Search results

A high percentage of circuit boards manufactured in the electronics industry are of an irregular shape and are produced on a standard panel outline to facilitate assembly handling. The unused pieces of circuit board pass through the same processes as the useful parts and are normally discarded. This excess material could, among other things, be used to evaluate the quality of a bare board or an assembly. This paper will highlight the usefulness of designing test patterns on this excess material, namely test coupons, in terms of how these can be used to monitor all of the manufacturing and assembly process steps. It will also show how these coupons can be used to make the board easier to assemble and how they may actually lead to an improvement in the quality of the assembly and an increase in production yields. Suggestions will be made as to the types of test pattern that can be used, as well as how these patterns can be utilised as process control checkers. Since the test coupons are incorporated in the board design, a quality check of 100% of the boards that are being processed is possible. This would highlight any board‐to‐board variation if it were present. It would also allow for destructive testing to be carried out, without damaging any of the working product. The applications of these patterns are wide ranging. They can be used to check bare board quality—etch definition, layer registration, plating quality, solder mask definition etc. They can also be used to monitor the assembly processes for SMT and conventional PTH assembly types—cut and clinch quality, paste printing quality, onsertion accuracy, reflow/flow soldering quality and assembly cleanliness, among others. Many of these applications are examined in this paper.

The purpose of this paper is to understand the influence of information and knowledge exchange and sharing between managers and non-executive directors is important in assessing the dynamic processes of accountability in boardrooms. By analysing information/knowledge at multiple levels, invoking the literature on implicit/tacit and explicit information/knowledge, the authors show that information asymmetry is a necessary condition for effective boards. The authors introduce a conceptual model of manager-non-executive director information asymmetry as an outcome of the interpretation of information/knowledge-sharing processes amongst board members. The model provides a more nuanced agenda of the management-board information asymmetry problem to enable a better understanding of the role of different types of information in practice.

The analysis of information/knowledge exchange, sharing and creation and the resultant conceptual model are based on the following elements: manager-non-executive director information/knowledge, management-board information/knowledge and board dynamics and reciprocal processes converting implicit/tacit into explicit information/knowledge.

The paper provides new insights into the dynamics of information/knowledge exchange, sharing and creation between managers and non-executive directors (individual level)/between management and boards (group level). The authors characterise this as a two-way process, back-and-forth between managers/executive directors and non-executive directors. The importance of relative/experienced “ignorance” of non-executive directors is revealed, which the authors term the “information asymmetry paradox”.

The authors set out key opportunities for developing a research agenda from the model based on prior research of knowledge conversion processes and how these may be applied in a boardroom setting.

The model may assist directors in better understanding their roles and the division of labour between managers and non-executive directors from an information/knowledge perspective.

The authors apply Ikujiro Nonaka’s knowledge conversion framework to consider the transitioning from individual implicit personal to explicit shared information/knowledge, to understand the subtle processes at play in boardrooms influencing information/knowledge exchange, sharing and creation between managers and non-executive directors.

This study aims to analyse the relationships between board processes, board role performance and board effectiveness for a cross-country (UK and Romania) sample of comparable European listed companies.

The research design is quantitative in nature and based on the survey method, a self-administered questionnaire which was send to 342 chairmen of selected Romanian and British listed companies and which contains validated statements measured through a seven-point Likert-type scale and grouped in validated constructs.

This study found further empirical evidence that board processes are stronger determinants of board effectiveness than board characteristics and that board roles mediate the relationship between board processes and board effectiveness. It further confirmed the relevance of the three board processes mentioned by Forbes and Milliken (1999) in their seminal work on board decision-making.

The main limitation of this study is the relatively small number of responses (55), which indicates a reduced reliability and generalizability of the results. However, several steps were taken to assure the homogeneity of the sample, starting with a unique data set of firms of comparable size and industry representation.

This study is useful to board directors and chairmen of listed companies, as it can help them to better understand and manage board behaviour.

This study contributes to the limited body of research that investigates specific board process constructs derived from the small team literature and their effect on board effectiveness.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how information-processing mechanisms between nominating committees (NCs), incumbent executives, board chairs, and shareholders affect the comprehensiveness of executive succession processes.

The authors employ an explanatory multiple-case study that comprises eight CEO and CFO succession cases in large German publicly traded firms.

The findings reveal that comprehensiveness is determined by four key information-processing mechanisms: the effectiveness of NC’s information sharing, absorbing disagreement, and integrating heterogeneous opinions; board chair leadership (i.e. an apprentice board leadership structure in association with the board chair’s openness to ideas); the breadth and depth of information sharing between executives and NCs; and the extent and timing to which major shareholders influence succession processes.

The authors summarize the findings in a conceptual framework and develop a set of propositions to guide future research on the topic. Such studies may want to test the suggestions in a quantitative way, preferably in a multinational context.

The authors’ emerging conceptual framework contributes a set of information-processing variables by which NCs engage in comprehensive executive successions with incumbent executives, board chairs, and major shareholders and offers a multiechelon approach to study executive successions.

In this paper we develop a model for researching the influence that a board of directors can have on improving an organization’s sustainability performance. Our model explores sources of cognitive flexibility of boards needed to recognize and respond to the need for improved sustainability performance. We first define concepts of sustainability, sustainability competence, and sustainability performance. We then analyze two forms of board capital (a board’s human capital and its social capital) and three aspects of a board’s information processing (its patterns of information search, discussion and debate, and information absorption) that we suggest affect a board’s cognitive flexibility and thereby influence whether a board decides to adopt sustainability performance goals. Our model also suggests that an organization’s strategic flexibility – as represented by its current endowments of resource flexibilities and coordination flexibilities – will moderate the relationship between a board’s decision to adopt sustainability performance goals and an organization’s subsequent achievement of those goals. We also suggest that our model is generally relevant to any research seeking to predict the influence of boards on strategic change in many forms, not just to research focused on sustainability issues.

Although board expertise has been identified as an important determinant of board performance, some surveys are still reporting that the overall level of board expertise is insufficient to carry out current and emerging roles. Consequently, companies must ensure that board members have the required skills and knowledge. This study aims to examine three board processes aimed at developing and improving board expertise.

Based on disclosures in the corporate governance guidelines of 100 leading US companies, the study focuses on three board processes, i.e. director nominations, orientation and education programs, and board performance evaluations.

Based on the initial findings, it is found that most companies in the sample were in compliance with stock exchange requirements and provided information on director nominations, orientation and education programs and board performance evaluations. All too often, however, the companies disclosed generic, non‐specific information; this provides little reassurance that the proper processes are in place to promote companies' long‐term interests.

By examining these key board processes, the paper contributes to the governance literature by providing empirical evidence on this important topic and offering guidance to companies examining board processes aimed at improving directors' overall expertise.

By focusing on disclosures in corporate governance guidelines, the authors also gain insight into decisions made by companies under increased pressure from securities regulators and other stakeholders to provide increased transparency on governance issues.

This paper aims to investigate a team dynamics based approach to assess board effectiveness, namely the interplay between boardroom decision-making processes and the board members' cognitive mental models.

A socio-cognitive perspective is utilized for analyzing board processes and determining board effectiveness. Utilizing the concepts of team mental models and sensemaking, a theoretically grounded model of board effectiveness is developed, wherein the propositions predict the causality and effect of the socio-cognitive and sensemaking processes on board effectiveness.

The proposed model is able to analyze the relationship among the different decision-making processes and members' cognitive models as determinants of board effectiveness, wherein the board's decision making process mediates the board's cognitive model – effectiveness relationship, while the board's cognitive model moderates the decision process – effectiveness relationship.

The conceptual model advances a rationale that might explain the mixed or modest findings in literature on the relationship between board demographics, dynamics and effectiveness.

The model allows practitioners and policy makers an alternative mechanism to assess board effectiveness, that is able to not only integrate the demographic, diversity and dynamics related measures, but also enables a clear understanding of the cognitive influences on board decision making and effectiveness.

The conceptual model encompasses most of the relevant constructs and findings of previous studies and offers a parsimonious yet holistic understanding of the boardroom mechanisms that might determine board effectiveness.

This paper is an examination of residues on printed wiring boards and printed wiring assemblies. Sources of residues are illustrated and the effects of various residues are discussed. Case studies are presented for bare board cleanliness issues, water soluble flux and aqueous cleaning processes, and low solids flux (no‐clean) processes, with and without cleaning. The case studies reflect lessons learned in various process troubleshooting efforts. Residues in this paper were characterized using advanced ion chromatography procedures. In addition, some data on surface insulation resistance (SIR) are presented.

Teachers are central to the learning of their students, and teacher learning is integral to teaching quality. In this study, six teachers who had recently completed the National Board assessment in the Middle Childhood/Generalist certificate area were interviewed over a six-month period about the effects of the certification process on their views and practices. Overall, the six teachers described changes in their practices for each of the eleven standards, with nearly all of the teachers describing changes in three areas in particular – reflection, assessment, and family involvement. In addition, most of them reported that the certification experience increased their confidence as teachers in part because it validated their current practice and in part because others treated them with more respect. Overall, four of the six teachers described their experience as having had a significant positive effect on their practice, with one teacher characterizing the effect as modest, while another reported little change. The teacher who reported few changes did so because she believed that her practices were already consistent with the National Board vision. A number of features of the National Board certification process appeared to contribute to the professional development of these teachers, including the standards themselves, the portfolio process (but not the assessment center exercises), writing structured commentaries, and collaborating with colleagues.

This article offers an action plan for CEOs who wish to constructively engage their boards in strategy development. In this approach, the board participates in the strategic thinking and strategic decision‐making processes, adding value but not infringing on the CEO’s and executive team’s fundamental responsibilities. More specifically, in value‐added engagement, the CEO and management lead and develop the strategic plan with directors’ input, and the board generally approves the strategy and the metrics to assess progress. The author details the five key elements critical to successful engagement of the board in strategy development: view strategy as a process, not an event; design parallel but lagged processes; inform and educate the board; collect and analyze director input; generate strategic alternatives. The recommended framework for engaging the board in strategy development is called the “strategic choice process”; it has six steps, with the CEO and his/her team leading the way.