CAREY (877-882-2739) Where business is taught with humanity in mind.