Search results

The financial analysis of international investment decisions is complex. The basic methodology which homes in on incremental cash flows needs to be refined in order to focus upon cash flows which are remittable to the parent company, for it is only these that would logically add shareholder value. Build in the complications of two lots of tax and changing exchange rates and the equation looks anything but simple. But there is another complexity too which renders the traditional discounting methodology less than wholly appropriate. And this applies not just to international investment but to any situation where capital is committed with an option to expand or curtail embedded in it. This is not to say that the typical model cannot be adapted to meet the situation. It can and it is not too difficult.

In late 2020, a group of librarians at the University of Colorado Boulder (CU Boulder) came together to pursue the design of a diversity audit for monograph collections. After initial research and reflection, the authors realized that evaluating their existing collection on its racial or ethnic representation would not only be problematic, but also unnecessary, because it was clear to the authors that their collections are dominated by white voices and perspectives. How could they be otherwise? They were built for a primarily white audience as part of a system of knowledge production dominated by whiteness. The authors questioned whether the framework of a “diversity audit” really addressed their goal of a systematic anti-racist approach to collections management. This chapter details the authors’ process of rejecting the diversity audit framework for a large-scale review of monographs in a large academic library collection in the United States. It reviews the literature regarding diversity audits, as well as background on whiteness studies, as it leads to the authors’ rationale for instead developing a workbook for collection selectors. This workbook will position collection management practices within the white institutional presence (WIP) conceptual framework developed by scholar Diane Gusa (2010).

Justifying new manufacturing technology is usually very difficult since the most important benefits are often strategic and difficult to quantify. Traditional capital budgeting procedures that rely on return measures based on direct cost savings and incremental future cash flows do not normally capture the strategic benefits of higher quality, faster responses to wider ranges of customer needs, and the options for future growth made available by flexible manufacturing technology. Adding to these limitations is the difficulty of using traditional cost accounting systems to generate the information necessary for justifying new manufacturing investments. This paper reviews these problems and recommends procedures useful for assessing investments in flexible manufacturing technology.

In 1987, Campbell Soup Company introduced the Souper Combo, a line of frozen soup and sandwiches. Melvin Druin, vice‐president for packaging, called it “the perfect combination of old‐fashioned good taste and today's convenience. No mess. No fuss. Easy to use. All you have to do is clean your spoon. Everything else just throw away.” Unfortunately, the multi‐layered plastic‐coated packaging does not just disappear when thrown away. Plastics packaging, particularly from convenience products, has become a waste disposal nightmare. Garbage, an environmental magazine, gave the Souper Combo an “in the dumpster” award, saying, “It's precisely the kind of product that's created the municipal landfill monster.”