Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
You might have heard of the beer distribution game. The idea is that a group of participants enact a four-stage supply chain scenario. Some take on the role of those at the point of origin in the supply chain – the upstream agents: manufacturers and distributors. Others role-play the downstream agents at the other end of the chain – the distributors and end-customers: in this case, let’s say the bar owners and beer drinkers. The goal is simple. All you have to do is produce, deliver and sell the beer to your customers, while keeping your costs on back orders and inventory to a minimum. This should be easy enough, in theory. The basic rules of economics suggest that customer demand dictates supply. In practice, however, things can get a little skewed. And this disconnect can happen fast. For a start, players have limited information. They can only see what’s in front of them – bits of paper with order numbers. And as they start to share this information with each other, all kinds of coordination issues arise. Things start to go wrong. Customer demand for X or Y kegs of beer is imperfectly relayed to the bar owner retailer, who in turn passes it on the other players upstream, but makes mistakes in doing so. The result is a kind of Chinese Whispers where confusion reigns, poor decisions are made about stock, too much or too little beer is manufactured or supplied. You end up with increased costs in the supply chain, and, not to mention thirsty beer drinkers. The beer game is just that – a game. But it represents a problem that is all too familiar to suppliers in most industries and sectors. It’s called the Bullwhip effect, and it’s a conundrum. “The Bullwhip effect is a real challenge for suppliers in every industry,” said Nikolay Osadchiy, associate professor of Information Systems & Operations Management at Goizueta Business School. “Because demand information gets distorted along the chain, suppliers can see a lot of volatility at their end which can translate into more inventory and drives up costs. It’s a really pressing issue that needs to be addressed.” Osadchiy and his colleagues Bill Schmidt from Cornell University and Jing Wu from the Chinese University of Hong Kong got to work researching the idea. First, they modeled a supply network based on 15 years of data from publicly traded companies across the globe. Second, they determined the ‘upstreamness’ that different firms had – or the positions they occupy – within that network. And third, they examined the demand distortion within each firm and measured demand variability across the different layers of the network to determine how they affect each other. The results of their work were all captured in the article attached below – the information was quite compelling and will greatly assist businesses as they plan their way through and after a globe-shifting event like COVID-19. It’s interesting material for sure – and if you are a journalist looking to know more about supply chains and how businesses will need to adapt in order to survive post-pandemic, then let our experts help with your questions and coverage. Nikolay Osadchiy is an Associate Professor of Information Systems & Operations Management at Emory University's Goizueta Business School. He is an acclaimed expert in the areas of supply chain management and how supply networks affect risk and operational performance. Nikolay is available to speak with media regarding this topic – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview today.
Continuing to Learn and Explore American History
In the United States, students take several American history courses throughout their K-12 experience. So, why should students bother to continue taking American history courses in college? For Southern Utah University's Dr. Mark Miller, the answer is simple. “When I teach a history course, I am always looking for ways to point out how an issue or event in the past is relevant to something going on in today's world,” said Dr. Miller. “With this year's presidential election going on there have been plenty of examples to tie into regarding past politics and past political crises we have lived through as Americans.” Dr. Miller has conducted some exciting research that will be published in 2021. His upcoming articles includes: “Polygamy under the Red Cliffs: Women’s Voices and Historical Memory at Centennial Park” in Utah Historical Quarterly, “A River Again: Fossil Creek, Desert Fishes, and Dam Removal in the American Southwest” in Pacific Historical Review, and “‘One Territory, Many Peoples:” Racial and Ethnic Groups and the Development of Arizona Territory” in The Smoke Signal. “I think my work on plural marriage and environmental history shows that history is never dead,” said Dr. Miller. “It reveals that in current debates history is quite important. What happened in the past still informs the present. Since both of these topics are quite controversial today, I think historians provide a valuable service by exposing the history behind debates over allowing polygamy in modern America or whether we should make trade offs in development and water use to preserve unique species. Knowledge of people who practice plural marriage and their religious history as well as the history of preservation efforts toward endangered species is vital to all participants in the debates.” Dr. Mark Miller is a professor of history and the department chair of History, Sociology, & Anthropology at Southern Utah University. His research and teaching specialties include United States History, American West, Borderlands, Indigenous Culture and History, World Civilization, and Latin America. He has published articles and books on modern American Indian History, most recently Forgotten Tribes (2006) and Claiming Tribal Identity (2013). He has published articles on race and ethnicity, on indigenous identity and politics in several journals. Dr. Miller is familiar with the media and available for an interview. Simply visit his profile.
Workplaces are changing – and with America adjusting and adapting to the new realities of COVID-19, how teams are managed and how leaders are portrayed is also in a state of evolution. Georgia Southern’s Steven Charlier was recently interviewed by the BBC – and was featured in an article that focused on the differences between leadership skills and how they come across in-person and on-line. “Fifteen years ago, Steven Charlier, chair of management at Georgia Southern University in the U.S., had a hunch that in-person charisma and leadership skills don’t translate virtually. “Before I became an academic, I worked for IBM for a number of years on a lot of virtual teams,” he says. “I had a boss who was a wonderful guy and great manager, and he drove me crazy trying to communicate. He was incredibly slow and unresponsive.” This seed of professional vexation has borne fruit, with new data showing that the confidence, intelligence and extroversion that have long propelled ambitious workers into the executive suite are not enough online, because they simply don’t translate into virtual leadership. Instead, workers who are organised, dependable and productive take the reins of virtual teams. Finally, doers lead the pack – at least remotely. Georgia Southern’s Charlier is not surprised to find a wide gulf between the behaviors of in-person and remote leaders. “In any leadership role, you’ve got to establish that trust. It’s trusting that the person is going to do things,and trusting that they’re telling the truth and being up front and honest. But how you go about doing that virtually is a little different – it’s a different skill set.” This is a fascinating topic and one that will be top of mind as America begins a new era of remote working. And if you are a journalist looking to follow up on this topic – then let our experts help. Steven Charlier is an expert in project management and virtual teams on project-based work and how technology influences how we work and lead within organizations. He’s available to speak with media about this very interesting topic – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.
In the introduction to his new book, Greg Fisher and his co-authors note that strategy used to be the domain of only those at the very top of an organization. Many would attend management retreats and forget what was discussed soon afterward, much like unfulfilled New Year’s resolutions. “It used to be that strategy happened at off-site retreats, often coupled with golf, cigars and scotch. It used to be that strategy was only discussed as part of an annual planning cycle … was about grand, long-term plans that stretched way into the future,” they wrote. “Strategy was largely cerebral.” Fisher, the Larry and Barbara Sharpf Professor and an associate professor of entrepreneurship at the IU Kelley School of Business, says those days are over. Even before the Covid-19 pandemic began seemingly disrupting every aspect of life, including business processes, the rapid pace of social change meant that companies could no longer wait or slowly adjust. His book, “Strategy in 3D: Essential Tools to Diagnose, Decide & Deliver (Oxford University Press),” co-authored with two former Kelley School faculty members, presents insights into how companies can broaden and include more people in the strategic process. “Anyone with career ambition in the business world needs to become a strategist. We hope this book will serve as a useful resource for everyone willing to take that leap,” he wrote along with John Wisneski of Arizona State University’s W.P. Carrey School of Business and Rene Bakker of Rotterdam School of Management at Erasmus University. The first section of the book discusses strategic concepts and ideas and how they can be enacted in different ways and at different levels of an organization. Then they discuss the “three elements that are central to being strategic within a business – the 3Ds of diagnose, decide and deliver.” The second section outlines tools that should be part of any manager’s strategy toolbox. The authors see strategy as being about diagnosing a wide array of complex issues or opportunities facing organizations, deciding on solutions to address those challenges or opportunities and then taking action. But the process of forming such strategies is messy. “There are no hard-and-fast rules when it comes to applying tools in tandem,” they note in the book’s conclusion. “What does stand out, though, is that making combinations that ‘click’ with the specific problem in focus adds more value than simply adding tools in isolation.” The book’s 218 pages cover a great deal, but here are three important takeaways from Fisher, Wisneski and Bakker: Let the problem define the parameters – Preconceived preferences for certain tools or frameworks offer fewer useful insights than the application of tools developed to address specific issues. “In other words, start from the problem or question you face,” they said. Combine strategic tools that offer complementary insights – It makes sense to select tools that will investigate different sides of a problem, “making sure no stone is left unturned.” It makes sense to often include at least one external and internal strategic tool in tandem. “We want to know generally whether this new market is attractive, but the more important question is whether the market is also attractive for us,” they said. “Strategists are everywhere,” Fisher and his co-authors write. “We are aligned in our dismissal of the view of the chief executive as the almighty, all-knowing strategy designer.”
Volunteers receiving government aid while unemployed face scrutiny, bias from public
With the worldwide spike in unemployment caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, many people may turn to volunteerism as a way to pass their newly found free time. But new research suggests that volunteers who also receive government aid are often judged negatively as "wasting time" that could be used to find paid employment. "We found that aid recipients are scrutinized to a greater extent than those who are working, including the underemployed, with observers demonstrating a strong bias toward believing that aid recipients should be using their time to pursue employment opportunities above all else," said Jenny Olson, an assistant professor of marketing at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business and corresponding author of the research forthcoming in the International Journal of Research in Marketing. "This is beyond education, personal leisure, and spending time with family and friends. "As a result, they are given less latitude in how they use their time, and can even be seen as more moral for choosing not to engage in prosocial behaviors, when such behaviors take time away from gaining paid employment," Olson added. "The simple act of volunteering among aid recipients -- versus not mentioning volunteering -- not only shapes judgments of the individual aid recipients, but this information can also impact views toward federal tax policy more broadly." Although volunteering is a positive activity that partially combats the negative stereotype of a welfare beneficiary, Olson and her colleagues found that it also sparks anger among observing consumers, with aid recipients being perceived as being "less moral for choosing to volunteer." Factors that minimize these judgments include being perceived as taking strides toward gaining employment via education and being perceived as unable to work. Other co-authors of the paper, "How Income Shapes Moral Judgments of Prosocial Behavior," are Andrea Morales of Arizona State University, Brent McFerran of Simon Fraser University in Canada and Darren Dahl of the University of British Columbia. The research was supported in part by grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. According to a 2019 report from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, public spending on government assistance averaged more than 20 percent across 36 countries in 2018. Many countries -- including those in Asia, Europe, and the Americas -- have seen a rise in the number of people receiving benefits over the years, a total now reaching into the billions. The extent to which the welfare state is supported depends, in no small part, on public sentiment. Previous research has shown that support for government spending on welfare programs is directly related to how the voting public perceives the beneficiaries. This is the first paper to document a link between prosocial behavior and support for federal spending on welfare programs. "Given that individuals perceive opportunity costs for their own time, it stands to reason that they perceive them for others as well," Olson said. "Because government programs are supported by 'their' taxpayer dollars, observers often feel justified in suggesting how aid recipients spend their time." The research shows that consumers prefer different patterns of tax redistribution as a function of viewing aid recipients making nonfinancial choices. Specifically, consumers support allocating fewer tax dollars toward supporting government assistance programs after hearing about an aid recipient who volunteers his time. Researchers conducted nine studies across three countries. They randomly presented participants with scenarios about hypothetical aid recipients and asked them to offer judgment about how the recipients used their time, such as engaging in volunteer activities or sending out resumes. Participants were asked how they viewed target individuals on a morality index and how they felt about them emotionally. For interviews with Jenny Olson, contact George Vlahakis at 812-855-0846 or vlahakis@iu.edu.
The spotted lanternfly, an invasive species native to China, India and Vietnam, arrived in Pennsylvania in 2014. It is only over the past couple years, however, that the insect has gained particular notoriety. This year, the presence of spotted lanternflies has drastically increased in eastern Pennsylvania, and these pesky bugs can have dangerous effects. According to Villanova University professor of biology Vikram Iyengar, PhD, "The spotted lanternflies are back and showing no signs of going away. In fact, 12 new counties in Pennsylvania were added to the quarantine zone in 2020, which indicates that the invasive insects are spreading westward within the state." This quarantine prevents the travel of any spotted lanternflies through landscaping waste, firewood, plants and more. Reducing the spread via quarantine is vital to minimize agricultural harm, including damage to fruit-bearing trees. (Spotted lanternflies pose a considerable threat to grape and wine production throughout the country.) Per Dr. Iyengar, "The state of Pennsylvania is devoting a lot of resources to figure this out, and there have been some successes—for example, New York still has not reported spotted lanternflies, which indicates that the Pennsylvania quarantine has been somewhat effective. But there is still no solution yet." So, what's the answer? Dr. Iyengar notes that the possibility of a predator species will not combat the issue. Instead, "they will need to find some special pheromone or chemical that selectively lures spotted lanternflies into traps." Having a harsh winter this year is also key. "The fact that we had such a mild winter last year probably meant that more eggs were able to withstand the winter," said Dr. Iyengar. "A harsh winter may be our best hope, so the persistence of the spotted lanternfly may be yet another negative consequence of climate change." Another invasive species currently being tracked in Pennsylvania is the emerald ash borer. Villanova's R. Kelman Wieder, PhD, studies plant biology and believes these insects, which kill ash trees, are the next big threat to plant life in Pennsylvania. "I have lots of ash trees in my woods and they all are dead or dying," said Dr. Wieder. "My house was built in the 1830s and the huge ash tree was as old as my house." But Dr. Wieder isn't too worried. "Are we doomed? Well, yes and no. Eastern deciduous forests have been radically changed in the past by the chestnut blight and Dutch elm disease, yet we still have forests." That said, he still has some concerns for the future. "On top of this, deer munch on young trees," added Dr. Wieder. "So many Pennsylvania forests are deficient in young trees. So, in 50 to 100 years, what will happen?"
Paper ballots, risk-limiting audits can help defend elections and democracy, IU study finds
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- With just over two months before the 2020 election, three professors at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business offer a comprehensive review of how other nations are seeking to protect their democratic institutions and presents how a multifaceted, targeted approach is needed to achieve that goal in the U.S., where intelligence officials have warned that Russia and other rivals are again attempting to undermine our democracy. But these concerns over election security are not isolated to the United States and extend far beyond safeguarding insecure voting machines and questions about voting by mail. Based on an analysis of election reforms by Australia and European Union nations, they outline steps to address election infrastructure security -- such as requiring paper ballots and risk-limiting audits -- as well as deeper structural interventions to limit the spread of misinformation and combat digital repression. "In the United States, despite post-2016 funding, still more than two-thirds of U.S. counties report insufficient funding to replace outdated, vulnerable paperless voting machines; further help is needed," said Scott Shackelford, associate professor of business law and ethics in the Kelley School, executive director of the Ostrom Workshop and chair of IU's Cybersecurity Program. "No nation, however powerful, or tech firm, regardless of its ambitions, is able to safeguard democracies against the full range of threats they face in 2020 and beyond. Only a multifaceted, polycentric approach that makes necessary changes up and down the stack will be up to the task." For example, Australia -- which has faced threats from China -- has taken a distinct approach to protect its democratic institutions, including reclassifying its political parties as "critical infrastructure." This is a step that the U.S. government has yet to take despite repeated breaches at both the Democratic and Republican national committees. Based on an analysis of election reforms by Australia and European Union nations, they outline steps to address election infrastructure security -- such as requiring paper ballots and risk-limiting audits -- as well as deeper structural interventions to limit the spread of misinformation and combat digital repression. "In the United States, despite post-2016 funding, still more than two-thirds of U.S. counties report insufficient funding to replace outdated, vulnerable paperless voting machines; further help is needed," said Scott Shackelford, associate professor of business law and ethics in the Kelley School, executive director of the Ostrom Workshop and chair of IU's Cybersecurity Program. "No nation, however powerful, or tech firm, regardless of its ambitions, is able to safeguard democracies against the full range of threats they face in 2020 and beyond. Only a multifaceted, polycentric approach that makes necessary changes up and down the stack will be up to the task." For example, Australia -- which has faced threats from China -- has taken a distinct approach to protect its democratic institutions, including reclassifying its political parties as "critical infrastructure." This is a step that the U.S. government has yet to take despite repeated breaches at both the Democratic and Republican national committees. The article, "Defending Democracy: Taking Stock of the Global Fight Against Digital Repression, Disinformation and Election Insecurity," has been accepted by Washington and Lee Law Review. Other authors are Anjanette "Angie" Raymond, associate professor of business law and ethics, and Abbey Stemler, assistant professor of business law and ethics, both at Kelley; and Cyanne Loyle, associate professor of political science at Pennsylvania State University and a global fellow at the Peace Research Institute Oslo. Aside from appropriating sufficient funds to replace outdated voting machines and tabulation systems, the researchers said that Congress should encourage states to refuse to fund voting machines with paperless ballots. The researchers also suggest requiring risk-limiting audits, which use statistical samples of paper ballots to verify official election results. Other suggested steps include: Congress requiring the National Institute of Standards and Technology to update their voting machine standards, which state and county election officials rely on when deciding which machines to purchase. Australia undertook such a measure. Creating a National Cybersecurity Safety Board to investigate cyberattacks on U.S. election infrastructure and issue post-elections reports to ensure that vulnerabilities are addressed. Working with universities to develop training for election officials nationwide to prepare them for an array of possible scenarios, and creating a cybersecurity guidebook for use by newly elected and appointed election officials. "With regards to disinformation in particular, the U.S. government could work with the EU to globalize the self-regulatory Code of Practice on Disinformation for social media firms and thus avoiding thorny First Amendment concerns," Raymond said. "It could also work to create new forums for international information sharing and more effective rapid alert and joint sanctions regimes. "The international community has the tools to act and hold accountable those actors that would threaten democratic institutions," added Stemler, who also is a faculty associate at Harvard University's Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society. "Failing the political will to act, pressure from consumer groups and civil society will continue to mount on tech firms, in particular Facebook, which may be sufficient for them to voluntarily expand their efforts in the EU globally, the same way that more firms are beginning to comply with its General Data Protection Regulation globally, as opposed to designing new information systems for each jurisdiction."
Tune in September 13 as GSU honors its Top 40 Under 40
The Georgia Southern University Alumni Association “40 Under 40” Class of 2020 has been announced. The exemplary group will be honored during a virtual awards ceremony on Sunday, Sept. 13, which will be broadcast via Facebook Live on the Alumni Association’s page @GeorgiaSouthernAlumni. The “40 Under 40” program, in its fifth year, recognizes young alumni who have made significant strides in business, leadership, community, educational or philanthropic endeavors. “We are thrilled to celebrate alumni who are making an impact across the country,” said Ava Edwards, director of Alumni Relations. “They are industry leaders and community champions who represent the best of the University. We are proud to call them Eagles.” The “40 Under 40” honorees were chosen by a selection committee that reviewed each individual’s professional expertise and achievements, and their dedication to charitable and community initiatives. Their commitment to Georgia Southern was also taken into consideration. The selection process began with nominations in March with more than 240 alumni nominated for this year’s class. Honorees must have attended Georgia Southern or Armstrong State University and aspire to uphold the University’s core values of collaboration, academic excellence, discovery and innovation, integrity, openness and inclusion, and sustainability. Follow the attached article below for more details and a list of this year's honorees. To learn more about Georgia Southern University or if you are journalist and would like to cover this prestigious event, simply reach out to Georgia Southern Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.
Georgia Southern University saw a significant increase in grant and contract funding awarded to its faculty for research in the 2020 fiscal year. Georgia Southern faculty and staff received 144 awards totaling $10.7 million, which represents nearly a 67% increase over the previous year. The University received $6.4 million in FY2019 and $5.6 million in FY2018. This year marks the first time that faculty-led research at Georgia Southern broke the $10 million threshold. Vice Provost for Research Christopher Curtis, Ph.D., praised the faculty for their achievements. “These are highly competitive awards from the state, the federal government and private enterprises,” he said. “To grow our research portfolio in a national environment of diminishing funding is truly remarkable and a testament to the intellectual firepower and creativity of our professors. Georgia Southern is a Public Impact Research university, which means that the success of these researchers will be felt well beyond the confines of the University and will extend across the region.” Faculty engage in research that contributes significantly to the University’s $1.4 billion economic impact on the coastal region and that makes Georgia Southern a leading Public Impact Research university in the Southeast. The Allen E. Paulson College of Engineering and Computing, the College of Science and Mathematics and the Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health each received over $2 million in sponsored awards in FY2020. If you have any questions about the faculty research being conducted at Georgia Southern University, or if you are a journalist looking to cover this topic - let us help. Christopher Curtis is the Vice Provost for Research at Georgia Southern University. Simply click on his icon to arrange an interview today.
A new program being offered by the Waters College of Health Professions at Georgia Southern University is helping soldiers with the 3rd Infantry Division (ID) rank up their readiness by offering a new Tactical Athlete Certificate (TAC) program. This program is designed to help soldiers improve their performance, avoid musculoskeletal injuries in physical training, receive college credits and points toward promotions. The program comprises three courses including a basic course, trainer course and programming course. “The Tactical Athlete Certificate is a beneficial program for both the military as a whole and the individual soldier,” said Nancy Henderson, Ph.D., assistant professor in the Department of Rehabilitation Sciences. “The military gains more knowledgeable soldiers who can develop science-based and comprehensive physical training plans, and the individual soldier benefits by receiving college credits, which can help them as they advance in their military careers.” Each course is a three-week hybrid course with two weeks online and one week of face-to-face instruction and could be completed in one semester. Institutional fees are waived for active-duty military, and the admissions process does not require a minimum GPA or SAT/ACT score. If you are a journalist and are looking to cover this topic or learn more about how Georgia Southern University is working with the armed forces, the let us help with your stories. Dr. Nancy Henderson is an assistant professor in the Department of Rehabilitation Sciences at Georgia Southern University. She is an expert in injury prevention, running form and assessing meaningful change of interventions. Nancy is available to speak with media regarding this topic – simply click on her icon to arrange an interview.
