Generating Solutions for Society
Logistics Service Provider Technology Report
Logistics Service Provider Technology Report
The Logistics Service Provider Technology Report (LSPTR) will be an annual report published by the University of Maryland’s Supply Chain Management Center that aims to provide technology spend visibility for logistics service providers (LSPs) in a variety of areas.
We find that LSPs do not know how much to invest in technology because public filings do not disclose specifics about IT spend, consulting firms have limited data to back their perspectives, and industry analysts are bias and do not collect hard data. Shippers also cannot compare providers' technology capabilities or investments due to LSPs alignment with strategy being unclear despite marketing various capabilities, and they cannot compare their partners’ technology investment within their segment or the broader market.
Publishing an annual technology report compiling technology spend data will provide a solution to the identified problems and create value for stakeholder groups including, but not limited to: LSPs, software vendors, hardware vendors, shippers, industry associations, trade groups, shareholders, and consulting firms.
The report will encompass all technology-related expenditures of the companies who opt in to provide a complete perspective of LSP interest, activity, and spend on technology, with an initial proof-of-concept/pilot addressing 2 key sub-sets of technology in 2025: AI and robotics.
Geoff Milsom - UMD Professor
Jaclyn Wilton - Advisor
Maggie McGuire - Fellow
Ryan Sachar - UMD Undergraduate Student
Ivy Zheng - UMD Undergraduate Student
CFO Narcissism and the Power of Persuasion Over Analysts: A Mixed-Methods Approach
Review of Accounting Studies
We study the role of CFO narcissism in the intent and ability to positively influence sell-side analysts’ perceptions of the firm. Consistent with narcissists casting favorable impressions on others, we find CFO narcissism is associated with overly optimistic analyst valuations. We then study public persuasion attempts by analyzing conference call transcripts and private persuasion attempts through a laboratory study. In the conference call setting, we provide evidence that narcissistic CFOs use more persuasive language and are more inclined to call on bearish analysts, both of which we link to higher price targets. In the lab study, we simulate a one-on-one conversation and find that narcissists are especially more likely to use coercive methods to induce higher valuations (e.g., threatening to remove private lines of communication). Collectively, we provide evidence that narcissistic CFOs exercise persuasion tactics to favorably influence analysts’ perceptions of firm value.
Chad Ham and Mark Piorkowski - Indiana University; Nick Seybert - University of Maryland; Sean Wang - Southern Methodist University
Conflicted About Coworkers: How Coworker Support Influences Engagement After Status Loss
Personnel Psychology, February 2025
People's needs for status and support are theoretically distinct, yet little research has considered how people cope with having one but not the other. We examine how people react to losing status as a function of whether they typically perceive their coworkers as supportive. Although social support is documented as a resource people can draw on to cope with failure at work, we argue that in the case of failures that implicate status (i.e., status loss), experiencing these events in a more supportive work group may not aid recovery and reengagement. Specifically, we predict that when the preexisting group context is one of more (rather than less) supportive coworkers, status loss may elicit greater ambivalence about those coworker relationships, triggering psychological reactions that undermine engagement. Consistent with this model, in a weekly experience sampling study of working adults (Study 1), having more supportive coworkers led to a stronger negative effect of weekly status loss on subsequent engagement. In scenario-based (Study 2) and high-involvement laboratory (Study 3) experiments featuring different manipulations of coworker support and status loss, we found that when individuals experienced status loss in more (rather than less) supportive work groups, status loss led to lower engagement because it heightened ambivalence about their coworker relationships, which triggered anxiety (Study 2), and self-threat and hurt feelings (Study 3). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
Jennifer Carson Marr (UMD), Edward P. Lemay (UMD), Hyunsun Park (Georgia Tech)