Premium
A PROCEDURE FOR SECONDARY DATA ANALYSIS: INNOVATION BY LOGISTICS SERVICE PROVIDERS
Author(s) -
BUSSE CHRISTIAN
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
journal of supply chain management
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.75
H-Index - 92
eISSN - 1745-493X
pISSN - 1523-2409
DOI - 10.1111/j.1745-493x.2010.03205.x
Subject(s) - service provider , context (archaeology) , business , categorical variable , test (biology) , marketing , service (business) , exploratory research , empirical research , knowledge management , computer science , statistics , mathematics , paleontology , sociology , anthropology , biology
This paper presents a procedure for confirmatory and exploratory research with a limited amount of secondary data. The methodology is exemplified by research on the innovation activities and performance of logistics service providers (LSPs), thereby extending the work of Wagner. A research hypothesis is derived, stating that the context of LSPs to innovation is significantly different from that of other service providers. Secondary data from the 2006–2008 Mannheim Innovation Panel, an annual survey on the innovation behavior of German firms, is assessed and found suitable to test that hypothesis. The χ 2 test of independence is used to test the hypothesis. Multiple activity and performance indicators can be used as operationalizations that are later tested in parallel, with the help of the Bonferroni correction. Then, the distribution of categorical variables is recalculated, and multiple scenarios for missing values are taken into account. Empirical and critical χ 2 values are computed, and the test result is aggregated. The findings indicate that the LSP context of innovation is indeed significantly different from that of other service providers. Those differences are then analyzed and interpreted. The results show that innovators among LSPs appear to have similar innovation benefits to non‐LSPs, while for LSPs, innovation appears to be more costly. This could explain the lower share of innovation‐active LSPs. The paper concludes by discussing the limitations of the methodology, and of the content‐related findings.