Search results

This paper aims to presents a counterexample that points to an inconsistency generated by the first- and second-order approximation methods, FORM and SORM, respectively, procedures for elliptical problems.

The classical results of theory measure and functional analysis were used.

The FORM and SORM are known to find solutions in a Gaussian space. This procedure does not satisfy the conditions of the Lax–Milgram theorem and does not assure the existence and uniqueness of the solution.

This paper alerts the engineering research community that uses these methods, initiating discussion and improvement of FORM and SORM procedures.

This paper puts in check the feasibility of using FORM and SORM in engineering problems.

From the moment they were introduced to the engineering and scientific communities, the FORM and SORM were taken as the bases for solving various problems found in the literature and indifferent documents scattered throughout the world over the past 50 years, for FORM, and 40 years, for SORM. Even though it was a very serious fault, at least for elliptical problems, pointed out in this work, it went unnoticed all those years by the research community. Therefore, the contribution of this paper is to present the engineering community that uses FORM and SORM in elliptical problems an unnoticed failure since the introduction of these methods.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a competitiveness measurement system for start-ups considering multiple critical success factors.

The methodological approach uses concepts from key performance indicators (KPIs) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) based on the fuzzy AHP (FAHP) methodology to weight the criteria related to fundamental points of view (FPVs) and critical success factors (CSFs).

Data collection was performed with 21 specialists and 28 start-ups, which returned the weights and performance of CSFs and FPVs related to the start-ups’ competitiveness. The results show only one start-up had a highly competitive global performance. In addition, all start-ups showed low competitiveness related to industry 4.0 technologies.

The article collaborates with existing research as a starting point for discussions on the subject, considering that previous research did not address the measurement of the start-ups’ competitiveness level through multiple factors, as developed in this article. In addition, we provide decision-makers and other stakeholders in the start-up ecosystem with a robust measurement system to assess business competitiveness and diagnose the company’s situation.

We present a critical literature review debating Brazilian research on social and environmental accounting (SEA). The aim of this study is to understand the role of politics in the construction of hegemonies in SEA research in Brazil. In particular, we examine the role of hegemony in relation to the co-option of SEA literature and sustainability in the Brazilian context by the logic of development for economic growth in emerging economies. The methodological approach adopts a post-structural perspective that reflects Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory. The study employs a hermeneutical, rhetorical approach to understand and classify 352 Brazilian research articles on SEA. We employ Brown and Fraser’s (2006) categorizations of SEA literature to help in our analysis: the business case, the stakeholder–accountability approach, and the critical case. We argue that the business case is prominent in Brazilian studies. Second-stage analysis suggests that the major themes under discussion include measurement, consulting, and descriptive approach. We argue that these themes illustrate the degree of influence of the hegemonic politics relevant to emerging economics, as these themes predominantly concern economic growth and a capitalist context. This paper discusses trends and practices in the Brazilian literature on SEA and argues that the focus means that SEA avoids critical debates of the role of capitalist logics in an emerging economy concerning sustainability. We urge the Brazilian academy to understand the implications of its reifying agenda and engage, counter-hegemonically, in a social and political agenda beyond the hegemonic support of a particular set of capitalist interests.

There is a growing interest in understanding the strategic behaviour of family firms producing international commodities such as coffee, particularly in contexts where decisions about what products to sell, where to commercialise them and how to promote them appear to be highly based on both business and family aspects. The purpose of this paper is to explore product differentiation strategies in family firms in the specialty coffee industry across Latin American countries. Whilst the socioeconomic relevance of coffee production in Central America is unequivocal, the approach and rationale of families that engage in specialty coffee production remain underexplored.

This study examines product differentiation in specialty coffee family farms across countries in Central America: Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. The study relies on in-depth interviews, case studies and an interpretative approach to unpick the dynamics of product differentiation by families in business dedicated to producing specialty coffee.

The findings show that product differentiation in specialty coffee family farms is influenced by both business and family aspects and driven by entrepreneurial stewards. Coffee-farming families can engage in product differentiation through a shared vision, a combination of traditional and specialised knowledge, and through the continuous development of an exchange network. The findings reveal a connection between families in business balancing family and business interests, and the strategic intention to build up their assets entrepreneurially over time.

This study contributes to the literature on stewardship and strategic behaviour in family firms when families in business engage in differentiating their products in a highly competitive industry. More specifically, this study focuses on companies across countries where coffee is of crucial socioeconomic importance, and where the said companies are owned and managed by families. The study expands understanding of product differentiation in family-enterprise-first businesses and suggests that the family elements in differentiation can be explained through an entrepreneurial stewardship perspective.