James C. Ward’s research while affiliated with Arizona State University and other places

This study explores the social ecology of publication productivity in the Journal of Consumer Research (Volumes 1 through 20). It examines the distribution of scholarly productivity as it relates to collaborative networks of authors. It is found that these networks resemble tree-like structures with successful scholars as their "trunks" and collaborators as the branches. Thus, we find structural effects of network centrality of authors on their individual publication productivity and of network density on network publication productivity.

Despite an extensive amount of research studying the influence of significant others on an individual's ethical behavior, researchers have not examined this variable in the context of organizational group boundaries. This study tests actual and perceptual sharing and variation in ethical reasoning and moral intent within and across functional groups in an organization. Integrating theory on ethical behavior, group dynamics, and culture, it is proposed that organizational structure affects cognitive structure. Departmental boundaries create stronger social ties within the group as well as intergroup biases between the groups. Thus individuals will be more likely to share in ethical reasoning and moral intent with members of their own functional group (in-group) than with members of other functional groups (out-group). Additionally, they will perceive that they are more likely to share in ethical reasoning and moral intent with in-group members than with out-group members. Responding to two versions of two ethical scenarios, respondents contrasted their own ethical behavior to their expected ethical behavior of in-group and out-group members. Empirical results confirmed the hypotheses. Organizational group boundaries create actual as well as perceptual sharing and variation in ethical reasoning and moral intent. Furthermore, when comparing perceptual sharing to actual sharing, results show that individuals understate their sharing of ethical reasoning and moral intent with out-group members and overstate their sharing with in-group members. As organizational boundaries can create actual and perceived differences between groups that could lead to inter-group conflict, suggestions for management focus on removing or blurring inter-group boundaries.

This study examines the relation between author productivity and the network structure of collaboration among 1,215 authors who published consumer behavior articles in selected journals from 1977 to 1996. We find that the distribution of publication productivity is skewed, following an empirical regularity that has also been observed in other disciplines. After finding a strong relation between author productivity and collaboration, we next explore the structure of co-authorships. Network analysis reveals a "macronetwork" that includes virtually all of the most frequently published authors and many "micro" networks that surround them. Further analysis shows strong relations between publication productivity and the social-structural position of authors in co-author networks. Implications of these findings for understanding the institutional, intellectual, and social structure of knowledge production in consumer behavior are discussed.

Organizational buying and strategic marketing decisions often emerge from a messy process of belief accommodation and compromise. In a longitudinal field study, the authors investigate how the beliefs and preferences of individual actors in a collective decision developed and changed. This provides a rare opportunity to relate beliefs and social influence to articulated preferences, as well as to evaluate the basic assumptions that underlie persuasive arguments theory, a prominent theory of group polarization. Econometric models are employed to test proposed relationships between group processes and outcomes. A model incorporating both cognitive and social process variables accurately predicts 95% of the actors’ top choices. The authors provide new insights for understanding the dynamics underlying group polarization and exploring group processes in marketing.

Organizational buying and strategic marketing decisions often emerge from a messy process of belief accommodation and compromise. In a longitudinal field study, the authors investigate how the beliefs and preferences of individual actors in a collective decision developed and changed. This provides a rare opportunity to relate beliefs and social influence to articulated preferences, as well as to evaluate the basic assumptions that underlie persuasive arguments theory, a prominent theory of group polarization. Econometric models are employed to test proposed relationships between group processes and outcomes. A model incorporating both cognitive and social process variables accurately predicts 95% of the actors' top choices. The authors provide new insights for understanding the dynamics underlying group polarization and exploring group processes in marketing.

This article explores the relation of culture to consumption by investigating individual, social, and cultural sources of variation in the sharing of causal reasoning about behavior in two microcultures. The results suggest (1 ) the importance of intracultural variation in the study of culture, (2) differences between experts and novices as a robust source of this variation, (3) novel insights into the relationship between expertise and sociocultural phenomena, and (4) the potential for investigating attitude structure, categorization, and attribution as products of causal reasoning originating from cultural belief systems. The study also demonstrates the synergy created by diverse research methods. Copyright 1996 by the University of Chicago.

Strategic decision processes feature the interplay of decision participants who advocate different visions of the path to organizational success. By examining the mental maps of marketing and R&D managers, this study traces the changing portrait of a strategic decision. The Techno project, a highly contested decision in a Fortune 500 company, provided the context for our research. Employing a longitudinal design, interviews were conducted with marketing and R&D executives at three points in the decision process. Based on a content analysis of the executive interviews, mental maps were constructed to capture the changing belief structures of the two functions. The analysis is further enriched by qualitative data drawn directly from the transcribed interviews of marketing and R&D managers. Changes in the managers' belief structures are linked to corresponding changes in the direction of the strategic decision. Several propositions issuing from the research are offered and key managerial and research implications are highlighted.

By examining marketing's strategic role through the lenses of managers operating throughout the organizational structure, researchers and strategists can gain special insights. Adopting a structural-cognitive perspective, the authors employed a longitudinal design, coupled with snowball sampling, to explore the beliefs and changes in beliefs of key actors in a major strategic decision. The results show a dramatic conflict across functions in the interpretation of a proposed new strategy and its consequences. The authors conclude with a discussion of the implications of the results for the study of managerial thought worlds, organizational learning, and strategy development.

By examining marketing's strategic role through the lenses of managers operating throughout the organizational structure, researchers and strategists can gain special insights. Adopting a structural-cognitive perspective, the authors employed a longitudinal design, coupled with snowball sampling, to explore the beliefs and changes in beliefs of key actors in a major strategic decision. The results show a dramatic conflict across functions in the interpretation of a proposed new strategy and its consequences. The authors conclude with a discussion of the implications of the results for the study of managerial thought worlds, organizational learning, and strategy development.