In 2021, Assistant Professor Andreas Hagemann developed a new econometric methodology that addresses the complexities of clustered data to enhance the accuracy and reliability of empirical work in economics and related fields. Typical examples of clusters are firms, cities, or states. The central challenge is that units within clusters may influence one another or may be influenced by similar environmental factors in ways that cannot be observed. Empirical researchers know that neglecting to account for clusters can yield results where non-existent effects erroneously appear as highly significant. Hagemann's research agenda developed new tools to address this issue in challenging and empirically relevant scenarios. His work has had a substantial impact on econometric theory and empirical practice. For instance, the methodology he developed is now the standard option for clustering in the canonical implementation of quantile regression in the statistical programming language R.

Professor Jim Walsh played a significant role in the development of work on individual, group, and collective cognition in organizations. Interested in managerial mistakes, Walsh wanted to know if executives’ worldviews could blind them to their decision environments. He was also interested in learning how the cognitive capabilities of both leadership teams and the organization itself could be harnessed for the good of organizations. In a 1988 Academy of Management Journal article, Walsh traced how these belief structures might or might not blind executives to their decision environments. He also considered how these belief structures may or may not combine to shape team decision-making. Therefore, he wrote a theoretical paper about these possibilities, which was published in the Journal of Management in 1986. He followed up that article with an empirical effort to measure and trace the impact of “negotiated belief structures” on decision-making (Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes published his findings in 1988). His thoughts then turned to the organization as a whole. He wrote a seminal paper on organizational memory, one that identified the nature of information selection, retention, and retrieval processes in organizations – for the good or ill of those organizations. That work was published in the Academy of Management Review in 1991. When interest in cognition in organizations started to grow, Walsh became a founding officer of the Academy of Management’s Managerial and Organizational Cognition Interest Group in 1990 and helped to lead that pioneering group of scholars for the first three years of its existence. Tying all of the insights and experiences together, he wrote what became something of a field-defining scholarly paper in 1995. Titled “Managerial Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane,” it was published in Organization Science. Today the Managerial and Organizational Cognition Division of the Academy of Management is home to more than 1,200 scholars worldwide. Citing his foundational scholarship and early leadership, the Division honored Jim with its Distinguished Scholar Award in 2020.

Professor Karl Weick was an iconic founder of the field of organizational behavior. Starting with his seminal book, The Social Psychology of Organizing, which was published in 1969, Weick's ideas had enormous influence, shaping organizational scholarship over the next decades and to this day. He focused on the processes of organizing rather than on organizations per se, suggesting that the insights into those processes give us important leverage to both understand and affect life in organizations. In his book, he introduced the seminal concept of "sense-making," which he defined as "the ongoing retrospective development of plausible images that rationalize what people are doing." Weick's ongoing research focused on how individuals engaged in making meaning and how that meaning-making affected important outcomes in organizations. His book has been cited more than 35,000 times, and his other work on the topic has been cited more than 13,000 times. His pioneering work has instilled a highly influential perspective on the people attempting the organizing work that goes into organizations.

In 2002, Professor Ravi Anupindi and his co-authors published the influential paper "Coordination and Flexibility in Supply Contracts with Options" in Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. This work introduced an innovative model that integrated options into supply contracts, offering enhanced management of demand uncertainties in supply chains. The research highlighted the important potential role of options in attaining contractual flexibility to coordinate supply chain participants and improve overall efficiency. The paper influenced subsequent research on supply contract design and demand management, one of the major areas of supply chain management research in the past two decades.

In 2008, an article by Michigan Ross Professor Scott Rick changed how academics, practitioners, and the general public thought about consumers’ spending habits. The key insight was that many people who spend very little are frustrated with their behavior. They consistently spend less than they think they should, often with negative consequences for themselves and those around them. Under-spenders (“tightwads”) and over-spenders (“spendthrifts”) are two sides of the same coin: both experience conflict and distress around their spending habits. The scale Rick and colleagues developed to measure these tendencies has become widely used by marketing and psychology researchers. The tightwad-spendthrift construct attracted even more attention when Rick and colleagues demonstrated that tightwads and spendthrifts are more likely to marry one another than they are to marry someone like themselves. This “opposites attract” pattern is initially enjoyable, but eventually, as partners begin to confront a never-ending series of joint spending and saving decisions, tightwad-spendthrift differences harm relationship quality.

This research has attracted broad attention beyond the boundaries of marketing academia. It has been the topic of webinars, podcasts, and other features produced by the National Science Foundation, the American Psychological Association, the National Academy of Sciences, and the World Economic Forum. It has received years of sustained coverage from media outlets such as NPR, the New York Times, and the Wall Street Journal. Financial organizations like the CFP Board, ING, Charles Schwab, and Equifax have informed their clients and customers about the implications of this research. Most notably, in 2024, St. Martin’s Press published a mass-market book about this research, titled Tightwads and Spendthrifts: Navigating the Money Minefield in Real Relationships.

The paper "Quantity Flexibility Contracts and Supply Chain Performance" by Professor Bill Lovejoy and his colleague, Andy Tsay from Santa Clara University, was published in Manufacturing & Service Operations Management in 1999. The paper delves into the concept of quantity flexibility in supply chain contracts and its potential to deal with demand uncertainties. This influential work formally captured the practice of “funneling” variability over time, whereby more variability is tolerated in earlier planning phases and less tolerated over time as the delivery date approaches. This paper has specifically led to further studies on the optimal design and effectiveness of supply chain contracts, enhancing the field’s understanding of tactical and strategic issues in supply chain management. Researchers have built on Tsay and Lovejoy's model to study the application of QF contracts in different industrial contexts and their interactions with various supply chain configurations. The concept and modeling presented in this paper have become a prominent part of the academic discourse on supply chain coordination, influencing subsequent studies in inventory management, order variability, and supply chain profitability. Thus, the paper's impact is significant and broad, inspiring much-needed research on flexible, cooperative strategies for supply chain optimization.

Professor C.K. Prahalad was the major pioneer and advocate of the 'bottom of the pyramid' proposition that selling to the poor can simultaneously be profitable and help eradicate poverty. While appealing, the BOP proposition is also controversial. Professor Aneel Karnani was an early and prominent critic of the BOP proposition. In his 2007 article "The Mirage of Marketing to the Bottom of the Pyramid" and his 2011 book Fighting Poverty Together: Rethinking Strategies for Business, Governments, and Civil Society to Reduce Poverty, he argues for an alternative perspective. Rather than viewing the poor primarily as consumers, it is better to focus on the poor as producers and to emphasize buying from the poor. Both the private sector and government have a critical role to play in alleviating poverty. The best way to alleviate poverty is to raise the real income of the poor by providing them appropriate employment opportunities. The private sector is the best engine of job creation. The government should facilitate the creation and growth of private enterprises in labor-intensive sectors of the economy. The government should also fulfill its traditional, accepted functions of providing adequate access to public services, such as education, public health, drinkable water, sanitation, security, and infrastructure.

Professors Norman Bishara and Jagadeesh Sivadasan have made significant contributions to influential literature examining the variation in the enforceability of non-compete clauses and their consequences. Their work is an important part of broader literature documenting monopsony power (i.e., the power of employees to set wages leading to a redistribution of surpluses away from workers), worker mobility, and knowledge transfers. In a pioneering paper published in 2010, Bishara created a detailed rating of the non-compete enforceability in all 50 states, building on painstaking work parsing the regulations and case law at the state level. The enforceability index from Bishara's 2010 paper, combined with worker-quarter-level U.S. Census data, was used in a paper by Sivadasan and co-authors to show that higher enforceability is correlated with lower wages and mobility for tech workers.

Bishara and his U-M coauthors also undertook a broad survey of U.S. workers, documenting for the first time the surprising prevalence of the use of non-compete clauses across a range of industries, including for low-wage workers, as well as work showing the chilling effect of noncompetes on employee behavior, even when they are unenforceable. This portfolio of work helped spark a major policy debate about the use and abuse of noncompetes that inspired action from the White House and the research conclusions being cited in the 2023 State of the Union Address, and spurred a report from U.S. Treasury Department, legislative changes from numerous states, and research from a range of think tanks that eventually led to the 2024 final rule from the Federal Trade Commission attempting to ban noncompetes in employment contracts across the country.
 

The fields of social movements and organizations had very little overlap until Professors Jerry Davis and Mayer Zald convened a pair of conferences at Michigan Ross in 2001 and 2002 that brought together top scholars from both domains and forged research collaborations that yielded a 2005 Cambridge University Press volume and a 2008 special issue of Administrative Science Quarterly. Zald had previously published a piece on the topic in 1977, as had Davis in 1994. Today, this is a widely recognized and fruitful research domain that arose just in time to explain the increasingly prevalent interplay between corporations and social movements, including boycotts, corporate political activism, and employee social movements.

The Affordable Care Act represented arguably the largest change in federal health policy since the creation of the Medicare and Medicaid programs in the 1960s, expanding coverage to approximately 40 million people who were previously uninsured. In a series of papers published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, New England Journal of Medicine, AEJ: Applied Economics, Journal of Public Economics, and other outlets, Associate Professor Sarah Miller and her co-author Dr. Lara R. Wherry quantify the impact of this policy on the predominantly low-income population who gained coverage as a result of the reform's resultant changes in Medicaid eligibility. Their work has shown that 1) low-income adults who gained coverage through the ACA Medicaid expansions experienced reduced mortality rates and that the failure of some states to adopt these expansions cost approximately 4,800 deaths per year in those states; 2) low-income adults who gained coverage through these expansions experienced improved access to medical care and improved financial outcomes; 3) the expansion of coverage to these individuals did not crowd out care provided to population who were unaffected, such as those in Medicare. This work has garnered over 1,800 citations and has been discussed in numerous high-profile media outlets and policy documents.

The 1996 book Competing for the Future by the late Professor C.K. Prahalad and his colleague, Gary Hamel from the London Business School, was unique in that it tied together several of Hamel and Prahalad's leading ideas into book format. The book introduces the concept of "core competencies," which emphasizes that organizations should focus on leveraging their inherent strengths and unique capabilities, and "strategic intent," which focuses on setting an ambitious, long-run vision for a firm's future. This emphasis on future thinking was a particularly notable aspect of the book. In general, the book advocated for a proactive approach to strategy where businesses actively envision and shape the trajectory of their respective industries instead of merely reacting to existing competitors and market dynamics in the short run. This emphasis on dynamics -- in particular, envisioning the future and then mobilizing strategy to compete in shaping it -- had important managerial implications for business thinking in the 1990s.  It suggested that companies needed to transition from a short-term, reactive mindset to a more forward-thinking, visionary stance; this would allow companies not just to survive but dominate in future market landscapes. Overall, this book had a notable impact on business practice; Time Magazine named it one of "The 25 Most Influential Business Management Books."

In 2018, Professor Tom Lyon led a team of scholars who published a groundbreaking article about corporate political responsibility titled “CSR Needs CPR” in the California Management Review. The article argued that corporate social responsibility was an insufficient measure of corporate contribution to society and that stakeholders who care about CSR should also pay attention to corporate political responsibility. In 2019, Elizabeth Doty, adjunct faculty at Presidio Graduate School, contacted the Erb Institute at the University of Michigan and suggested turning the article into an industry roundtable dedicated to working with a select group of influential business leaders and their companies to bring to life the core precept of the article – the need to better align companies’ political spending and lobbying with their commitments to values, purpose, sustainability, and stakeholders. Thus, the Erb Corporate Political Responsibility Taskforce was founded in 2020. Lyon and Doty have developed the taskforce into a nationally recognized forum with the goal of making CPR a new norm for business. The taskforce operates under Chatham House Rule and has 20 members from some of the most recognized brands in the United States who share best practices and address CPR challenges. In 2023, the taskforce released the non-partisan Erb Principles for Corporate Political Responsibility, with five major companies as inaugural signatories. Looking ahead, the taskforce will continue building its integrated framework and engage more companies in applying the Erb Principles. Lyon continues his work in this space with his recently published volume Corporate Political Responsibility.

The Michigan Business Challenge is a prestigious business plan competition hosted by the Zell Lurie Institute for Entrepreneurial Studies. It allows U-M students to showcase their entrepreneurial ideas, receive feedback from experienced judges, and compete for over $100,000 in cash prizes to support their ventures. 

The Michigan Business Challenge was established in 1984 at Michigan Ross and has since become one of the region's most impactful and well-known startup competitions. Over the years, the MBC has supported numerous successful startups, generated millions of dollars in funding, and helped launch successful entrepreneurial careers for U-M students and alumni. The MBC is open to various stages of business concepts, from early-stage ideas to established businesses. 

The competition consists of three tracks that cater to specific industry sectors, including the Seigle Impact Track for social ventures, the Invention Track for ventures that have intellectual property at the core of their high-tech venture, and the Innovation Track for growing startups. These tracks provide tailored resources, networking opportunities, and funding for participants. Notable entrepreneurial ventures that have come through the MBC include Morning Brew, Xoran Technologies, AMBIQ Micro, Elevate K-12, and many more.

In a paper published as a lead article in the Journal of Finance in 1990, Professor Nejat Seyhun investigated whether informed investors stabilize and correct mistakes in security prices by buying undervalued assets and selling overvalued assets or destabilize security prices by jumping into already overpriced securities to create bigger bubbles and mis-valuations first, only to exploit them later. Seyhun's investigation centered on the stock market crash of Oct. 19, 1987, when the stock market crashed by 22% in one day. He found that top corporate insiders bought undervalued stocks and sold overvalued stocks in record quantities immediately following the crash. Hence, informed insiders were stabilizing security prices and not destabilizing them further. This finding provides comfort that the stock market will be self-policing and self-correcting and justifies the current regulatory system, which assumes that more information is beneficial by requiring timely, accurate, and full dissemination of information from all parties involved. Seyhun was among the first to explore various aspects of reported insider trading and its effects on share prices and shareholder wealth.

Professor Dudley Maynard Phelps, who was part of the Michigan Business School faculty from 1924-67, studied and wrote about the distinct marketing environments and challenges in markets as diverse as Latin America, Western Europe, and the former Soviet Union, including work for the U.S. State Department. He received recognition for this work from the International Marketing Institute and was president of the American Marketing Association. In the 1980s, Professor Vern Terpstra continued this work and authored the most widely used text on international marketing and other books on the cultural environment of international business, and also published highly impactful research on country-of-origin effects with his PhD student C. Min Han. Terpstra was president of the Academy of International Business in 1970 and was invited to teach at several universities.

In the article "The Core Competence of the Corporation," Professor C. K. Prahalad and his collaborator Gary Hamel introduced a groundbreaking idea about how companies succeed. 

They presented the idea that rather than just looking at the products they sell, companies should identify and nurture their core competencies -- the unique abilities and strengths that make them stand out. Those competencies are born from collective experience and knowledge in the company and combine different skills and technologies. Additionally, core competencies are not easy for competitors to copy, therefore giving companies a lasting edge in the market. 

In their article, Prahalad and Hamel cautioned companies not to get overly wrapped up in their current products, which might change with time. They advised that instead, companies should focus on understanding and enhancing their deep-rooted strengths as they pave the way for future innovations and market leadership. By recognizing and harnessing core competencies, companies can venture into new markets, innovate, and stay ahead of the competition. In simple terms, companies should know and recognize what they are genuinely good at and use that to shape their future.