Scott MacKenzie

Scott is Neal Gilliat Chair and professor of marketing at the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University. He received a BA

Areas of Expertise

Research Methodology, Advertising Effectiveness, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, Leadership

Academic Degrees

• PhD, Marketing, University of California, Los Angeles, 1983
• MBA, Marketing, University of California, Los Angeles, 1978
• BA, Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, 1976

Professional Experience

• Professor, Indiana University, 1995 - present
• Associate Professor, Indiana University, 1989 - 1994
• Assistant Professor, Indiana University, 1983 - 1988

Awards, Honors & Certificates

• "Research Excellence Award," Kelley School of Business, 2005
• “William A. Owens Scholarly Achievement Award” for the best I/O psychology article published in the previous year, Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (APA Division 14), 2004
• “Distinguished Teaching Award,” Kelley School of Business, 2003
• “Outstanding Reviewer Award 2000-2003,” Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 2003
• Appointed to Neal Gilliatt Chair, Kelley School of Business, 2001
• Appointed to Indiana University Foundation Professorship, Kelley School of Business, 2000
• "Teaching Excellence Recognition Award," Kelley School of Business, 2000
• "Outstanding Research Award," Kelley School of Business Alumni Association, 1999
• "Harold H. Maynard Award" for significant contributions to marketing theory and thought, American Marketing Association, 1996
• "Research Excellence Award," Kelley School of Business, 1997
• Appointed Edgar G. Williams Faculty Fellow for 1995-2000
• Faculty Fellow, American Marketing Association Doctoral Consortium, 1990, 2001, 2004, 2006
• "Outstanding Reviewer Award," for the Journal of Consumer Research, 1989
• "Robert Ferber Award – Honorable Mention" Association for Consumer Research, 1985
• Student Fellow, American Marketing Association Doctoral Consortium, 1981
• Beta Gamma Sigma, Scholastic Honor Society, 1980
• Magna Cum Laude, University of California, Los Angeles, 1976
• Phi Beta Kappa, Scholastic Honor Society, 1976

Selected Publications

• Podsakoff, Nathan P., Philip M. Podsakoff, Scott B. MacKenzie, Timothy D. Maynes, and Trevor M. Spoelma (2014), “Consequences of Unit-Level Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Review and Recommendations for Future Research,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, S87–S119.
• Podsakoff, Nathan P., Philip M. Podsakoff, Scott B. MacKenzie, and Ryan L. Klinger (2013), “Are We Really Measuring What We Say We’re Measuring? Using Video Techniques to Supplement Traditional Construct Validation Procedures,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(1): 99-113.
• Podsakoff, Philip M., Scott B. MacKenzie, and Nathan P. Podsakoff (2012), "Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It," Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 63, pp. 539-569.
• Jarvis, Cheryl B., Scott B. MacKenzie, and Philip M. Podsakoff (2012), “The Negative Consequences of Measurement Model Misspecification: A Response to Aguirre-Urreta and Marakas,” MIS Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 139-146.
• MacKenzie, Scott B. and Philip M. Podsakoff (2012), “Common Method Bias in Marketing: Causes, Mechanisms, and Procedural Remedies,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 88, No. 4, pp. 542–555.
• MacKenzie, S. B., P. M. Podsakoff, and N. P. Podsakoff (2011), "Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: Integrating new and existing techniques," MIS Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 2, June, pp. 293-334.
• Mackenzie, Scott B., Philip M. Podsakoff, and Nathan P. Podsakoff (2011), “Effects of Challenge-Oriented and Affiliation-Oriented OCBs on Organizational Effectiveness:  Do Challenge-Oriented Behaviors Really Have an Impact on the Organization’s Bottom-line?,” Personnel Psychology, 64, 559–592. 
• Ahearne, Michael, Scott B. MacKenzie, Philip M. Podsakoff, John E. Mathieu, and Son Lam (2010), “The Role of Consensus in Sales Team Performance,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 47, No. 3, June, pp. 458-469.
• Podsakoff, Philip M., Scott B. MacKenzie, Nathan P. Podsakoff, and Daniel G. Bachrach (2008), “Scholarly Influence in the Field of Management: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Determinants of University and Author Impact in the Management Literature in the Past Quarter Century,” Journal of Management, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 641-720.

Abstract The purpose of this study is to identify the universities and research scholars who have had the greatest impact on the field of management during the past quarter century and the factors that influence their impact. Using bibliometric techniques, the authors examined 30 management journals to identify the 100 most-cited universities and ¡50 most-cited authors from 1981 to 2004. The analysis included more than 1,600 universities and 25,000 management scholars across five individual time periods. The findings showed that (a) a relatively small proportion of universities and scholars accounted for the majority of the citations in the field; (b) total publications accounted for the majority of the variance in university citations; (c) university size, the number of PhDs awarded, research expenditures, and endowment assets had the biggest impact on university publications; and (d) total publications, years in the field, graduate school reputation, and editorial board memberships had the biggest effect on a scholar''s citations.

• Smith, Robert E., Scott B. MacKenzie, Xiaojing Yang, Laura M. Buchholtz, and William K. Darley (2007), “Modeling the Determinants and Effects of Creativity in Advertising,” Marketing Science, Vol. 26, No. 6, pp. 819-833.

Abstract Consumer perceptions of advertising creativity are investigated in a series of studies beginning with scale development and ending with comprehensive model testing. Results demonstrate that perceptions of ad creativity are determined by the interaction between divergence and relevance, and that overall creativity mediates their effects on consumer processing and response.

• Kukar-Kinney, Monika, Rockney G. Walters, and Scott B. MacKenzie (2007), “Consumer Response to Characteristics of Price Matching Guarantees: The Moderating Role of Price Consciousness,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 83, No. 2, pp. 211-221.

Abstract The present study develops and tests a conceptual model of consumer response to different types of price-matching characteristics (i.e., refund depth, length, and scope) across consumer segments with varying levels of price consciousness. A computer shopping simulation results show that a deep refund is interpreted as a signal of low prices by nonprice conscious consumers. However, price conscious consumers are found to associate deep refunds with increased prices, an unintended outcome for the retailer. The effects of price-matching characteristics on search and purchase behavior were also found to vary across more and less price conscious consumer segments.

• Podsakoff, Philip M., William H. Bommer, Nathan P. Podsakoff, and Scott B. MacKenzie (2006), “Relationships Between Leader Reward and Punishment Behavior and Subordinate Attitudes, Perceptions and Behaviors: A Meta-Analytic Review of Existing and New Research,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 99, No. 2, pp. 113-142.

Abstract Despite decades of research on the relationships between leader reward and punishment behaviors and employee attitudes, perceptions, and performance, no comprehensive examination of these relationships has been reported in the literature. This paper reports the results of two studies that address this issue. In the first study, data from 20 new samples were gathered on the relationships between leader reward and punishment behaviors and some criterion variables that have not been examined extensively in previous research. In the second study, a meta-analytic review was conducted incorporating both the new and existing research in order to provide estimates of the bivariate relationships between these leader behaviors and a variety of employee criterion variables across 78 studies containing 118 independent samples. Results of regression analyses designed to control for the effects of the other leader behaviors showed that: (a) the relationships between leader reward and punishment behaviors and employee attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors were more functional when the rewards or punishments were administered contingently than when they were administered non-contingently, and (b) these leader reward and punishment behaviors were strongly related to two variables (employees’ perceptions of justice and role ambiguity) that were expected to be key mediators of the relationships between these leader behaviors and the employee criterion variables. In addition, meta-analytic evidence from longitudinal studies suggested that the same leader behavior can be a cause of some employee criterion variables, and a consequence of others. Implications of these findings for future research in the area are discussed.

• Organ, Dennis W., Philip M. Podsakoff, and Scott B. MacKenzie (2006), Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature, Antecedents, and Consequences, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Translated into Japanese by Yutaka Ueda and published by Hakuto-Shobo Publications (2006). 
• MacKenzie, Scott B., Philip M. Podsakoff, and Cheryl Jarvis (2005), “The Problem of Measurement Model Misspecification in Behavioral and Organizational Research and Some Recommended Solutions,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 90, No. 4, pp. 710-730.

Abstract The purpose of this study was to review the distinction between formative- and reflective-indicator measurement models, articulate a set of criteria for deciding whether measures are formative or reflective, illustrate some commonly researched constructs that have formative indicators, empirically test the effects of measurement model misspecification using a Monte Carlo simulation, and recommend new scale development procedures for latent constructs with formative indicators. Results of the Monte Carlo simulation indicated that measurement model misspecification can inflate unstandardized structural parameter estimates by as much as 400% or deflate them by as much as 80% and lead to Type I or Type II errors of inference, depending on whether the exogenous or the endogenous latent construct is misspecified. Implications of this research are discussed.

• Podsakoff, Philip M., Scott B. MacKenzie, Nathan P. Podsakoff, and Daniel G. Bachrach (2005), “The Influence of Management Journals in the 1980s and 1990s,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 26, May, pp. 473-488.

Abstract It is difficult to get a clear picture of the relative influence of management journals because previous studies have focused on a single sub-area in the field over a relatively restricted number of years, and/or have used inconsistent criteria to judge journal influence. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine journal influence using citations from 28 journals over the past two decades. The findings show that the top seven journals accounted for 61 percent of all of the citations in the journals included, and that the three journals that showed the greatest increase in influence over the past 20 years were AMJ, AMR, and SMJ.

• Bettencourt, Lance A., Stephen W. Brown and Scott B. MacKenzie (2005), “Customer-Oriented Prosocial Boundry-Spanning Behaviors: A Test of a Social Exchange Model of Antecedents,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 141-157.

Abstract Using a sample of 281 frontline service employees of a national retail bank, we test a social exchange model of antecedents of three dimensions of customer-oriented boundary-spanning behaviors suggested by prior boundary-spanning and services marketing/management literatures: external representation, internal influence, and service delivery. In support of our hypotheses, we identify fully mediated relationships from procedural, interactional, and distributive justice to external representation and internal influence via job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Our results generally support our expectation that the indirect effects of procedural justice on external representation and internal influence are stronger than the indirect effects of distributive or interactional justice on these behaviors. Also, our results reveal no significant indirect effects of procedural and distributive justice on service delivery behaviors. However, we find an unexpected direct positive path from interactional justice to service delivery behaviors. We interpret this latter finding in light of the normative value of interactional justice as a source of role modeling or managerial legitimacy.

• Ingram, Thomas N., Raymond W. LaForge, William B. Locander, Scott B. MacKenzie, and Philip M. Podsakoff (2005), “New Directions for Sales Leadership Research,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 137-154.

Abstract The changing environment facing sales organizations is characterized by the dimensions of complexity, collaboration, and accountability. Responding effectively to this dynamic environment requires a focus on specific leadership activities by senior sales leaders, field sales managers, and salespeople. A sales leadership framework is presented and used to identify and discuss specific leadership challenges and important research questions at different sales organization levels. Several new directions for sales leadership research are proposed to improve sales leadership thought and practice.

• Podsakoff, Philip M., Scott B. MacKenzie, Jeong-Yeong Lee, and Nathan P. Podsakoff (2003), “Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88, October, pp. 879-903.
• MacKenzie, Scott B. (2003), “The Dangers of Poor Construct Conceptualization,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 323-326.  Reprinted in: Naresh K. Malhotra (ed.) (2007), Fundamentals of Marketing Research, Vol. 3, Sage Publications.

Abstract Most authors give a great deal of consideration to questions of internal and external validity, but far less to issues related to construct and statistical conclusion validity. The downward spiral for many manuscripts begins with the failure to adequately define the focal constructs of the study. This fundamental failure produces a series of subsequent problems: 1. Because the construct was never defined, it is difficult to develop measures that faithfully represent its domain. 2. This failure makes it difficult to specify how the construct should relate to its measures. 3. Inadequate construct definition undermines the credibility of a study''s hypotheses. To break this cycle, researchers should carefully define the constructs of interest, develop measures that adequately represent the constructs of interest, think carefully about the relations between the constructs and the measures, and defend the construct domain and insist on the conceptually appropriate measurement model.

• Podsakoff, Philip M., Scott B. MacKenzie, Nathan P. Podsakoff, and Jeong Yeong Lee (2003), “The Mismeasure of Man(agement) and its Implications for Leadership Research,” The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 6, pp. 615-656.

Abstract The purpose of the present review is to examine the potential problems caused by measurement model misspecification in the field of leadership. First, we discuss the conceptual differences between the four types of measurement models that have been used in leadership research and provide a set of criteria that could be used to decide upon the appropriate model. Following this, we examine the extent of measurement model misspecification by conducting a review of the leadership literature and applying these criteria. Next, we discuss the potential consequences of measurement model misspecification on conclusions made about the structural relationships between constructs. Finally, we discuss the implications of our study for leadership research.

• Jarvis, Cheryl, Scott B. MacKenzie, and Philip M. Podsakoff (2003), “A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 199-218.

Abstract A review of the literature suggests that few studies use formative indicator measurement models, even though they should. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to (a) discuss the distinction between formative and reflective measurement models, (b) develop a set of conceptual criteria that can be used to determine whether a construct should be modeled as having formative or reflective indicators, (c) review the marketing literature to obtain an estimate of the extent of measurement model misspecification in the field, (d) estimate the extent to which measurement model misspecification biases estimates of the relationships between constructs using a Monte Carlo simulation, and (e) provide recommendations for modeling formative indicator constructs.