Search results

This chapter aims to conceptualize the general framework of policies to support entrepreneurship and competitiveness by indicating a move from a dispersive comprehension of competitiveness towards an integrated macro-meso-micro perspective, by taking as a case study the European South. First, it presents theoretical contributions to entrepreneurship enhancement policies, which mostly suggest that intervention can be effective in a fragmentary and relatively incoherent way. Then, it counter-proposes the ‘competitiveness web’ approach, which gives an integrated policy framework for the competitive strengthening and evolution of a socioeconomic system. In the framework of competitiveness web, we analyze and propose a meso-micro level policy via the Institutes of Local Development and Innovation (ILDI), which is a policy for empowering the local and regional business ecosystems through the enhancement of business innovation. Finally, by using the competitiveness web filter, we propose the structuration of a mechanism that could identify the level at which the socioeconomic entities in different spatial levels can articulate their policies for entrepreneurship enhancement in the macro-meso-micro integrated approach.

The purpose of this paper is to advance our understanding of competitiveness. The authors introduce the concept of Competitive Productivity (CP), supplementing shortcomings of traditional understandings of national, organisational and individual productivity which overlook the nature of competitiveness, i.e. outperforming the competition, or at least bettering one’s own performance. The authors offer definitions, components and construct measurements of CP at three levels: macro, meso and micro.

A review of the literature was conducted to evaluate the need for combining productivity and competitiveness into one new construct. There are theories that combine these ideas – e.g., the resource-based theory of the firm – but the authors are presenting these concepts differently, or in a novel way. The authors’ focus on CP makes necessary a new group of construct measures which are different from that of the strategy literature: the authors measure an agent’s tendency “to be better than the competition” along multiple dimensions. Based on the CP construct, the authors present three testable models to uncover determinants of CP at three levels (macro, meso and micro). Finally, the work around “emergent property” can be applied to examine CP itself as being a determinant for other higher-order outcomes such as welfare, profits and life satisfaction. CP forms a platform to explore likely interplay (bottom-up and/or top-down mechanisms) within the micro–meso–macro architecture.

Three CP models were developed and are briefly discussed in this paper: first, a National Competitive Productivity (NCP) model to capture the components/drivers of national CP (macro level). Second, a Firm Competitive Productivity (FCP) model to capture the components/drivers of firm CP within an industry context (meso). And finally, an Individual Competitive Productivity (ICP) model capturing the components/drivers of CP at the individual (micro) level.

The study provides a combined approach to capture productivity and competitiveness within one innovative concept: CP. It can be used by government and policy makers (NCP model), managers and organisations (FCP model), and individuals such as workers and students (ICP model) to evaluate and enhance their performance. A better understanding of the components/drivers of CP at the three levels and the suggested measurement of CP should provide a stronger theory of competitiveness of nations, firms and individuals. Not least should a focus on the three levels (macro, meso and micro) better prepare citizens, firms, workers and students to effectively function and work in the marketplace and in society. The authors’ work should eventually contribute to more effective benchmarking and continuous improvement in the competitiveness domain. Crucially, this conceptual paper forms the foundation for future empirical testing of CP components in the context of the relative values and moderated behaviour as captured by the ReVaMB model.

Along with technology-based ecosystems, healthcare start-ups are expanding multi-fold. On the other hand, underlying uncertainties pose several challenges for these health-tech enterprises at macro-meso-micro level, influencing their business circumstances and profitability. The current study aims to comprehend the macro-, meso- and micro-level barriers that make it difficult for enterprises to set up healthcare technology start-ups. The study also observed the perceived effect of these challenges on firms' performance and cost structure over time. Using the theory of behaviour under uncertainty, the study revealed multiple systemic, sector-related, human and implementation barriers that hinder business growth and lead to uncertainties for health-tech start-ups.

Using a grounded theory approach, the study collected the views of 51 health tech start-ups in the UK using an online participants pool. The data was collected using qualitative data techniques in the form of open-ended essays, and a content analysis using thematic coding process was conducted. The questions centered around the different institutional uncertainties or barriers while setting up or running a healthcare start-up.

The study revealed several macro-, meso- and micro-level barriers these technology-based enterprises perceive in the healthcare industry. These are recognised as systemic barriers, such as lack of funding and procedural issues; sector-related barriers, such as market-related impediments; human barriers, including psychological barriers and resistance to new technology; and implementation barriers, such as operational and personnel issues.

The study used qualitative, open-ended essay techniques to collect the data. Future studies may use a mixed-methods approach to provide holistic insights. The study is conducted in a single developed country, the UK. Future work may expand these findings by comparing developed market challenges with those of emerging markets and by assessing the viewpoints of healthcare start-ups.

This research will assist the healthcare sector and government understand health tech start-up hurdles and uncertainty. Policymakers must assist start-ups and encourage entrepreneurial innovation. Regulating and enabling policies will help. The paper examines start-ups' macro, meso and micro uncertainties. Policymakers promoting sector entrepreneurship must consider these barriers while designing policy guidelines.

The study contributes to the existing literature on technology start-ups, particularly in the healthcare industry, and identifies significant barriers these start-ups face. The study synthesizes research on health-tech start-up uncertainty and bridges the gap between theory and practice by applying empirical findings.

Investment in non-listed real estate funds (NREFs) in an emerging economy like India has its own challenges that entail a detailed understanding of the risks. The purpose of this paper is to identify the key risk factors across the life cycle of a NREF, based on a considered feedback of various real estate fund management stakeholders. It is important for the investors and fund managers to appreciate these risk factors to make informed investment decisions.

The present study based on the literature survey and discussion with experts identifies 39 risk attributes, which were further summarized using factor analysis into a smaller set of factors impacting NREF returns (risk). The relative importance of each risk attribute was examined and ranked using the relative importance index (RII). Further, cluster analysis using Euclidian distance was used to partition these risk attributes in various segments depending on their importance.

The risk attributes are summarized as five risk factors, i.e. regulatory RISK, foreign direct investment risk, entry risk, business risk and project risk. Whereas the top five perceived risk attributes are investee/partner risk, project entitlement risk, title risk, legislative and regulatory risk and project execution risk.

This study has significance to the industry practitioners and the academic community in developing an understanding of the dynamic nature of risks across the life cycle of the NREFs in India and classifying them at the macro-meso-micro levels.

This paper is one of the first attempts to understand the risks impacting NREFs in India. It will help investors develop a better strategic understanding of the risks across the life cycle of an investment.

This chapter provides an introduction to the European case study chapters in this volume on curriculum making. The chapter explores different conceptions of curriculum and curriculum making. It offers a critique of existing thinking about curriculum making as something that occurs withinreified levels within an educational system. Such thinking often construes curriculum making as occurring through linear and hierarchical chains of command from policy to practice. Drawing upon previous conceptualizations of curriculum making, the chapter develops a new approach to understanding curriculum making. This is a heuristic rather than a normative framing; it is essentially non-linear, framed around the concept of intertwined sites of activity – supra, macro, meso, micro and nano – within complex systems, with curriculum making framed as types of activity rather than institutional functions.

This chapter provides a summary and a concluding discussion on the main findings from the different cases and chapters throughout this volume. The chapter revisits the approach on curriculum making as non-linear and as framed around a conceptualisation of interrelated sites of activity – supra, macro, meso, micro and nano – presented in the introduction. A central conclusion of this book is that the meso site of activity stands out as critical for current developments within curriculum making, both in terms of a transformed role for the nation state in macro curriculum making, as well as implications of policy flows and processes from the supra site of activity. Based on our observations, we suggest an elaborated model for understanding curriculum making, with special attention to the significance of meso curriculum making and teacher agency. In the final part of the conclusions, we argue that there are a number of lessons to be learned from curriculum making in the European context. In line with the significance of meso curriculum making observed throughout the volume, we emphasize the importance of middle ground and mobility, the necessity of participatory curriculum making, and that systems of accountability need to be based on trust. We also underline the importance of a delicate balance concerning regulation– providing support, guidance and steering – together with a critical awareness of destructive as well as progressive forces for maintaining and providing the agency of the educational systemfor good curriculum making.

Crises are often studied in international business (IB) research as the external “context” for business strategies, but firms can also be active participants in the unfolding of crises. The study of crises in IB could benefit greatly from studying the role of multinational enterprises (MNEs) as active participants, rather than as mere passive actors, responding to exogenous events. History shows that IB crises typically unfold partially as exogenous processes, and partly as the result of MNE strategies. A multilevel and longitudinal approach to studying crises in IB is clearly necessary. This chapter considers the extent to which smaller events that preceded the present crisis – since 1989 – point to systemic problems in global governance. It also defines five overlapping lenses through which future IB studies can further create relevant insights on how to deal with crises: historic, macro, meso, micro and exogenous. The chapter finally serves as an introduction to the whole Progress in International Business Research volume by indicating the relevance of all parts and chapters that follow.

The purpose of the paper is to develop a new framework depicting the incorporation of concepts such as corporate social responsibility (CSR) within corporate communication as a process that called “institutionalization by translation”. The paper aims to develop a micro‐meso‐macro‐perspective to analyze why and how organizations institutionalize CSR with which effects.

The paper brings together institutional, sensemaking and communication theories. The paper builds on neo‐institutionalism to frame the external conditions that foster or hinder the institutionalization of CSR on the macro‐ and meso‐level. And the paper uses sensemaking and communication theories to describe this process on the meso‐ and micro‐level. The paper illustrates the analysis by describing the CSR strategies of a large European energy company.

CSR can be regarded as an empty concept that is based on moral communication and filled with different meanings. The analysis describes how CSR is internally translated (moralization and amoralization), which communication strategies are developed here (symbolic, dialogic, etc.) and that CSR communications are publicly negotiated. The analysis shows that the institutionalization of CSR bears not only opportunities, but also risks for corporations and can, therefore, be described as a “downward spirale of legitimacy and upward spiral of CSR institutionalization”. Finally, alternative ways of coping with external demands are developed (“management by hypocrisis” and “defaulted communication”).

The paper shows risk and explains more effective ways of building organizational legitimacy.

The originality lays in the macro‐meso‐micro‐perspective on the institutionalization of CSR. It allows the description of this process and its effects from the background of constraints and sensemaking and offers a new perspective on organizational legitimacy building.

Basil Bernstein’s theoretical ideas have been called upon by far fewer higher education researchers than would be expected. We argue that the international higher education field of research is ripe for further application of Bernstein’s theoretical ideas. Through reference to our own and that of others, we illustrate five key affordances of Bernstein’s theoretical framework. First, it provides a unique approach that leads researchers to pose formerly unthinkable questions and encourages the development of new knowledge to address them. Second, Bernstein’s valuable concepts raise questions about the specific but inter-related macro- (societal), meso- (organisational) and micro- (individual) level processes involved in producing (in)equalities. Bernsteinian analysis can help to identify how inequalities emerge from and can be addressed at these levels. Third, we contend that the approach encourages empirical exploration of the ways in which education may be disruptive of the social order. Fourth, we suggest Bernstein’s concepts can be adapted to capture the complexity of intersecting inequalities in a way that allows the object of analysis to determine what inequalities are foregrounded. Finally, we argue that concepts help to orientate questions around inequality and social justice in a way that does not over-determine answers.

The purpose of this paper is to build on contemporary intersectional literature to develop a grounded methodological framework for the study of social differences.

A systematic literature review serves as the foundation for a discussion of the challenges associated with intersectional research. The findings assist in positioning the proposed methodological framework within recent intersectional debates.

The review shows a rise in intersectional publications since the birth of the “intersectionality” term in 1989. Moreover, the paper points to four tensions within the field: a tension between looking at or beyond oppression; a tension between structural-oriented and process-oriented perspectives; an apparent incommensurability among the macro, meso, and micro levels of analysis; and a lack of coherent methodology.

On the basis of the highlighted tensions in contemporary research as well as the limitations of that research, the present presents a methodological framework and a discussion of the implications of that framework for the wider diversity literature.

The paper suggests an empirically grounded approach to studying differences. This provides an opportunity, for scholars and practitioners, to reassess possible a priori given assumptions, and open up to new explorations beyond conventional identity theorization.

The paper suggests a need for an empirically grounded approach to studying social differences, which would not only create an opportunity to reassess common assumptions but also open up for explorations beyond conventional identity theorizations.

The framework departs from traditional (critical) diversity scholarship, as it is process oriented but still emphasizes stable concepts. Moreover, it does not give primacy to oppression. Finally, it adopts a critical stance on the nature of the macro, meso, and micro levels as dominant analytical perspectives. As a result, this paper focusses on the importance of intersectionality as a conceptual tool for exploring social differences.