1 / 20

Studies on Transaction Governance Structure: Construct, Instruments, and Surveys.

Studies on Transaction Governance Structure: Construct, Instruments, and Surveys. Aimao Zhang, Ph.D. Department of Information Technology Georgia Southern University P.O.Box 8150 Statesboro, Georgia 30460-8150 Han Reichgelt Georgia Southern University College of Information Technology

babu
Download Presentation

Studies on Transaction Governance Structure: Construct, Instruments, and Surveys.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Studies on Transaction Governance Structure: Construct, Instruments, and Surveys. Aimao Zhang, Ph.D. Department of Information Technology Georgia Southern University P.O.Box 8150 Statesboro, Georgia 30460-8150 Han Reichgelt Georgia Southern University College of Information Technology P. O. Box 7995 Statesboro, GA 30460-7995

  2. Aimao Zhang “Transaction Governance Structure: Theories, Empirical Studies, and Instrument Design” to be appear inInternational Journal of Commerce and Management. Aimao Zhang and Han Reichgelt, “Product Complexity As A Determinant Of Transaction Governance Structure: An Empirical Comparison Of Web-Only And Traditional Banks,” to be appear inJournal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 4(3), 1-17, 2006. Aimao Zhang “Online versus Offline: a Combination of Product and Process Approach,” in review process at Electronic Commerce Research and Applications.

  3. Engineering Studies VS. Social Studies Descriptive Studies VS. Empirical Studies Focus is on Social Empirical Studies

  4. The Construct of TGS and Its Definition • Transaction governance structure (TGS) is a structure that mediates exchanges of goods or services between technologically separable agents or between production functions (Williamson, 1979; 1981). • A construct needs to be defined in terms of other constructs/concepts which have specified meaning and context.

  5. How Did We Measure TGS? Review of 81 empirical studies from 1982 to 2004.

  6. Tautology Aubert, B. A., Rivard, S., & Patry, M. (1996). Development of measures to assess dimensions of IS operation transactions. Omega, 24(6), 661-668.

  7. The Current Status of TGS Studies

  8. Can We Agree on the Dimensions of TGS? • Is he thinking what I’m thinking? I bet that he will buy my idea.

  9. Williamson’s Dimension of TGS ++ strong; + semi-strong; 0 weak. Source: Williamson 1991: 281

  10. Items Proposed for measuring TGS * Reversed

  11. Second Study There is a big price discrepancy among the same type of products offered by different sellers. If it is online, I ○ Strongly disagree ○ Disagree ○ Neutral ○ Agree ○ Strongly agree If it is offline, I ○ Strongly disagree ○ Disagree ○ Neutral ○ Agree ○ Strongly agree

  12. ANOVA Using FDIC Data to Test Relationship between Product and TGS

  13. Third Study Product: Using Nelson’s classification scheme (Nelson, 1974) - experience goods (Perfume, shoe, and clothing) and search goods (computer hardware and book). Process: (See instrument on the next slide) Select an efficient and effective way to find out the price for the following products Perfume/Cologne  Online OR  Offline Shoe  Online OR  Offline Clothing  Online OR  Offline Computer hardware  Online OR  Offline Book  Online OR  Offline

  14. The Instrument for measuring transaction process

  15. Data Summary * 35.8% is the percentage of participants chose offline for Perfume in function 1 (157/(157+281)). ** 64.2% is the percentage of participants chose online for Perfume in function 1 (281/(157+281)). *** 38.8% is the average percentage of participants chose online for Perfume in all 4 functions ((64.2%+47.3%+28.8%+15.1%)/4).

  16. Factorial Logistic Regression contrast code (1 1 1 -1.5 -1.5, -2 1 1 0 0, 0 -1 1 0 0, 0 0 0 -1 1) to code five products. contrast code (1 0 0 0, 0 1 0 0, 0 0 1 0) to code four process functions.

  17. Implications

  18. Limitations • Factor analysis • Independency problem due to repeated measures • Sample bias

More Related