Search results

The new geopolitical context being created by the Ukraine–Russia war highlights the need for structured approaches to planning and implementing unhooking strategies and developing associated supply chain reconfigurations.

The authors have interviewed six supply chain executives to begin the investigation of the key supply chain risks and disruptions caused by the Ukraine–Russia war.

Initial corporate responses to the Ukraine–Russia conflict were significant, perhaps unprecedented. However, as institutional, corporate and consumer sentiment influence reconfiguration responses, the authors have identified three supply chain pathways that underpin unhooking actions.

The authors selected respondents from each different type of supply chain interaction with the conflict zone (inbound, outbound and within), covering both components/intermediate products and finished goods. Therefore the sample size was small and designed to fit in with the spirit of the pathway initiative.

The authors reinforce the key role of procurement and supply chain management in not just supply but also in downstream markets that can accelerate decoupling and mitigate the associated supply chain disruptions.

The authors observe that supply chains are increasingly being weaponized, as external institutional and consumer influences necessitate companies to unhook from conflict zones, countries, or regimes. They are becoming increasingly intertwined with foreign policy.

The novelty of the contribution to the associated discourse is the perspective that after decades of increasing globalization and geographic dispersion of supply chains, the unhooking effort is not limited to a firm and its internal operations but involves multiple stakeholders. For instance, the full extent of the complex linkages of supply chains, networks and relationships that touch conflict zone geographies must be considered, particularly those that are incompatible with the firm's values and aims, including those of their stakeholders.

This study aims to investigate the impact of FTX bankruptcy on the global stock markets, including both the developed and emerging markets, as per the Morgan Stanley Capital Investment (MSCI) country classification.

Using the daily closing prices for leading stock market indices of all 47 countries in the MSCI market classification, comprising 23 developed markets and 24 emerging markets, the event study methodology is used to examine the impact of the event on developed markets, emerging markets and overall global equity markets.

The study finds heterogeneous effects of the event on different countries. Results indicate that overall global equity markets experienced a statistically significant positive cumulative average abnormal returns of 15.8533% in the complete event window of 28 days from t − 7 to t + 20. The authors conclude that traditional global equity markets can be used as a hedge against potential financial risk posed by unfavorable events in the cryptocurrency markets and have safe haven properties.

The study emphasizes the global financial system’s interconnectedness and the potential of traditional equity markets to hedge risks in the cryptocurrency market. The findings are relevant for investors seeking portfolio diversification and mitigating their exposure to potential risks in the cryptocurrency market.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the present study is the earliest attempt to comprehensively examine the impact of the bankruptcy of the world’s fourth largest cryptocurrency exchange, FTX, on the global equity markets.

This study aims to examine whether and how voluntary accounting disclosures can repair individual donors’ trust in a charity after negative events.

The authors adopt a qualitative research approach and conduct 32 semi-structured interviews with active Australian individual donors, with a hypothetical vignette design. Hypothetical negative events and corresponding accounting disclosures are presented to participants during interviews.

Three types of individual donors are identified based on their decision-making patterns after negative events and primary trust relations with a charity-reasoned donor (giving-decision based on their analysis of the situation, competence-based trust), generalist donors (giving-decision based on trust in the charitable sector, institution-based trust) and emotional donors (giving-decision based on feelings and emotions about the charity, integrity-based trust). The research suggests that accounting disclosures can repair trust damage for reasoned donors and support institution-based trust for generalist donors, but do not seem able to repair trust damage for emotional donors and can potentially damage trust further.

Overall, the findings suggest that a one-size-fits-all approach to communicating with individual donors after negative events is not likely to be very effective in repairing trust. Instead, charities may need to adapt disclosures to their different types of individual donors.

While prior accounting studies have largely focussed on how charity managers themselves grapple with accountability or how negative events impact charitable donations, the authors demonstrate how accounting disclosures can play different roles in the trust-repairing process for different types of individual donors.

This remembrance discusses the intellectual climate and circumstances under which David Maines came to the Metro Detroit area in the early 1990s. It discusses his impact on graduate students at Wayne State University and how he met the historian Linda Benson whom he would marry. It chronicles his arrival to the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan in 1997, which provided him a well-deserved academic home after his long 25-year journey in academia. Maines was tenured there in 1998, promoted to full professor in 1999 and chaired the department from 2000–2006.