Search results
1 – 10 of 101Benjamin Bader, Pia Charlotte Faeth, Anthony Fee and Margaret Shaffer
Thalia Anthony, Juanita Sherwood, Harry Blagg and Kieran Tranter
John Bruen, John P. Spillane, Jim Bradley and Tara Brooks
This study aims to uncover managerial representations of achieving competitive advantage in architectural practices operating within the United Kingdom (UK).
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to uncover managerial representations of achieving competitive advantage in architectural practices operating within the United Kingdom (UK).
Design/methodology/approach
A sequential qualitative methodology is applied, underpinned by nine managerial interviews in five architectural practices, which are analysed using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software.
Findings
In all, 108 representations are identified, with highly rated concepts including reputation, client satisfaction, fees and staff resources discussed in detail. The need for architectural practices to develop a competitive advantage within their sector is increasingly apparent, particularly during times of market turbulence. A total of 20 themes identified are clustered into four main groups focused on People (including Calibre of Staff, Attract Graduates; Qualified Staff); Product (including Emphasis on design, Specialisation, Competitive Fees): Process (including Low Overheads, Office Efficiency) and Potential (Reputation, Ability to Undertake Large Projects, Repeat clients, Ability to expand, Parent Company, Market Understanding and New Offices).
Originality/value
Despite numerous studies conducted on this subject, there has been no research to date documenting managerial representation on achieving competitive advantage in the context of architectural practices in the UK. This paper closes this gap in knowledge by contributing to underlying research on competitive advantage, focusing on the managerial representations within UK architectural practices.
Details
Keywords
While existing research explores the impact of audit market competition on audit fees and audit quality, there is limited investigation into how competition in the audit market…
Abstract
Purpose
While existing research explores the impact of audit market competition on audit fees and audit quality, there is limited investigation into how competition in the audit market influences auditors' writing style. This study examines the relationship between audit market competition and the readability of audit reports in Iran, where competition is particularly intense, especially among private audit firms.
Design/methodology/approach
The sample comprises 1,050 firm-year observations in Iran from 2012 to 2018. Readability measures, including the Fog index, Flesch-Reading-Ease (FRE) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), are employed to assess the readability of auditors' reports. The Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI) is utilized to measure audit market competition, with lower index values indicating higher auditor competition. The concentration measure is multiplied by −1 to obtain the competition measure (AudComp). Alternative readability measures, such as the Flesch–Kincaid (FK) and Automated Readability Index (ARI) are used in additional robustness tests. Data on textual features of audit reports, auditor characteristics and other control variables are manually collected from annual reports of firms listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE).
Findings
The regression analysis results indicate a significant and positive association between audit market competition and audit report readability. Furthermore, a stronger positive and significant association is observed among private audit firms, where competition is more intense compared to state audit firms. These findings remain robust when using alternative readability measures and other sensitivity checks. Additional analysis reveals that the positive effect of competition on audit report readability is more pronounced in situations where the auditor remains unchanged and the audit market size is small.
Originality/value
This paper expands the existing literature by examining the impact of audit market competition on audit report readability. It focuses on a unique audit market (Iran), where competition among audit firms is more intense than in developed countries due to the liberalization of the Iranian audit market in 2001 and the establishment of numerous private audit firms.
Details
Keywords
Anthony Macari and Grace Chun Guo
This conceptual paper focuses on a common observation in the implementation stage of reward-based crowdfunding (RBC) – entrepreneurs' failures and delays in delivery of rewards to…
Abstract
Purpose
This conceptual paper focuses on a common observation in the implementation stage of reward-based crowdfunding (RBC) – entrepreneurs' failures and delays in delivery of rewards to investors, which, in turn, may be perceived as violations of reward delivery obligations.
Design/methodology/approach
Drawing on entrepreneurial personality theory and psychological contract theory, this paper develops propositions and identifies factors related to both entrepreneurs (overconfidence and narcissism) and factors related to investors (types of motivators and psychological contracts) that may explain the perceived violations of reward delivery obligations. Implications for theory and practice are also discussed.
Findings
The theoretical analysis, by wielding two independently developed literatures, has demonstrated that it is important to investigate factors that are related to both investors and entrepreneurs in understanding issues and challenges at different stages of the RBC model. The authors believe that the current analysis provides an integrated understanding and a solid foundation for researchers to further examine these issues by empirically testing these propositions.
Originality/value
The authors examined two previously understudied psychological factors in the context of RBC – entrepreneurial traits, mainly overconfidence and narcissism, and the type of psychological contracts formed between investors and entrepreneurs, both of which, according to McKenny et al. (2017), need greater attention from researchers studying crowdfunding.
Details