Search results

This empirical study aims to explore how actors in specific human resource practices (HRPs) such as line managers (LMs) impact employee productivity measures in the context of financial institutions (FI) banks.

This cross-country study adopted a qualitative methodology. It employed semi-structured interviews to collect data from purposefully selected 12 business facing directors (BFDs) working in the top 10 banks in Nigeria and the UK. The data collected were analysed with the help of the trans-positional cognition approach (TPCA) phenomenological method.

The findings of a TPCA analytical process imply that in the UK and Nigeria’s FIs, the BFDs line managers’ human resources practices (LMHRPs) resulted in a highly regulated workplace, knowledge gap, service operations challenges and subjective quantitatively driven key performance indicators, considered service productivity paradoxical elements. Although the practices in the UK and Nigerian FIs had similar labels, their aggregates were underpinned by different contextual issues.

To support LMs in better understanding and managing FIs BFDs productivity measures and outcomes, we propose the Managerial Employee Productivity Operational Definition framework as part of their toolkit. This study will be helpful for banking sectors, their regulators, policymakers, other FIs’ industry stakeholders and future researchers in the field.

Within the context of the UK and Nigeria’s FIs, this study is the first attempt to understand how LMHRPs impact BFDs productivity in this manner. It confirms that LMHRPs result in service productivity paradoxical elements with perceived or lost productivity implications.

This study aims to investigate why and how shared service centres (SSCs) are implemented as well as how they affect audit firm practice and audit quality.

In this qualitative study guided by the theoretical framework of institutional theory, the authors conducted 25 semi-structured interviews in seven European countries, including 16 interviews with audit partners from Big 4 firms, 6 with audit team members, 2 with interviewees from second-tier audit firms and 1 with a member of an oversight body.

The authors show that the central rationale for audit firms to implement SSCs is economic rather than external legitimacy. The authors find that SSC implementation has substantial effects on audit practices, particularly those related to standardisation, coordination and monitoring activities. The authors also highlight the potential impacts on audit quality.

By exploring the motivation for and effects of SSC implementation amongst audit firms, the authors offer insights into the best practices related to subsequent change processes and audit quality.

Supply chain (SC) and knowledge management (KM) have been studied; still, there is a need to understand how KM can be used for SC resilience and improving the firm’s performance. The purpose of the paper is to study and analyze SC resilience strategies based on KM processes to enhance SC performance considering six SC strategies: SC reengineering, collaboration, SC innovation, SC integration, SC agility and SC risk management.

By adopting the dynamic capability theory, the empirical research is conducted on a sample of 312 Indian micro, small to medium enterprises. To evaluate 312 samples, the structural equation modeling approach is adopted.

The study found a is a positive relationship between SC reengineering, SC collaboration, SC integration, SC agility, SC risk management and KM. Nevertheless, the relationship between SC innovation and KM is not significant. This study also found the mediating effect of KM on SC performance, and the results shows that SC reengineering, SC collaboration, SC agility and SC risk management are having complementary mediation, while SC innovation and SC integration did not show any mediation.

This is the only research that integrates resilience strategies and KM for improving SC performance. Using KM, SC reengineering will improve SC performance by enhancing readiness and recovery strategies to avoid SC disruption. KM will improve SC collaboration. It will enhance the SC process’ overall visibility, transparency and so on. Agility leads to increased speed, visibility and flexibility, which aids in dealing with uncertainty in the environment. SCRM entails investments and additional resources (such as equipment and labor) to navigate uncertainty and risks in the SC and improve SC performance.