Search results

Discusses the process and issues involved in developing a performance measurement system for a virtual engineering team working within a high technology environment. This team consists of members from many different sites across the world with a unique role in maintaining standardized manufacturing processes at the lowest possible cost. As a result, they faced many challenges including communication barriers, culture differences, as well as different reporting structures within each individual site. To help address these issues, a performance measurement system was developed to focus the team on the key actions affecting performance instead of the issues getting in the way. A measurement system was developed that linked the team’s objectives to its mission and identified the critical actions associated with each objective.

States that the major reasons for difficulties in cross‐cultural communication stem from the fact that actors from different cultures have different understandings regarding the interaction process and different styles of dialogue. Suggests that better understanding of communication within other cultures is the key to success. Uses past literature to suggest a number of cultural variability constructs concerning preferred interaction behaviours and the common themes they share. Presents three case studies to illustrate this.

Looks at the 2000 Employment Research Unit Annual Conference held at the University of Cardiff in Wales on 6/7 September 2000. Spotlights the 76 or so presentations within and shows that these are in many, differing, areas across management research from: retail finance; precarious jobs and decisions; methodological lessons from feminism; call centre experience and disability discrimination. These and all points east and west are covered and laid out in a simple, abstract style, including, where applicable, references, endnotes and bibliography in an easy‐to‐follow manner. Summarizes each paper and also gives conclusions where needed, in a comfortable modern format.

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

The purpose of this paper is to report on one UK secondary school English teacher and use his practice as a vehicle for exploring the classroom realities of dialogic assessment. Dialogic assessment, a term first proposed by Alexander (2004), is a position which seeks to synthesise the potentially powerful positions of both dialogic teaching and assessment for learning remains largely unexploited as an approach to developing effective teaching and learning.

Using video classroom evidence and interview, the authors explore the parameters within which dialogic teaching and assessment can be developed, and investigate the opportunities and obstacles which developing dialogic assessment bring about.

The authors develop a framework, drawing on the evidence, which demonstrates the development of dialogic assessment in the classroom.

This paper is an original look at dialogic assessment within the upper secondary sector.

In exploring how small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) overcame COVID-19 restrictions by deploying their specific dynamic capabilities to pivot their business models, this article explains the novel approaches that SMEs take and how they have responded to the financial challenges that arose from the pandemic.

The article adopts a dynamic capabilities lens to explain: (1) the specific financial effects of the relatively “short” (seven week) COVID-19 lockdown during March and April 2020 on SMEs; (2) the barriers they faced; and (3) how they overcame these barriers. The data were collected via semi-structured interviews with the owner-manager or a senior manager in each surveyed SME. The interview data were analysed using NVivo.

Analysis of the findings revealed five key factors: (1) the capability of SMEs to access external resources, especially entrepreneurial finance; (2) their ability to reconfigure resources and plan for the longer term, yet retain flexibility; (3) how entrepreneurial learning provided the capability to deal with the “unplanned” events/uncertainty; (4) the importance of networking and sources of information; and (5) the remarkable optimism for a future recovery, despite the difficulties of the trading period.

This research fills a unique niche, as no previous studies have examined the resilience and dynamic capabilities of SMEs during a complete lockdown and business shutdown of this magnitude. This context, unprecedented in the history of modern economies, offers a new lens through which to understand the mechanisms of business survival and adaptation in times of severe disruptions. No previous studies have been conducted in unique circumstances during a time when SMEs were faced with such a strict lockdown with travel and business completely shut down.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.