Search results

The case was developed in partnership with the focal entrepreneur, Michael Maher, and relies on primary data he provided.

This case is based on the experiences of Michael Maher, a Cincinnati, OH (USA)-based entrepreneur whose ecommerce business failed in 2016, largely due to a major change in Amazon’s marketplace. The case puts students in Michael’s position as this is happening. It focuses on the fact that although Michael knew, logically, that the failure was largely beyond his control, and that he “should” think about failure as a learning opportunity, emotionally and psychologically he felt terrible. The case forces students to confront this reality as they reflect on the situation and determine how Michael might best respond. The case is intended to help instructors address the often undiscussed “dark sides” of entrepreneurship, which can include financial hardship and intense stress, and also cause or exacerbate depression, substance abuse and other mental and physical health issues (Shepherd, 2019). These challenges frequently impact other involved stakeholders (e.g. family members) and, as a result, can negatively impact familial dynamics, friendships and other relationships. The goal of the case is not to discourage students from entrepreneurial activity, but to make them aware of these potential dark sides. In addition to awareness, the teaching plan is designed to provide students with tools and strategies to recognize and navigate the dark sides.

This case is appropriate for introductory entrepreneurship courses at the undergraduate and graduate level. It might also be used in more advanced courses focused on developing/launching a new venture (e.g. “New Venture Planning” courses). The case can be taught at any point within a given course, but it is recommended after students have developed an understanding of key entrepreneurship concepts in the focal course or in previous courses. In particular, students should have a working knowledge of the concept of “learning from failure” and other tenets of the lean startup and similar approaches (Blank, 2013; Ries, 2011). This background knowledge is important because the case confronts students with the reality that, although “learning from failure” is central to entrepreneurship, that does not necessarily eliminate the social and psychological challenges that often follow failures. Assuming students possess this background knowledge, the case is most effectively used early in a course to make students aware of the “dark sides” they might confront as an entrepreneur and set the stage for the development of strategies and skills to navigate those dark sides throughout the rest of the course. The case’s brevity means it can be assigned to be read in advance of class or during the class session in which it is being covered.

In interviews, Jamie Lee Curtis positions Halloween (2018) as a #MeToo film. As merely self-serving publicity, this reading is far too simplistic. In Halloween (1978) Laurie Strode is victimised; she then assumes the role of quintessential Final Girl as described by Carol J. Clover, providing the template for the entire sub-genre of horror slasher films birthed in its wake. However, in the similarly titled 2018 film, Laurie is no longer a victim. Instead of following the role of the stereotypical Final Girl of slasher films, she falls more in line with one of Yvonne Tasker's Warrior Women.

This chapter investigates Laurie Strode's transformation throughout the Halloween franchise. Once passive and victimised, Laurie has evolved: No longer the Final Girl – or victim – her position and behaviour in this film is much more in line with the neoliberal Warrior Woman of action films. Thus, the film assigns her the role of action heroine as a vehicle for responding to the concerns of the #MeToo era – and in this era, women are no longer victims. Women can and will fight back.

Alison Curtis, Joseph Matthews, Dan Haverkamp, Charles Farley, and James Michael offer their comments on the future of library automation from their perspective as vendors. This forum updates a similar symposium published four years earlier. When read in tandem, the 1985 forum and the 1989 version cover most of the same technologies (CD‐ROM, OPACs, gateways, but not expert systems and FAX) and issues (standards, co‐operation, money) but there is a difference. It is one of emphasis. In 1985 the emphasis seemed to be on the potential of new technologies to solve problems. Today the emphasis is more on the problems to be encountered and conquered if these technologies are to reach their real potential.

Celebrate Michael Buckland's impressive legacy to LIS by showing his humanity, generosity and versatility.

This article is walk through a scientific career in LIS. Through personal anecdotes and life history and building upon Michael Buckland's legacy, it summarises the author’s own work seen through the prism of her interactions with Buckland, leading to scholarly contributions articulating significant statements about the field of LIS as well as pointers to past relevant publications.

Michael Buckland has a unique way of putting an end to thorny LIS issues as well as being a documentator extraordinaire.

It is a personal account, as such cannot be evaluated through the classical norms of empirical research as there is no ground truth. This account shows how chance encounters with fellow scholars can have a lasting influence on one's academic career as well as wider impact in a field.

Companies that supply libraries with automation technology are part of the computer‐industry marketplace. However, vendors that serve the library component of this marketplace face problems not typical of the industry as a whole. Significant and unique problems include the protracted selection processes employed by libraries, the very slow and drawn‐out payment cycles, the dependence of the libraries on vendors, and the adversarial relationships that frequently exist between the libraries and vendors. These, and related issues, are discussed by representatives of eight prominent automation firms: Joseph R. Matthews (INLEX), James J. Michael (Data Research Associates), Harry Porteous (Geac), Gene Robinson (CLSI), Stephen R. Salmon (Carlyle), Stephen Silberstein (Innovative Interfaces), Phyllis Bova Spies (OCLC Local Systems), and Harriet Valázques (Utlas).

A story that Robert told in class during this research exposes the tension of simultaneously studying literacy and identity when submission and control are also processes at work in the story. There are two pieces of this story. In the first part of the story, Robert relates the narrative. The second part consists of the details of the story he told. Both pieces can be used to illustrate different elements of the tension between studying literacy and identity as a single construct labeled literate identity. In addition to suggesting a metaphor for literacy and identity, Robert's story navigates the constructs of submission and control that Wong (2008) discusses in terms of the aesthetic of motivation. The tension between submission and control when coupled with an exploration of literacy and identity has implications for the notions of resistance to literacy in the field of boys' literacy as well as the being and doing of literacy for the boys in this study.Our class began with the students congratulating Robert on his storytelling. When I inquired further, I found out that Robert had started to tell the legend of Cupid and Psyche in a previous class, but he had run out of time. The rest of the students expressed interest in hearing the story, either for the first time, or to know the end. Initially, his telling ebbed and flowed. He apologized for his lack of fluency and explained he was trying to provide us the parts of the story we would find the most interesting. Eventually he settled into a rhythm and finished 50 minutes later. (Reconstructed field note, December 2009)

The following is an introductory profile of the fastest growing firms over the three-year period of the study listed by corporate reputation ranking order. The business activities in which the firms are engaged are outlined to provide background information for the reader.

“Jessica’s dilemma: honesty or loyalty” is the true story of a Staff Accountant, Jessica, who discovered embezzlement by the controller, Michael. Jessica worked at a US subsidiary of a multinational organization. One of the company’s vendors contacted Jessica regarding unpaid invoices. Following up on the inquiry, Jessica found suspicious manual journal entries in the general ledger. When she questioned her boss, Michael, about her findings, he first denied the situation, then blamed another employee, and ultimately tried to intimidate Jessica so that she would not press the issue. Jessica’s investigation led to the discovery that Michael had been embezzling money from the company. To complicate matters, Jessica and her husband had a close relationship with Michael and his wife outside the office. Jessica had to make a choice between being loyal to a family friend and being honest and loyal toward her employer.

The authors obtained the information for this case from the staff accountant and her husband via a series of interviews. The information was verified via publicly available news articles on the presented case. Additionally, legal documents, which were publicly available, were also used for information. The name of the company and the names of the individuals in the case were changed to protect the identities and privacy of the involved parties.

An instructor can use this case in business ethics, introductory management, human resource law or accounting courses targeting undergraduate or introductory MBA students. This case is best used in the beginning of the suggested courses, as the instructor introduces ethical dilemmas, ethical frameworks, and stakeholder theory. The case is designed so that students do not need a background in business or business ethics to be able to successfully complete the case analysis. Additionally, the case provides a platform to discuss the differences in an ethical vs an unethical manager and how to respond to such a situation.

Many employees are afraid to report ethical wrongdoing to upper management, or to engage in ethical dissent. When upper management is receptive to reports of wrongdoing, ethical dissent within the organization to upper-level management has more organizational benefits than when the issue is shared with coworkers or external agencies. This is because upper management has the power to make a difference in the situation and may be able to keep the situation within the organization to eliminate possible reputation problems for the organization. The presented case can be utilized to discuss the importance of feeling safe in an organization as it pertains to reporting wrongdoing within the organization and how organizational culture and leadership can enhance or diminish that feeling.