Search results
1 – 10 of 226Stephen L. Vargo, Robert F. Lusch, Melissa Archpru Akaka and Yi He
Christine Cress, Tricia Mulligan and Thomas Van Cleave
Transformational learning outcomes of short-term faculty-led international service-learning experiences can by stymied by cultural shock and improperly facilitated programs…
Abstract
Transformational learning outcomes of short-term faculty-led international service-learning experiences can by stymied by cultural shock and improperly facilitated programs. Moreover, dissonance in dimensions of the self in contrast to foreign traditions and social interactions can be especially salient in American student encounters in India. How students resolve and make meaning of their own emotional entropy is traced across two institutional programs, two courses (1 undergraduate and 1 graduate), and multiple India community partner sites. An evidence-based pedagogical model and strategies for preparation, praxis, and processing are offered in supporting student reflection of themselves as global beings and in development of global agency which is manifested as intrapersonal, interpersonal, intercultural, academic, and professional competencies.
Details
Keywords
I reexamine the conflicting results in Frank, Lynch, and Rego (2009) and Lennox, Lisowsky, and Pittman (2013). Frank et al. (2009) conclude that firms can manage book income…
Abstract
I reexamine the conflicting results in Frank, Lynch, and Rego (2009) and Lennox, Lisowsky, and Pittman (2013). Frank et al. (2009) conclude that firms can manage book income upward and taxable income downward in the same period, implying a positive relation between aggressive book and tax reporting. Lennox et al. (2013) conclude the relation is negative and aggressive book reporting informs users that aggressive tax reporting is less likely. I identify four key differences in the research designs across the two studies, including measures of aggressive book reporting, measures of aggressive tax reporting, sample time periods, and empirical models. I systematically examine whether each of these differences is responsible for the conflicting results by altering the key difference while holding other factors as constant as possible. I find the relation between aggressive book and tax reporting is driven by the measure of aggressive book reporting, as the relation is positive for some subsets of firms and negative for others. Firms accused of financial statement fraud have a negative relation while nonfraud firms exhibit a positive relation. Using discretionary accruals, I also look for, but do not find a “pivot point” in the relation between aggressive book and tax reporting. I provide a better understanding of the relation between aggressive book and tax reporting by identifying research design choices that are responsible for prior results. I show that measures of both discretionary accruals and financial statement fraud are necessary to gain a more complete picture of the relation between aggressive book and tax reporting.
Details
Keywords
Mansour Javidan and Mary B. Teagarden
The Global Mindset Inventory® has been developed through a very rigorous theoretical and empirical process. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis indicated three…
Abstract
The Global Mindset Inventory® has been developed through a very rigorous theoretical and empirical process. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis indicated three components: (a) intellectual capital, (b) social capital, and (c) psychological capital. Each component had good internal reliability. Each component showed evidence for discriminant and convergent validity. The instrument development followed a multiphase, multimethod research methodology, and has robust psychometric properties as evidenced by its strong reliability scores and its multidimensional validity properties.
Mansour Javidan, Richard M. Steers and Michael A. Hitt
The authors of the various chapters in this book have approached the concept of global mindset from diverse perspectives and have defined it differently. Levy et al. in this…
Abstract
The authors of the various chapters in this book have approached the concept of global mindset from diverse perspectives and have defined it differently. Levy et al. in this volume define global mindset as a highly complex cognitive structure distinguished by an openness to and expression of multiple cultural and strategic realities on both global and local levels and the cognitive capacity to moderate and assimilate across this diversity. More specifically, global mindset is typified by three corresponding dimensions: (1) an openness and attentiveness to multiple realms of action and meaning, (2) a complex representation and expression of cultural and strategic dynamics, and (3) a moderation and incorporation of ideals and actions oriented toward both global and local levels (Chapter 1 of this volume). At the core of their definition is the awareness of and openness to multiple realities, meanings, and perspectives.