2018/10/26 by Guanyi Lu, Xin Ding, Xin (David) Ding +3 · 2 citations
Decision Sciences · Economics, Econometrics and Finance · #Efficiency Analysis Using DEA #Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life #Healthcare Policy and Management
paper · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2018.10.001
openalex publication_date 2018/10/26 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
Abstract Addressing endogeneity can be a challenging task given the different sources of endogeneity and their impacts on empirical results. While premier business journals typically expect authors to rigorously address endogeneity, this expectation is relatively new to many Operations Management (OM) scholars, as exemplified by a recent editorial in Journal of Operations Management that calls for more rigorous treatment for endogeneity. This study serves two purposes. First, we summarize recent OM literature with respect to the treatment for endogeneity by reviewing studies published in leading OM journals between 2012 and 2017. The review provides evidence that endogeneity problems have received increasing attention from OM scholars. However, we also find some common problems that may render the chosen techniques for addressing endogeneity less effective and potentially lead to biased analysis results. Second, since instrumental variable regression is the most prevalent technique for dealing with endogeneity in the OM literature according to our review, we provide an empirical illustration tailored to OM researchers for using instrumental variable regression in the post‐design (data analysis) phase. Using variables from a publicly available healthcare dataset, our analysis sheds light on the importance of examining instruments' quality and triangulating results based on more than one test/estimator.