The impact of new entrants and the new entrant program on motor carrier safety performance

Due to the importance of the recent Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration requirement that all motor carriers participate in the New Entrant Safety Assurance Program (NESAP), the purpose of this study is to examine the relationship of the NESAP to motor carrier safety performance. Our study finds that carriers who entered the industry before the NESAP program (e.g., more experienced carriers) have significantly better safety performance in comparison to new entrant carriers. We also demonstrate that new entrants who successfully complete the requirements of the NESAP have significantly better safety performance than new entrants who fail to complete the program successfully. The implications of the study are also discussed.

[1]  P Fanara,et al.  EFFECTS OF NEW ENTRANTS ON MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY. CHAPTER 16 OF TRANSPORTATION IN AN AGE OF DEREGULATION , 1988 .

[2]  E. Rogers.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[3]  Paul Israel,et al.  The Sources of Innovation , 1990 .

[4]  Sanjeev Dewan,et al.  Firm Characteristics and Investments in Information Technology: Scale and Scope Effects , 1998, Inf. Syst. Res..

[5]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[6]  Peter J. Lane,et al.  Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning , 1998 .

[7]  David E. Cantor.  Owner-operator versus company-driver safety performance analysis : tech transfer summaries. , 2016 .

[8]  Thomas M. Corsi,et al.  Do Electronic Logbooks Contribute to Motor Carrier Safety Performance , 2009 .

[9]  C. Andriopoulos,et al.  Probing the future: Mobilising foresight in multiple-product innovation firms , 2006 .

[10]  T. Corsi,et al.  Technology, Firm Size, and Safety: Theory and Empirical Evidence from the US Motor-carrier Industry , 2016 .

[11]  Varun Grover,et al.  Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information Technology in Contemporary Firms , 2003, MIS Q..

[12]  Thomas M. Corsi,et al.  Do owner–operators pose a safety risk on the nation’s highways? , 2013 .

[13]  Robin L. Dillon,et al.  Airline Safety Improvement Through Experience with Near‐Misses: A Cautionary Tale , 2016, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[14]  Thomas M. Corsi,et al.  DEREGULATION, NEW ENTRANTS, AND THE SAFETY LEARNING CURVE , 1988 .

[15]  Jennifer Blackhurst,et al.  Supply chain risk mitigation competency: an individual-level knowledge-based perspective , 2016 .

[16]  Peter M. Madsen,et al.  Failing to Learn? The Effects of Failure and Success on Organizational Learning in the Global Orbital Launch Vehicle Industry , 2010 .

[17]  C. Freeman.  Techno-Economic Paradigms: Schumpeter's Business Cycles and Techno-Economic Paradigms , 2009 .

[18]  John P. Saldanha,et al.  Combining Formal Controls to Improve Firm Performance , 2013 .

[19]  Thomas M. Corsi,et al.  Safety performance differences between unionized and non-union motor carriers , 2012 .

[20]  Brian S. Fugate,et al.  How Organizations Respond to Information Disclosure: Testing Alternative Longitudinal Performance Trajectories , 2017 .

[21]  Marjorie A. Lyles,et al.  Absorptive capacity, learning, and performance in international joint ventures , 2001 .