Search results

This study aims to analyze the effect of cognitive load and social value orientation on managers’ preferences when they face with two types of restructuring choices in financially distressed firms: the first belonging to the family of organizational restructuring (massive layoffs) and the second to the family of financial restructuring (debt increases).

The authors investigate experimentally the impact of managers’ cognitive load and social value orientation on the decision to restructure leveraged buyout (LBO) firms in financial distress by using either massive layoffs or debt increases.

By investigating the impact of managers’ cognitive load and social value orientation on the restructuring decision of an LBO firm in financial distress, the research reveals that, on average, cognitively loaded managers prefer massive layoffs over increased debt levels. The massive layoffs seemingly provide a relatively easier way to avoid conflict with influential, residual claimants. In contrast, social value–oriented managers actively avoid massive layoffs and prefer to increase debt.

These results imply that the performance mechanisms emphasized to improve agency relations, for example, in LBOs, have their own limitations during periods of financial distress. This study shows that one of these limits is related to cognitive distortions and personality traits.

In this research, the originality lies in understanding how managers’ internal factors affect their restructuring decision-making, in the case of LBO firms in financial distress.

The purpose of this study is to determine what technological strategies were used within each of the phases of the ADDIE framework when developing content for professional training. The study also examined the affordances of those technologies in training.

A PRISMA systematic review methodology (Moher et al., 2015) was utilized to answer the four questions guiding this study. Specifically, the PRISMA extension Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for Protocols (PRISMA-P, Moher et al., 2015) was used to direct each stage of the research, from the literature review to the conclusion. In addition, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA principles; Liberati et al., 2009) are used to guide the article selection process.

The findings reveal that the majority of the studies were in healthcare (36%) and education (24%) and used an online format (65%). There was a wide distribution of ADDIE used with technology across the globe. The coding for the benefits of technology use in the development of the training solution revealed four trends: 1) usability, 2) learning approaches, 3) learner experience and 4) financial.

This systematic review only examined articles published in English, which may bias the findings to a Western understanding of how technology is used within the ADDIE framework. Furthermore, the study examined only peer-review academic articles from scholarly journals and conferences. While this provided a high level of assurance about the quality of the studies, it does not include other reports directly from training providers and other organizations.

These findings can be used as a springboard for training providers, scholars, funders and practitioners, providing rigorous insight into how technology has been used within the ADDIE framework, the types of technology, and the benefits of using technology. This insight can be used when designing future training solutions with a better understanding of how technology can support learning.

This study provides insight into the uses of technology in training. Many of these findings and uses of technology within ADDIE can also transfer to other aspects of society.

This study is unique in that it provides the scholarly community with the first systematic review to examine what technological strategies were used within each of the phases of the ADDIE structure and how these technologies provided benefits to developing a training solution.