@article {1971131,
	title = {How Plant Managers{\textquoteright} Experiences and Attitudes towards Sustainability Relate to Operational Performance},
	journal = {Production and Operations Management},
	volume = {18},
	year = {2009},
	month = {2009},
	pages = {278-299},
	abstract = {Managers are increasingly faced with pressure to think not just about profits, but also about their organization{\textquoteright}s environmental and social performance. This research provides a first examination of operational managers{\textquoteright} experiences with and attitudes about employee well-being and environmental issues, how these factors impact employee well-being and environmental performance, and how the three performance measures interrelate. We use violations of Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations and Toxic Release Inventory reports of emissions as proxies for employee well-being and environmental performance. Our findings suggest that operational managers do not (yet) think in sustainability terms. However, employee well-being and environmental performance do interact in a significant way with operational performance. Hence, operational managers would benefit from a more complete understanding of the relationships among the elements of the triple bottom line.},
	keywords = {Management, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Pagell,Mark and Gobeli,Dave}
}
@article {1971136,
	title = {Accelerating Innovation at Hewlett-Packard},
	journal = {Research Technology Management: international journal of research management},
	volume = {Jan/Feb 2005},
	year = {2005},
	month = {2005},
	keywords = {Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Rivas,Rio}
}
@article {1971141,
	title = {The Return on R\&D Versus Capital Expenditures in the Pharmaceutical and Chemistry Industies},
	journal = {IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management},
	volume = {50},
	year = {2003},
	month = {2003},
	pages = {141 -150},
	abstract = {The impact of research and development (R\&D) on firm performance is generally agreed to be positive, but the nature and extent of this impact share little agreement in the previous research. Using an improved, time series, cross-sectional regression model that accounts for both contemporaneous and firm-specific serial correlation, as well as the feedback between firm profitability and investments, our study compares the rate of return from a dollar investment on R\&D to a dollar investment on fixed assets in pharmaceutical and chemical industries. We find positive associations of R\&D intensity and all variables of firm performance (net margin, operating margin, sales growth, and market value). We find that an investment in R\&D earns an operating margin return much higher than the industry cost of capital. We also find that the effect of an investment in R\&D on the firm{\textquoteright}s market value is about twice as much the effect of an investment in fixed assets. These findings have implications for corporate investment strategies, indicating that additional R\&D investment is more likely to provide a firm with a unique and sustainable competitive advantage.},
	keywords = {Strategy \& Entrepreneurship, Supply Chain},
	author = {Hsieh,Ping-Hung and Mishra,C. S. and Gobeli,Dave}
}
@article {1971146,
	title = {The Three R Framework: Improving e-Strategy across reach, richness and range},
	journal = {Business Horizons},
	volume = {46},
	year = {2003},
	month = {2003},
	pages = {5-14},
	keywords = {Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Wells,J. and Gobeli,Dave}
}
@article {1971151,
	title = {Creating Brand Equity Through Strategic Investments},
	journal = {Journal of Private Equity},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2002},
	month = {2002},
	pages = {45-52},
	abstract = {Brand equity is central to an understanding of the worth of any business, yet it exists in the minds of consumers as a mixture of awareness and image. To measure and understand how this equity is developed, mananged, and enhanced is central to all theories of value creation. This article looks at the concepts of brand identity, brand meaning, brand response, and brand relationship with an eye toward how the measure of brand equity correlates with and is influenced by technology equity, communication equity, and foreign strategic investments. Seventy-seven multinational firms are tracked through the years 1986-1988 and results are reported on based on R\&D expenses, advertising costs, and investments in foreign subsidiaries.},
	keywords = {Marketing, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Mishra,Chandra  S. and Koenig,Hal and Gobeli,Dave}
}
@article {1978541,
	title = {Linking Teaching to Research Publication Opportunities: Experience in Seven European Countries.},
	year = {2002},
	month = {2002},
	keywords = {Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Przybylowski,K. and Rudelius,W.}
}
@article {1978551,
	title = {Enhancing Technology Management Through Alliances},
	year = {2001},
	month = {2001},
	keywords = {Marketing, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Koenig,Hal}
}
@article {1978546,
	title = {Enhancing the E-Business Value Sequence Through R\&D},
	year = {2001},
	month = {2001},
	address = {Portland, OR},
	keywords = {Marketing, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Koenig,Hal}
}
@article {1977341,
	title = {Using IT to add value: Innovation versus Efficiency},
	year = {2001},
	month = {2001},
	address = {Portland, OR},
	keywords = {BIS, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Coakley,James and Gobeli,Dave}
}
@article {1971161,
	title = {The Effectiveness of Long Term, Accounting-based Incentive Plans},
	journal = {Journal of Managerial Issues},
	volume = {12},
	year = {2000},
	month = {2000},
	keywords = {Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Mishra,C. S. and Gobeli,Dave and May,D.}
}
@article {1978556,
	title = {Impact of R\&D on Performance},
	year = {2000},
	month = {2000},
	address = {Seattle, WA},
	keywords = {Marketing, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Mishra,C. and Koenig,Hal}
}
@article {1971156,
	title = {Strategic Value of Corporate Venture Capital Programs},
	journal = {Journal of Private Equity},
	year = {2000},
	month = {2000},
	abstract = {Corporate venturing activities, driven largely by the need to be competitive in the Internet Age, have out-paced the accompanying theory on how such programs can create value. This article presents a framework for understanding value creation through a firm{\textquoteright}s venture capital programs. The framework includes two stages of value creation: a firm creates value through building technology equity and brand equity, and then corporate venturing programs can multiply this value. A mediating variable, free cash flow level, is included to allow for effective use of venture funds.},
	keywords = {Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Mishra,C. S.}
}
@article {1978566,
	title = {The Effectiveness of CEO Compensation},
	year = {1999},
	month = {1999},
	address = {Florida},
	keywords = {Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Mishra,C. and McConaughy,D.}
}
@article {1978571,
	title = {Strategic Value of Technology and Brand Equity},
	year = {1999},
	month = {1999},
	address = {New Jersey},
	keywords = {Marketing, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Mishra,C. and Koenig,Hal}
}
@article {1978561,
	title = {Two Stage Internalization Framework for Multinational Corporations},
	year = {1999},
	month = {1999},
	address = {South Carolina},
	keywords = {Marketing, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Koenig,Hal}
}
@article {1978576,
	title = {Valuation of intangible Assets in Software Firms},
	year = {1999},
	month = {1999},
	address = {Corvallis, OR},
	keywords = {Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Mishra,C.}
}
@article {1971166,
	title = {Managing Conflict in Software Development Teams:  A Multi-Level Analysis},
	journal = {Journal of Product Innovation Management},
	volume = {15},
	year = {1998},
	month = {1998},
	pages = {423-435},
	abstract = {For a new product development (NPD) organization, a little conflict can be a good thing. Healthy disagreements can push project team members or different functional groups in an organization to pursue more in-depth, insightful analysis. This type of creative tension can help to engender an environment that encourages innovation and thus keeps NPD efforts free from the business-as-usual doldrums. However, management must ensure that conflict remains on a healthy level.David H. Gobeli, Harold F. Koenig, and Iris Bechinger note that conflict must be managed not only to increase the satisfaction of project team members, but also to achieve strategic project success. To provide better understanding of the important issues in conflict management, they examine the effects of three conflict factors on software development project success: context, conflict intensity, and conflict management style. Using survey responses from 117 software professionals and managers, they develop a multi-level framework of success versus conflict for team-based, software development projects. Within this framework, they examine context, conflict intensity, and conflict management approaches at the team and organization levels.
For the participants in this study, unresolved conflict has a strong, negative effect on overall software product success and customer satisfaction. Project team member satisfaction decreases substantially with higher intensity conflict at the organization level, and even more strongly at the project level. For the respondents to this study, the combined effects of conflict intensity and conflict management style on project success are significant, but they are not as great as the combined effects of such context variables as company goals, group dynamics, and management support.
Two conflict management styles—confronting and give and take—have beneficial effects on success at the organization level for the firms in this study. Smoothing, withdrawal, and forcing all have negative effects, although only forcing has a statistically significant negative effect. In general terms, the results suggest that management should guard against frequent use of the dysfunctional management styles—withdrawal, smoothing, and forcing. The results suggest that emphasis on confrontation—that is, true problem solving—is essential at the project level, even if a give-and-take style is better tolerated at the organization level.
},
	keywords = {Marketing, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Koenig,Hal and Bechinger ,Iris}
}
@article {1984446,
	title = {Managing Conflict in Software Development Teams:  A Multi-Level Analysis},
	journal = {Journal of Product Innovation Management},
	volume = {15},
	year = {1998},
	month = {1998},
	pages = {423-435},
	abstract = {For a new product development (NPD) organization, a little conflict can be a good thing. Healthy disagreements can push project team members or different functional groups in an organization to pursue more in-depth, insightful analysis. This type of creative tension can help to engender an environment that encourages innovation and thus keeps NPD efforts free from the business-as-usual doldrums. However, management must ensure that conflict remains on a healthy level.David H. Gobeli, Harold F. Koenig, and Iris Bechinger note that conflict must be managed not only to increase the satisfaction of project team members, but also to achieve strategic project success. To provide better understanding of the important issues in conflict management, they examine the effects of three conflict factors on software development project success: context, conflict intensity, and conflict management style. Using survey responses from 117 software professionals and managers, they develop a multi-level framework of success versus conflict for team-based, software development projects. Within this framework, they examine context, conflict intensity, and conflict management approaches at the team and organization levels.
For the participants in this study, unresolved conflict has a strong, negative effect on overall software product success and customer satisfaction. Project team member satisfaction decreases substantially with higher intensity conflict at the organization level, and even more strongly at the project level. For the respondents to this study, the combined effects of conflict intensity and conflict management style on project success are significant, but they are not as great as the combined effects of such context variables as company goals, group dynamics, and management support.
Two conflict management styles—confronting and give and take—have beneficial effects on success at the organization level for the firms in this study. Smoothing, withdrawal, and forcing all have negative effects, although only forcing has a statistically significant negative effect. In general terms, the results suggest that management should guard against frequent use of the dysfunctional management styles—withdrawal, smoothing, and forcing. The results suggest that emphasis on confrontation—that is, true problem solving—is essential at the project level, even if a give-and-take style is better tolerated at the organization level.
},
	keywords = {Marketing, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Gobeli,Dave and Koenig,Hal and Bechinger ,Iris}
}
@article {1978581,
	title = {Product Success and Conflict in the Software Industry},
	year = {1997},
	month = {1997},
	address = {Corvallis, OR},
	keywords = {Marketing, Strategy \& Entrepreneurship},
	author = {Koenig,Hal and Bechinger,Iris and Gobeli,Dave}
}