Search results

Based on fifteen years of data on the annual Academy of International Business (AIB) best dissertation Farmer Award finalists, we find that these dissertations were done at a range of North American universities. Interestingly, dissertation topics differed from the topics covered in the three top IB journals with five‐sixths of the topics in management, organization, economics, or finance and two‐thirds set in a single country or region (U.S., Japan, North America, and Western Europe). Survey research is the most common methodology but analysis of secondary data is growing. As expected, the finalists are on average an extraordinarily prolific group.

Supply chain management literature recognizes that interorganizational networks provide resources that convey critical benefits, such as capital, competitive advantage and efficient strategy implementation. The purpose of this paper is to leverage network theory and identify technological innovations as the antecedents for organizations to achieve stronger interorganizational networks. Specifically, this paper investigates how supply chain technologies of its logistics affiliate, Cainiao Network (CN), affect Alibaba Group’s three fundamental network mechanisms reachability, richness and receptivity and how interorganizational networks subsequently drive Alibaba Group’s performance.

A case study approach was chosen as a methodology to develop an in-depth understanding of the proposed innovations-network-performance framework.

Results indicate that innovative technologies positively lead to network reachability, richness and receptivity. Stronger interorganizational networks directly lead to higher performance. In addition, CN is identified as a unique innovative business model.

The key contribution of this research is that it investigates Alibaba Group’s performance from a network and innovation perspective. It identifies technological innovations as a key driver for stronger interorganizational networks. Furthermore, three network mechanisms are introduced and investigated as the antecedents of organizational performance. This research also provides a comprehensive description of Alibaba Group and CN.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss a number of important recent developments in the area of business and human rights and considers the impact of these developments for accounting, assurance and reporting. Following the UN endorsement of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (the Guiding Principles) in June 2011, initiatives related to their implementation have advanced at a rapid pace. Despite the centrality of accounting, assurance and reporting to some of the key initiates – accounting research has, hitherto, lagged behind this growing momentum. In order to address this lacunae, this paper develops an agenda for future research in the area of accounting and human rights. In doing so, the paper provides an overview of the important contributions advanced by the other papers in this special issue of Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ).

This paper draws together and identifies key issues and themes related to the rapidly evolving research and policy domain of business and human rights and considers the relevance of these issues to accounting research.

The paper highlights the wide-ranging impact the Guiding Principles and other developments in business and human rights have for accounting practice and draws attention to potential areas of research for accounting scholars. In particular, the paper highlights the emergence of business and human rights due diligence requirements, including their management and reporting. Further, the paper draws attention to the development of business and human rights reporting and assurance practice – which, while still in its infancy, has gathered considerable momentum and support.

The paper provides important insights into emerging issues and developments in business and human rights that have clear relevance to accounting research and practice.

This paper, and the other contributions to this special issue of AAAJ, provide a basis and a research agenda for accounting scholars seeking to undertake research in this significant and emerging field.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the basis for, and ramifications of, applying relevant human rights norms – such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights – to the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). In doing so, the paper seeks to contribute to scholarship on the political legitimisation of the IASB’s structure and activities under prevailing global governance conditions.

The paper explores three distinct argumentative logics regarding responsibilities for justice and human rights vis-à-vis the IASB. First, the authors explore the basis for applying human rights responsibilities to the IASB through reasoning based on the analysis of “public power” (Macdonald, 2008) and public authorisation. Second, the authors develop the reasoning with reference to recent attempts by legal scholars and practitioners to apply human rights obligations to other non-state and transnational institutions. Finally, the authors develop reasoning based on Thomas Pogge’s (1992b) ideas about institutional harms and corresponding responsibilities.

The three distinct argumentative logic rest on differing assumptions – the goal is not to reconcile or synthesise these approaches, but to propose that these approaches offer alternative and in some ways complementary insights, each of which contributes to answering questions about how human rights obligations of the IASB should be defined, and how such a responsibility could be “actually proceduralised”.

The analysis provides an important starting point for beginning to think about how responsibilities for human rights might be applied to the operation of the IASB.

Discusses research ideas on the distinctions between data, information and knowledge, the categories of knowledge and knowledge‐processing activities in Holsapple and Whinston’s (HW’s) taxonomy (1987, 1988a, 1988b), and their application to markets and the activities of the firm. Describes a manufacturing firm’s inputs, production processes and outputs in terms of HW’s taxonomy, pointing out that management must filter the information surrounding the firm to turn it into knowledge of various types, e.g. descriptive, derived, assimilative etc. Considers the role of information for customers of and investors in the firm; and the relationship between knowledge and efficiency. Identifies three types of knowledge workers (builders, stewards and appliers) and calls for further research on the taxonomy of knowledge and standards of knowledge within the finance discipline.

Drawing on Fairclough (1989, 2005), the purpose of this paper is to explore how respect for human rights is emerging and being operationalized in the discourse of 30 Fortune 500 companies in the mining, pharmaceutical and chemical industries at two key points in the recent evolution of the UN’s business and human rights agenda. Specifically the paper explores the scope of rights for which corporations are accountable and, more specifically, the degree of responsibility a company assumes for enacting these rights.

The authors draw on Fairclough (1992) and Mashaw (2007) in a critical discourse analysis of corporate human rights disclosures of ten companies in each of the chemical, mining and pharmaceutical industries at two points in time coinciding with: first, the publication in 2008 of the Protect, Respect, Remedy policy framework; and second, the endorsement by the UN in 2011, of a set of Guiding Principles designed to implement this framework.

The study finds four grammars of respect and three different scopes of rights within specific corporate accountably disclosures on their responsibility to respect rights. Corporate constructions of human rights are broad: from labour rights, through social and political rights, to the right to health and a clean environment. The corporate discourse is one of promoting, realizing and upholding rights that construct the corporation as an autonomous source of power beyond the state.

The paper contends that the structuring of this emerging discourse is important, not only because the meaning and scope of corporate respect for rights affects the lived experience of some of the most vulnerable in society, but also because it reflects a shifting the relationship between the state, business and society (Muchlinski 2012).

The authors develop a way of conceptualizing business human rights responsibilities and contend that the corporate human rights discourse of respect reflects a significant reconfiguration of political power.

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Term. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.

This paper reports on the key findings of a study into the outcomes and costs of community care for a large cohort of people with learning disabilities, supported in 12 study sites across England, who left various long‐stay hospital 12 years ago as part of a centrally monitored and evaluated government policy initiative on deinstitutionalisation. It represents the last follow‐up of a raft of linked longitudinal evaluations, conducted at four time points over a twelve‐year period. The paper identifies the findings from the last follow‐up and interprets and presents them as summary observations and trends in relation to the findings in learning disability, briefly reviewing them in relation to wider evidence on deinstitutionalisation and community care in England.

Responding to a public outcry about the level of executive compensation in many corporations as well as the apparent weak linkage between performance and pay, on October 15, 1992, the SEC (US Securities and Exchange Commission) adopted new rules affecting corporate disclosure of compensation. These rules require that executive compensation and company performance be clearly presented, and that the compensation committee of the board of directors explain how they arrived at their compensation decisions. The new rule affects the 1993 proxy statements of all but the smallest publicly‐traded US corporations, and applies to results from the 1992 fiscal‐year.

Cruelty has often been understood as the result of incurable bad character by those able to distinguish right from wrong. Recent research suggests a way of thinking about it as a form of disability in which people are unable to learn empathy, cognitive social skills and associated behaviour, which qualifies it as a form of learning disability. It is suggested that accepting this classification opens up the possibility that selected interventions might be successful in enabling people to understand, practise and appreciate affiliative behaviour.