Search results

The development of Research Management and Administration (RMA) in Europe is strongly connected with the development of the Science and Technology (S&T) policy of the European Union (EU). These policies were the result of a continuous debate between the member states and the European Commission and European Parliament.

Although there is no data on the early development of RMA, there are some publications on the history of the development of the S&T policy in Europe: the excellent publication ‘A History of European Union Research Policy’ by Luca Guzzetti (Guzzetti, 1995). Guzzetti’s book investigates the history of EU research policies from 1948 up to the preparation of the Fourth Framework Programme (FP) (1994–1998).

The RMA aspects are constructed mainly by oral history complemented with some written sources. The history shows a gradual development of the profession unevenly spread in time and European geography. This has mainly with the EU enlargement in the same period, when new member states were connected to the FP. The profession started with a few colleagues’ way back in the eighties of the last century as financial people were dealing with the first European financial reporting up to the present day where RMA is becoming a field of work attracting many new colleagues.

This article provides an overview and analysis of 50 years of European policies, actions, and challenges to align its higher education and research, as well as lessons learned from this for similar initiatives elsewhere.

The study builds on a comprehensive overview and study of policy documents and scholarly literature to identify by decade the main policies and actions and the related challenges towards a European Higher Education and Research Area.

The findings make clear the key rationales, challenges, shifts and lessons to be learned from 50-year European policies for the alignment of higher education.

Its value lies in the historical overview and analysis of current initiatives, in particular the European Universities Initiative (EUI), to provide a historical and geographical context, which might give insight for similar initiatives elsewhere.

This paper examines whether target returns act as specific goals that impact risk-taking when individuals make investment decisions.

Using an experimental setting, the authors assign either a low or a high target return to participants and ask them to make independent investment decisions as the risk-free rate fluctuates around their target return and, for some of them, becomes negative.

Building on cumulative prospect theory, the authors find that the prevailing reference point of participants is the target return, regardless of the level of the risk-free rate. This result still holds even when the risk-free rate is negative, suggesting that (1) the target return drives risk-taking more than does a zero-threshold and (2) negative rates are limited as a tool to stimulate appetites for risk. In a follow-up study, the authors show that these conclusions remain valid when the target return is endogenously determined.

The authors' original approach, which pioneers the use of target returns in both the positive and negative interest rate contexts, provides insightful results about the “reach for yield” among regular people.

Expanding on the real-world financial market framework and considering the current market turmoil, with cryptocurrencies (where contracts for difference (CFDs) are extremely common) (Hasso et al., 2019) displaying unprecedented volatility, the authors aim to test in an online laboratory setting whether displaying a risk warning message is truly effective in reducing the level of risk taken and whether the placement of this method makes a difference.

To explore the impact of risk disclosure framing on risk-taking behavior, the authors conducted an online pair-wise lottery choice experiment. In addition to manipulating risk awareness through the presence or absence of risk warning messages of varying intensity, the authors also considered dynamic inconsistency, cognitive ability and questionnaire-based financial risk tolerance (FRT) scores. The authors aimed to identify potential relationships between these variables and experimentally elicited risk aversion. The authors' study offers valuable insights into the complex nature of risky decision-making and sheds light on the importance of considering dynamic inconsistency in addition to risk awareness and aversion.

The authors' results provide statistical evidence for the efficacy of informative and very salient messages in mitigating risky decision, hinting at several policy implications. The authors also provide some statistical evidence in support of the relationship between cognitive abilities and risk preferences. The authors detect that individual with low cognitive abilities scores display great risk aversion.

This study investigates the impact of risk warning messages on investment decisions in an online laboratory setting – a unique approach. However, the authors go beyond this and also examine the potential influence of dynamic inconsistency on decision-making, adding further value to the literature on this topic. To ensure a comprehensive understanding of the participants, the authors collect data on cognitive ability and FRT using questionnaires. This study provides a simple and cost-effective framework that can be easily replicated in future research – a valuable contribution to the field.

This paper aims to examine how collaborative supplier development (SD) activities, supplier capabilities and buyer–supplier relationship interrelate in technology-based, luxury product business contexts characterized by small volumes, difficult targets and resource constraints relative to those targets.

Using inductive case research method, the authors investigate multiple embedded cases involving six dyadic buyer–supplier relationships of two luxury product manufacturers in the motorcycle and automotive industries. Each dyad represents an important sub-system for which the buying firm committed significant SD efforts to help the supplier successfully achieve difficult targets.

The analysis reveals how paradoxical tensions might emerge as the firms engage in successful SD activities, which could lead to decreasing relationship commitment ultimately resulting in the termination of the relationship. The authors utilize the “value co-creation and value capture” paradox framework to understand the SD and relationship dynamic and characterize it as developing-leveraging paradox to explain its dualities, i.e. commitment-based SD efforts (increasing value co-creation), and unilateral leveraging of the newly acquired capabilities (increasing value capture) by both the buyer and the supplier. Overemphasis on value capture by one of the exchange partners spurs a detrimental vicious cycle leading to the decline of the relationship.

The study explains the paradoxical dynamics that may emerge in SD activities of innovative, technologically complex, luxury product firms. The findings contribute to the SD literature by highlighting how learnings from SD activities could contribute to the dark sides of buyer–supplier relationship. The technologically complex, luxury product contextual characteristics of the study may limit the generalizability of the study findings.

The study provides novel insights into the emergence and management of paradoxes in buyer–supplier relationships, in terms of virtuous and vicious dynamics of developing-leveraging.