Search results

The purpose of this study is to situate information and communications technology (ICT) “transparency reports” within the theoretical framework of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting. The self-denominated transparency report serves a dual purpose of highlighting an ICT company’s socially responsible behavior while also holding government agencies accountable for surveillance and requests for user data. Drawing on legitimacy theory, neo-institutional theory and stakeholder theory, this exploratory study examines how ICT companies are implementing industry-specific voluntary disclosures as a form of CSR.

A content analysis of ICT voluntary nonfinancial reporting (N = 88) was used to identify motivating principles, the company positioning to stakeholders, the relevant publics and intended audience of these disclosures and the communication strategy used to engage primary stakeholders.

Key findings suggest that most ICT companies used transparency reporting to engage consumers/users as their primary stakeholders and most used a stakeholder information strategy. A majority of ICT companies signaled value-driven motives in their transparency reports while also positioning the company to stakeholders as a protector of user data and advocate for consumer rights.

This study enriches the literature on CSR communication strategies and reporting practices by extending it to an underdeveloped topic of study: novel voluntary disclosures as CSR activities of prominent ICT companies (i.e. “Big Tech”). These polyphonic reports reflect varied motives, varied positioning and varied stakeholders. For market-leading companies, transparency reporting can serve to legitimize existing market power. And for midsize and emerging companies, transparency reporting can be used to signal adherence to industry norms – set by market-leading companies.

This study aims to elucidate the health care organization, management and policy barriers and facilitators associated with implementation of an evidence-based health promotion intervention in primary care centers in the Basque Country, Spain.

Seven focus groups were conducted with 49 health professionals from six primary care centers participating in the Prescribing Healthy Life program. Text was analyzed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) focusing on those constructs related to health care organization, management and policy.

The health promotion intervention was found to be compatible with the values of primary care professionals. However, professionals at all centers reported barriers to implementation related to: (1) external policy and incentives, (2) compatibility with existing workflow and (3) available resources to carry out the program. Specific barriers in these areas related to lack of financial and political support, consultation time constraints and difficulty managing competing day-to-day demands. Other barriers and facilitators were related to the constructs networks and communication, culture, relative priority and leadership engagement. A set of six specific barrier-facilitator pairs emerged.

Implementation science and, specifically, the CFIR constructs were used as a guide. Barriers and facilitators related to the implementation of a health promotion program in primary care were identified. Healthcare managers and policy makers can modify these factors to foster a more propitious implementation environment. These factors should be appropriately monitored, both in pre-implementation phases and during the implementation process, in order to ensure effective integration of health promotion into the primary care setting.

Service design is a multidisciplinary approach that plays a key role in fostering service innovation. However, the lack of a comprehensive understanding of its multiple perspectives hampers this potential to be realized. Through an activity theory lens, the purpose of this paper is to examine core areas that inform service design, identifying shared concerns and complementary contributions.

The study involved a literature review in two stages, followed by a qualitative study based on selected focus groups. The first literature review identified core areas that contribute to service design. Based on this identification, the second literature review examined 135 references suggested by 13 world-leading researchers in this field. These references were qualitatively analyzed using the NVivo software. Results were validated and complemented by six multidisciplinary focus groups with service research centers in five countries.

Six core areas were identified and characterized as contributing to service design: service research, design, marketing, operations management, information systems and interaction design. Data analysis shows the various goals, objects, approaches and outcomes that multidisciplinary perspectives bring to service design, supporting them to enable service innovation.

This paper supports service design teams to better communicate and collaborate by providing an in-depth understanding of the multiple contributions they can integrate to create the conditions for new service.

This paper identifies and examines the core areas that inform service design, their shared concerns, complementarities and how they contribute to foster new forms of value co-creation, building a common ground to advance this approach and leverage its impact on service innovation.

Territory-wide system assessment (TSA) was launched and administered by Hong Kong (HK) Education Bureau (EDB) since 2004. Since then, parents and teachers have been questioning its need, value, uselessness, effectiveness, harm for schools, teachers and students. In 2015, the issue blew up with Kau Yan School’s principal boycotting the tests. A series of discussions in the public and media and different surveys were then carried out widely in HK. After review, EDB announced in 2017 that the revised version of TSA be extended to Primary 3 students in HK. The purpose of this paper is to propose that TSAs for Primary 3, Primary 6 and Secondary 3 need a further review to judge their need and uselessness.

This paper reviews the educational policy governing the administration of the TSA. Primary and secondary data from focus group meetings, press interviews (Bogdan and Biklen, 1982; Miles and Huberman, 1994; Ouiment et al., 2001) and public reports would be analyzed. Besides, participant observation (Nosich, 1982; Sou, 2000; Sou and Zhou, 2007) and theoretical reasoning (Nosich, 1982; Sou, 2000; Sou and Zhou, 2007) have been applied for the critical review of this controversial test. The contrast study on the conflicting views of stakeholders in the education industry would bring up some insights of this controversial educational policy in Assessment for Learning.

Conflicting and contrasting perceptions from TSA to basic competency assessment (BCA) among stakeholders of education and government include governmental stakeholder – EDB’s awareness; EDB stressed that TSA is a low-stakes assessment which does not need extra practice for students; non-governmental stakeholders including legislative councilors’ perception, school principals’ perception, teachers’ perception, parents’ perception and students’ perception. Facing the opposition and grievances of different stakeholders, EDB announced in January 2017 that the revised version of TSA: BCA, be extended to HK in May 2017. Parents and legislative councilors were angry and they ask for a review or even cancellation for Primary 3 TSA.

This original study will initiate more thorough revisions and discussions for the TSAs for Primary 3, Primary 6 and Secondary 3 in HK, as a quality educational management step. While TSA for Primary 3 has been reviewed and substantially “revised,” the community at large still asks for further revision for its needs, uselessness and harm for parents, teachers and students. Since the underlying causes of students’ suicides are not fully identified, the problem of over-drilling practices for TSAs for Primary 3, Primary 6 and Secondary 3 needs to be satisfactorily resolved. Thus, TSAs for Primary 6 and Secondary 3, like that for Primary 3, should be reviewed for probable revision.