Search results

The game plan firms must navigate in the quest of competitive advantage which is changing quickly. More and more firms acknowledge that future prosperity depends on achieving the joint goals of economic, environmental and social sustainability. This understanding has resulted in both firms and actors on the financial markets enhancing their focus on environmental, social and governance dimensions in their respective decision-making processes. In this chapter, the focus is on one key component of the changing game plan, the European Union’s (EU) Sustainable Finance Platform that envisions investors as a key driver of firms’ sustainability transformation. Based on survey data from Swedish listed firms, we discuss implications and outcomes of the Platform. Our results show that investors play an important role in setting the rules of the gameplan for firms. However, not to the extent that it meets the ambitions of the policymakers. This suggests either that the Platform will fail to meet its aims or that firms should expect further significant changes to the gameplan in the future.

Purpose – Previous studies distinguish revenue management based on discretionary accruals; the research of studies is to investigate the factors that affect the finance manager at the discretionary accrual in General financial information statement.

Design/Methodology/Approach – Literature review models used in research aimed at detecting any company that performs the company’s discretion to fulfill the accrual of interests internally. This research study also discusses the relationship between earnings and discretionary manager behavior.

Findings – The researcher wants to re-examine the hypothesis of market efficiency on Indonesia’s capital market. The current company information technology uses greatly influences worldwide investor interest to invest on Indonesian’s capital market. Emerging Indonesia Capital market status becomes very interesting to be studied.

Originality/Value – It also presented the shortcomings of current research and the trends for future study in capital market.

This chapter insists that local cocreation projects need not only good intentions and the hard work of volunteers but also require funding and financing of the design and implementation of new solutions. It draws a conceptual distinction between funding and financing and explains who may help to provide funding and financing and why they may do so. As a part of this discussion, attention is drawn to the importance of writing good and persuasive funding applications and drawing up a strong and convincing business case to secure financing of new solutions. The new and emerging strategy for mobilizing private capital to help finance SDG projects is explained and illustrated, before closing the chapter with a discussion of the need to develop a proper system for fiscal accounting and auditing, which can prevent mismanagement and misconduct that eventually undermine popular support for local SDG projects.

Diffusion of innovations, defined as the adoption and implementation of new ideas, processes, products, or services in health care, is both particularly important and especially challenging. One known problem with adoption and implementation of new technologies is that, while organizations often make innovations immediately available, organizational actors are more wary about adopting new technologies because these may impact not only patients and practices but also reimbursement. As a result, innovations may remain underutilized, and organizations may miss opportunities to improve and advance. As innovation adoption is vital to achieving success and remaining competitive, it is important to measure and understand factors that impact innovation diffusion. Building on a survey of a national sample of 654 clinicians, our study measures the extent of diffusion of value-enhancing care delivery innovations (i.e., technologies that not only improve quality of care but has potential to reduce care cost by diminishing waste, Faems et al., 2010) for 13 clinical specialties and identifies healthcare-specific individual characteristics such as: professional purview, supervisory responsibility, financial incentive, and clinical tenure associated with innovation diffusion. We also examine the association of innovation diffusion with perceived value of one type of care delivery innovation – artificial intelligence (AI) – for assisting clinicians in their clinical work. Responses indicate that less than two-thirds of clinicians were knowledgeable about and aware of relevant value-enhancing care delivery innovations. Clinicians with broader professional purview, more supervisory responsibility, and stronger financial incentives had higher innovation diffusion scores, indicating greater knowledge and awareness of value-enhancing, care delivery innovations. Higher levels of knowledge of the innovations and awareness of their implementation were associated with higher perceptions of the value of AI-based technology. Our study contributes to our knowledge of diffusion of innovation in healthcare delivery and highlights potential mechanisms for speeding innovation diffusion.

Prior family business research has been dominated by an agency theory perspective, narrow definitions of what constitutes family wealth, and a preoccupation with business governance mechanisms to the exclusion of family governance mechanisms. This chapter presents the findings of examining the role of a broader range of governance mechanisms (for the business; for the family) in achieving more comprehensive wealth (economic and non-economic) family business goals in the Australian context. Based on survey responses from around 400 family businesses, the findings from this study show that both family and business governance mechanisms contribute significantly to achieving both the business’s financial performance and the achievement of family-centered goals that are important to the owning family. The results also suggest that the relationship between governance and performance in the family business context is much more complex than that acknowledged in prior research and has implications for both future research and practice.

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.

Research management and administration (RMA) is a globally emerging field, but it is not yet established in Romania. The chapter analyses what are the formal expectations regarding RMA in the Romanian research system, and how these tasks are resolved on the ground. First, policy documents and informational packages of the major research funding calls are examined. Second, interviews are conducted with research project leaders, who undertook projects in different research organisations (state financed or private universities, state financed research institutions, or private foundations) in Romania. The interviews focussed on the challenges project leaders experienced in the grant seeking and implementation process, and on how they see the institutional and policy environment they work in.

In the concluding parts of the chapter, concrete policy recommendations are formulated that could help in resolving the research management related challenges, and in establishing RMA as a profession in the country.

Starting in the late 1950s with the creation of the National Council of University Research Administrators (NCURA), followed by the formation of other professional organisations both in the USA and Europe, there was a growing sense that research management was indeed a profession. One goal was the creation of professional standards that would lead to a standard training curriculum and, ultimately, a professional credential, and there have been many attempts at developing research administration certification. Now, in the US, accreditation through the Research Administrators Certification Council (RACC) exam has become ubiquitous, whereas in other parts of the world, certification by portfolio is more common. This chapter will compare and contrast the salient features of certification, certificates, and degree programs in research administration and review their development and growth over the past 30 years. The chapter will discuss their relative merits and how they work to advance the profession of research administration.

This chapter discusses the growing importance of research-related information in the face of increased complexities and competitiveness within higher education environments globally. It provides some reflections on the importance of institutional research cultures to effectively address these challenges, focussing on the African context, and the role of effective research support through institutional structures such as a dedicated research office. The increasingly strategic role of research management has led to the need for a more active and visionary role in the positioning of institutions by supporting decision-making and contributing to the development and visibility of institutional research portfolios. The authors provide their insights into the scope of research-related information, the need for research offices to perform this strategic function, how these information sets can be applied in reports, evidence-based decisions, institutional showcasing, and enhanced research support. The chapter includes aspects to consider when establishing a research-related information management function within institutions.