Search results

This study aims to systematize and critically analyse existing indices and frameworks on digital capabilities with the focus on consumers’ digital capabilities, identify opportunities for their further development and suggest agenda for future research.

A sample of 18 frameworks and indices of consumers’ digital capabilities were compared based on their purposes, stakeholders, scope and application areas.

The study concludes with propositions that generalise current views on conceptualisation, measurement and management of consumers’ digital capabilities. Each proposition is further investigated in terms of possible implications for research and practice.

The study indicates opportunities for businesses not only to consider consumers as recipients and adopters of digital technologies but also to aim to understand how to proactively involve consumers in value co-creation, help them be better educated and have a comprehensive understanding of potential outcomes of their participation in the digital economy.

Highlighting individual consumer perspective in existing indices and frameworks will help consider the interests of society and provide win-win opportunities for everyone involved in the digital marketplace through bottom-up engagement in addition to top-down regulation and monitoring.

This study contributes to the extant literature threefold: firstly, existing digital capability frameworks and indices are systematized and critically investigated using criteria of stakeholders, purpose and aims; secondly, consumers are identified as principal stakeholder group whose interests are insufficiently presented in existing indices; thirdly, an integrative approach is suggested for a crucial comparison of existing indices, frameworks and their methodology with the focus on consumers’ interests.

This paper aims to characterize community archives in the common array of the manuscript collection of the National Library of Russia (NLR). The purpose of the paper is to identify the features of organization of the archival system of Russia and the place of community archives in it. The authors intend to characterize the features of origin, history of existence and preservation of archives of public organizations in Russia on the example of the archives of Russian societies of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries; to spread knowledge about historical communities of Russia and their archival heritage and to discuss the value of community archives and their information potential.

The research is based on the traditional methodology of the academic archival studies. At the same time interdisciplinary approach plays a great role in the field of study of community archives. The findings of the study were obtained as a result of the application of methods of historical research and special historical disciplines: archival heuristics, archive studies, source studies and archeography. The data were complemented by documentary analysis, including materials of nine archives, documents concerning acquisition and storage of these archives.

As a result of the study of different community archives in the Manuscript Department of the NLR the authors came to the conclusion about poor preservation and diffusion of these archives. It suggests the necessity of developing methods of virtual archive reconstruction.

This is the first study to date on the community archives in Russia. The first attempt to attribute and classify community archives of the NLR.

The purpose of this paper is to develop an understanding of what constitutes relationship quality in four different countries. The paper shows which attributes are important in assessing relationship quality and how they vary in importance among countries.

Conjoint analysis was used to derive how managers trade‐off different attributes of relationship quality. These attributes were: the levels of trust in the relationship, the understanding of each others' needs, the integration of systems between the two companies, the use or abuse of power, and the profit resulting from the interactions. Cluster analysis was used to classify the respondents in order to check if the overall results were indicative of a general consensus among the managers concerned, or alternatively if there were different perspectives on what constituted good quality relationship.

Whilst the routes to develop relationships may vary between different countries, the attributes which make up relationships are also likely to be valued differently in various places around the world.

Conjoint analysis questions are difficult to answer; making it difficult to have large sample sizes. However, further studies should try to consider increasing the sample size.

The paper shows that there are indeed differences between what it is that managers seek from the relationships that they have to manage: but while noting certain national traits that seem to dominate within particular cultures, there is still variance in the individual datasets, pointing to the fact that managers have to manage their portfolio of relationships in an individual way.

This is the first study that compares the importance of relationship quality within and between four counties.

This volume of Progress in International Business Research comprises of a selection of 12 competitive papers from the 34th EIBA (European International Business Academy) annual conference, which was held in Tallinn, Estonia in December 2008 with the theme “International Business and the Catching-up Economies: Challenges and Opportunities”. It addresses two main issues – (1) the internationalization process and (2) the role of knowledge and innovation for internationalization – that are important in the current economic slowdown both for catching-up and for other economies, scholars, and practitioners.

Four cast iron lions guard the charming Lions footbridge crossing St. Petersburg's Griboedov Canal. The first author strolled across the bridge on an August evening in 1998 with a Russian friend, Polina. The experience presents a parable for concluding this volume:As we crossed the bridge in the dark, we barely avoided stepping into a gaping hole in the deck half way across. A person could easily fall through. I reacted as a typical American, immediately taking responsibility for doing something about the problem, looking for some board to place over the hole or a barrier to warn pedestrians or someone to report the hazard to who would address it promptly. Polina indicated that no Russian would make such a fuss, and she could think of no one to report the hazard to who would respond. As we stood discussing this problem before two of the guardian lions, a group of drunken soldiers began to cross the bridge from the far side, arm in arm, singing loudly. Sure enough, one slipped through the hole and, but for his comrades holding his arms, he would have plunged into the canal. Surely they will report it, I said, but Polina was doubtful. She saw little chance for some protective action to fix the bridge or even to warn passers-by to beware. We went on our way mindful of the problem left behind. Perhaps a month after my return to the U.S., I received an email from Polina that she had gone to the bridge and, to her surprise, it was fixed. “Perhaps,” she wrote, “there is hope for Russia after all.”

Sustainability is a catch term for the different way of life required to counter the ills of the modern era. It encompasses new social and economic as well as ecological relationships. Sustainability theory is, by its nature, hopeful in envisioning an alternative corrective course of action. This volume deals with “the negative legacy problem” that confounds this optimism because we have so profoundly contaminated and altered the earth in lasting ways. Any effort to create a sustainable future will have to deal with this legacy. It is a huge and profound burden faced unevenly by people and non-humans today and that we have left for future generations (see Edelstein, 2006).

Tatyana J. Andrushchenko is dean of the School of Psychology and Social Work, head of the Department of Social Work and professor of psychology at Volgograd State Pedagogical University. Dr. Andrushenko earned her Ph.D. in Psychology from the Russian Federation Education Academy, Institute of Psychology. Her primary work is in child development, counselling methods, interpersonal communication, and the evaluation of social psychological services. She has participated in exchange programs in Denmark, the Netherlands, and the US. tandr@vspu.ru