Search results

This article has been withdrawn as it was published elsewhere and accidentally duplicated. The original article can be seen here: 10.1108/EUM0000000002724. When citing the article, please cite: Frank G. Bingham, Charles J. Quigley, Jr., (1989), “Venture team application to new product development”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 4 Iss: 1, pp. 49 - 59.

This article has been withdrawn as it was published elsewhere and accidentally duplicated. The original article can be seen here: 10.1108/EUM0000000002557. When citing the article, please cite: Frank G. Bingham, Charles J. Quigley, (1989), “A Team Approach to New Product Development”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 6 Iss 4 pp. 5 - 14.

Proposes a new product implementation process which is designed to reduce the risk inherent in new product introductions in consumer markets. Defines the stages of this process as idea generation, idea screening, conceptual development and testing, business analysis, product development, test market, and product introduction. Concludes that this process differs from previous models in suggesting a team be created to manage the development, speeding up the tasks in each stage.

Presents a new product implementation model which is designed to reduce the risk inherent in new product ventures in the industrial marketplace. Show that while there is debate over the number of failures, there is little debate that the new product failure rate is high. Describes a process that gives the industrial firm the ability to exert greater control over internal and external factors critical to the successful new product implementation. Concludes that the model is appropriate for many types of firms.

State funding is being reduced for higher education institutes (HEIs) is linked to several checks such as performance-based incentives (Hagood, 2019). This forces HEIs to look for other options for funding. Endowment funds are now becoming the main source of revenue for HEIs (Sörlin, 2007), largely provided by alumni. Thus, this study aims to examine the factors that lead to donor behavior in terms of university endowment funds.

Based on a sample of 627 participants in the survey from public universities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and 625 from public/private universities of the United States of America (USA), the authors conducted a cross-sectional survey-based analysis. Hypotheses were tested with regression analysis.

The results revealed that in the USA, donors with substantial prestige within the institution are more likely to contribute to the endowment fund; however, in the KSA, this relationship was insignificant. Additionally, this study found that participation, brand interpretation and satisfaction positively impact identification with an organization, leading to donor behavior.

This research has successfully identified psychological factors for endowment funding; however, mediating or moderating variables affecting donor behavior should also be considered. Further, this study considers only two countries, the KSA and the USA; therefore, a larger cross-cultural context warrants more investigation.

Overall results revealed several means through which the administrators and practitioners may efficiently manage and increase university endowment funds flow. This study's novelty is to conduct a cross-national investigation and identify the psychological factors of donation behavior toward university endowment funds, providing an opportunity for HEIs to understand the psychological factors in detail and motivate their alumni to be one of the important sources of funding even in developing countries.

Many psychological factors underlie alumni's engagement in volunteerism and donation activities, especially in cross-national settings. Following social identity theory, this study explored identity-based donor behavior in terms of supporting universities through endowment funding.

In order to better understand how heuristics are used in practice, the authors explore what type of heuristics is used in the managerial domain of financial advisors to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and what influences the shaping of these heuristics. In doing so, the authors detect possible fast-and-frugal heuristics in day-to-day decision-making of independent financial advisers who help owners of SMEs to acquire capital (e.g. loans, factoring, leasing and equity).

The authors inductively assessed the work of financial advisers of SMEs. Based on group discussions, the authors drew up a semi-structured interview-protocol with descriptive questions about how financial advisers come to a deal for their clients. The interviews of 19 professionals were analysed by relating them to the theory of fast-and-frugal heuristics.

Within their decision-making, advisers estimate the likelihood of acceptance by a few financial providers they know well in their personal network with a strong bias towards traditional banking products, although there are a large number of alternatives on the Dutch market. “Less is more” seems to be a relevant principle when defined as satisficing. Heuristics help advisers to deal with behavioural and economic limitations. Also, the authors have found that client interaction, previous working experience and the company the adviser is working for influences the shaping of the simple rules the adviser is using.

The study shows how difficult it is to understand the ecological rationality of a certain group of professionals and to understand the “less is more” principle. Financial advisers to SMEs use cognitive shortcuts and simple rules to advise SME-owners, based on previous experiences, but it is difficult to determine whether that leads to the same or even better solutions for them and their clients than using probability theory and financial optimisation models. Within heuristics, satisficing seems to be a dominant mechanism. Here, heuristics help advisers in recognising possibilities by searching for similarities between a current financing case and previous experiences. The data suggests that if “less is more” is defined as satisficing for one or more stakeholders involved, the principle dominates the decision making of financial advisers of SME's.

The authors suggest the relevance of a behavioural approach to finance by assessing the day-to-day decisions of financial advisers of SMEs. Also, the authors suggest that financial advisers are guided by previous experiences, and they do not fully assess a wide range of options in their work but need shortcuts to fulfil the needs of their clients.

The study comes close to day-to-day decision-making in finance by assessing how professionals make decisions. The authors try to understand types of heuristics in relation with “ecological rationality” and the less is more principle. The authors assess financial advisers of SME-companies, a group that has gotten little research attention until now. The influence of client interaction and of the company the adviser is working for is remarkable in the shaping of the advisers' simple rules.

Research has reliably demonstrated that decision-makers, especially expert ones, use heuristics to make decisions under uncertainty. However, whether decision-makers with little or no experience also do, and if so, how? is unknown. This research addresses this issue in the marketing context by studying how a group of young and generally inexperienced entrepreneurs decide when asked to set a price and choose a distribution channel in a scenario involving a hypothetical firm.

The authors used think-aloud protocols to elicit data and then used inductive procedures to code the data for analysis.

The inexperienced entrepreneurs in the sample used three types of heuristics in their decision-making, forming a structured process that narrows in scope. First, metacognitive heuristics, which specify a decision-making approach, were used, followed by heuristics representing the criteria they considered, and finally, heuristics detailing the execution of a selected option. The authors also found that heuristics relating to a market orientation, especially customer-centric criteria, were the most common, but these were balanced with ones representing an internal orientation or growth.

The generally inexperienced decision-makers the authors’ studied used heuristics in a structured way that helped them to select and balance several potentially conflicting decision-making criteria. As with most research using qualitative research designs, the generalizability of these findings is unclear. Further research on the mechanisms by which relatively inexperienced decision-makers learn the heuristics they use is recommended.

This research's novelty lies in its focus on heuristic use by nonexpert decision-makers under conditions of uncertainty and the findings about their scope and the order they are used. As the authors collected data from think-aloud protocols with relatively young entrepreneurs with limited experience, they also offer a description of the heuristics used by nascent entrepreneurs when making marketing decisions about pricing and channels. The most surprising conclusion is that even without relevant domain-specific knowledge, decision-makers can use heuristics in an ecologically rational way (i.e. structured to match the environment).

The purpose of this paper is to to summarize Advisers Act registration implications for non‐US advisers that now rely on the “private adviser” exemption from Advisers Act registration and to summarize the principal changes affecting investors in funds managed by non‐US advisers contained in the Dodd‐Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.

The paper explains the elimination of the “private adviser” exemption and the creation of the narrower “foreign private adviser” and other exemptions from Adviser Act registration, reporting and recordkeeping requirements relating to private funds; the Dodd‐Frank Act's provisions for information sharing by the SEC and the confidentiality of private fund information; the “Volcker Rule's” limitation of investment by banking entities and non‐bank financial companies in hedge funds and private equity funds; changes in the definition of “accredited investor”; and the future adjustment of the “qualified client” test for inflation.

The Dodd‐Frank Act will require many investment advisers and fund managers with their principal offices and places of business outside the USA to register with the SEC and to observe, with respect to US clients, the full spectrum of SEC regulations that apply to registered investment advisers. The Act will also impose new disclosure and recordkeeping requirements on many non‐US advisers.

The paper provides expert guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

The aim is to explain certain disclosure and other obligations of municipal securities dealers when they act as underwriters to municipal securities issuers, as contained in a Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board interpretive notice regarding MSRB Rule G‐17, approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2012.

The paper explains the basic fair dealing principle; required disclosure by an underwriter; timing, manner, acknowledgement, and substance of disclosures; guidance concerning the role and compensation of the underwriter; disclosures of other conflicts; disclosures required in the case of complex financing structures; guidance concerning underwriter compensation and new issuance pricing; requirements for underwriters to honor retail order periods; and guidance on dealer payments to issuer personnel.

Although most underwriters have always viewed themselves as having a duty of fair dealing to municipal issuers, the MSRB's notice will require underwriters to formalize their procedures. Underwriters will have to develop mandatory disclosures, checklists of potential conflict disclosures, and procedures for receiving written acknowledgments. They will need to rethink how they approach complex financings.

The paper provides practical guidance from experienced securities lawyers.

The aim of this paper is to provide hedge fund and other private fund managers with a brief recap of regulatory changes in 2010 and a reminder of certain “best practices” they should consider as they prepare for 2011.

The paper provides 2010 regulatory highlights, including relevant provisions of the Dodd‐Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Pay‐to‐Play Rule, and amendments to Form ADV. It outlines issues for consideration in 2011, including preparation for SEC registration (if applicable), review of compliance policies and procedures, updating Form ADV, Form D and Blue Sky Filings, “custody rule” (Rule 206(4)‐2 under the Advisers Act) compliance, other regulatory filings that may be required (including Form 13F, Schedule 13D/13G, and Forms 3, 4, and 5), CFTC regulatory requirements for investment managers who trade or advise others on trading commodity futures contracts, certain tax considerations (including foreign bank, brokerage and other financial account (FBAR) reporting requirements), the Foreign Tax Compliance Act of 2009 (FACTA)), ERISA and Department of Labor considerations, fee deferral arrangements, and offering document updates.

This summary is not intended to provide a complete list of an investment manager's obligations relating to its compliance with applicable rules and regulations or to serve as legal advice. It does not address any non‐US or state law requirements and has not been tailored to the specific needs of a particular investment manager's business.

This paper provides useful summary practical guidance from experienced financial institutions lawyers.