Search results

Describes the first fully integrated software program for hygiene management for food processors; a look at the company which developed it; the reasons behind its development; and who in the workplace uses it. The software provides manufacturers with complete control over all aspects of hygiene. It is particularly applicable to short‐life/high‐care products such as sandwiches and snack foods. In this rapidly growing industry sector, major sandwich retailers are increasingly insisting that suppliers provide hygiene audits and compliance with the new European Food Safety Inspection Scheme (EFSIS) before they will accept products from a supplier.

This paper presents a review and classification of reported experiments in job design. The study is confined, in the main, to published experiments directed towards the improvement of the motivational content of blue‐collar jobs, and is intended principally to provide a reference source to those researchers or practitioners engaged in work in this field. Before describing these experiments, we shall briefly review the methods available to the job designers who seek to restructure jobs. Much has been written on the subject and for this reason our discussion will be brief, nor will we discuss the history or development of job design principles which is adequately dealt with elsewhere.

Most of us have read and thought about job enlargement, job enrichment, job design and restructuring. Much has been said and written on these subjects, and perhaps we may now be forgiven if we are somewhat confused by the differences in methodology, terminology, perspectives, etc presented by authors in this area.

The purpose of this study is to examine the critical failure factors (CFFs) linked to various types of process improvement (PI) projects such as Kaizen, Lean, Six Sigma, Lean Six Sigma and Agile. Proposing a mitigation framework accordingly is also an aim of this study.

This research undertakes a systematic literature review of 49 papers that were relevant to the scope of the study and that were published in four prominent databases, including Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science and EBSCO.

Further analysis identifies 39 factors that contribute to the failure of PI projects. Among these factors, significant emphasis is placed on issues such as “resistance to cultural change,” “insufficient support from top management,” “inadequate training and education,” “poor communication” and “lack of resources,” as primary causes of PI project failures. To address and overcome the PI project failures, the authors propose a framework for failure mitigation based on change management models. The authors present future research directions that aim to enhance both the theoretical understanding and practical aspects of PI project failures.

Through this study, researchers and project managers can benefit from well-structured guidelines and invaluable insights that will help them identify and address potential failures, leading to successful implementation and sustainable improvements within organizations.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this paper is the first study of its kind to examine the CFFs of five PI methodologies and introduces a novel approach derived from change management theory as a solution to minimize the risk associated with PI failure.

This commentary on Kenny and Livi (2009) expands on aspects of leadership categorization theory that are consistent with the application of the social relations model (SRM). It critically considers limits to the generalization of the variance components analysis results described in Kenny and Livi's first example, and briefly summarizes results of an additional study that supports their findings. Finally, this commentary suggests interpretational issues of interest to researchers who wish to continue to apply the SRM to multi-level issues in the study of leadership.

The purpose of this study is to investigate and analyze demographic differences in using knowledge creation tools among faculty members. It also attempts to identify the most knowledge creation tool used by the participants. The tools comprised of 13 items including data mining, metadata, classifications, expert profiling, Mashup and blogs.

Data were collected through an online survey questionnaire. A total of 300 faculty members from 26 universities and colleges accredited by the UAE Ministry of High Education participated in the study. The t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) test are used to validate the stated hypotheses.

The study found personal knowledge management to be the most used knowledge creation tool among the faculty members, followed by authoring tools and templates. Findings of the study indicate statistically no significant difference in using knowledge creation tools with respect to gender, qualification, academic rank, teaching experience and institutional affiliation. These findings support the stated null hypotheses (H1, H3, H4, H6 and H8) and suggest that the use of knowledge creation tools is independent from these variables. However, the results showed statistically a significant age group difference, academic specialization and research experience in using knowledge creation tools. The findings reject the assumed hypotheses (H2, H5 and H7) and suggest the impact of these variables on the use of knowledge creation tools.

The paper is based on the data collected through a survey questionnaire. Future studies may combine quantitative and qualitative data collection methods for the purpose of comparison and in-depth analysis.

Findings could be an important reference for knowledge management officers and knowledge intensive organizations and institutions to develop knowledge creation tools and promote usage among knowledge workers.

The paper represents one of the very few empirical studies conducted on the use of knowledge creation tools. Findings of the study may contribute to the process of knowledge creation among faculty members and also to the improvement of knowledge management in the academic environment and other knowledge organizations.

This study aims to examine how science, technology, engineering, and mathematics doctoral students interact with postdocs within the research laboratory, identifying the nature and potential impacts of student–postdoc mentoring relationships.

Using a sample of 53 doctoral students in the biological sciences, this study uses a sequential mixed-methods design. More specifically, a phenomenological approach enabled the authors to identify how doctoral students make meaning of their interactions with postdocs and other research staff. Descriptive statistics are used to examine how emergent themes might differ as a product of gender and race/ethnicity and the extent to which emergent themes may relate to key doctoral student socialization outcomes.

This study reveals six emergent themes, which primarily focus on how doctoral students receive instrumental and psychosocial support from postdocs in their labs. The most frequent emergent theme captures the unique ways in which postdocs provide ongoing, hands-on support and troubleshooting at the lab bench. When examining how this theme plays a role in socialization outcomes, the results suggest that doctoral students who described this type of support from postdocs had more positive mental health outcomes than those who did not describe this type of hands-on support.

Literature on graduate student mentorship has focused primarily on the impact of advisors, despite recent empirical evidence of a “cascading mentorship” model, in which senior students and staff also play a key mentoring role. This study provides new insights into the unique mentoring role of postdocs, focusing on the nature and potential impacts of student–postdoc interactions.