Search results

The purpose of this article is to identify problems and opportunities for improving the formation of financial statements (FS) in accordance with International Standards, which is the most important instrument for international economic integration.

In carrying out the research, we used the FS of the modern organizations, prepared in accordance with International Standards (IASs and IFRSs), posted on the official websites of these organizations. At the same time, we researched the FS of both Russian and foreign organizations in order to draw conclusions about the problems of preparing FS in accordance with International Standards, which are typical for most modern organizations in different countries. When conducting research, we used methods such as comparison, analysis and synthesis.

We identified the main problems that arise in practice when preparing FS in accordance with International Standards, which are typical for both Russian and foreign organizations. We also analysed the project of the IASB (the organization that develops these standards) to improve the requirements for the preparation of FS in accordance with International Standards. Based on the analysis carried out, we identified the main problems arising from the planned requirements of this project. As a result of the research carried out, we made proposals for solving the identified problems of the formation of FS in accordance with International Standards.

Our proposals can be used to improve the regulations of International Standards for the formation of FS, and can also be applied in the practical work of modern organizations.

Sisaye and Birnberg (2010a, 2010b) have described the extent and scope of the innovations dimensions as the degree to which learning has affected the organizational structures and processes of the organization. Within this framework, extent has been defined as the degree to which the innovation affects the organization's management accounting administrative structures, systems, and behaviors of members or units within the organization. Extent is synonymous with the two types of learning identified by Argyris and Schon (1978) discussed earlier. Thus, the learning in the extent dimension varies from a technical change within an existing system (single loop) to the adoption of an entirely new administrative system (double loop). While this continuum extends from technical changes that affect a single process or task to administrative changes that affect organization-wide systems and structures, we will treat them as though they are dichotomous. As indicated earlier (Chapter 2), extent is associated with two types of learning: single loop (technical change within an existing system, i.e., gradual-incremental) and double loop (the adoption of an entirely new system, i.e., radical-transformational) (Argyris & Schon, 1978, 1996).

The resource-based view of an organization suggests that differences in resources among organizations affect the propensities for organizations to undertake strategic planning initiatives in response to environmental changes. Organizational resources may be used less effectively when organizations engage in “exploitation” of knowledge that they already have acquired or when they try to use their resources to improve the products and/or services they already produce or provide rather than to undertake new or radically altered activities. Kraatz and Zajac (2001) suggest that organizations relatively well endowed with resources are less likely to engage in major strategic changes to adapt to environmental changes. This, may be because the abundance of (slack) organizational resources may permit them to survive environmental changes without undertaking any strategic changes. These organizations need to respond/innovate only when the environmental change is perceived to create a significant threat to the organization's survival and/or growth. Kraatz and Zajac (2001) noted that organizations having the most success in the past are the least likely to change their goals because of their commitment to the current strategies that maximize the utilization of existing resources, even in situations that involve environmental uncertainty (p. 636). Most of the time, resources-rich large organizations are more likely to survive external threats from environmental change. Nevertheless, this does not rule out the fact that successful strategic changes are initiated/undertaken by resources-endowed firms. When resource-endowed firms do undertake a strategic innovation, their superior resources can facilitate the innovation and increase the likelihood of its success. Thus when the resource endowed organizations do undertake the changes, they are likely to be adaptive to change and to benefit from strategic changes.

Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) increasingly view social entrepreneurship as means to expand their mission scope while simultaneously diversifying revenue streams and strengthening financial foundations. However, the pursuit of social entrepreneurial ventures often incites a tug-of-war phenomenon between the deep-rooted social welfare logic of the parent NPO and a newly evolving commercial logic at the subsidiary social enterprise (SSE). The present study seeks to understand how NPOs navigate such logic conflicts as they strive to become more entrepreneurial. Based upon case studies of two NPOs, we found divergence in organizational identity, legitimacy, and mission/vision between parent nonprofits and their SSEs as they struggled with a defining question: Are we a program or are we a business? Our research indicates that organizations reconcile such cognitive dissonance through four distinct processes: connecting, variegating, separating, and augmenting social welfare and commercial logic spheres. We, thus, contribute to the social entrepreneurship and nonprofit management literatures by illustrating ways in which noncommercial organizations may address issues of logic divergence when engaging in revenue-generating commercial activities.

Defaults in corporations, financial institutions and semipublic organizations have resulted in (corporate) governance Codes and Law provisions that aim to improve governance, risk management and policy making by executive and non-executive directors of involved boards in The Netherlands and across the globe. The aim of this chapter is to discuss how semipublic organizations deal with public interest and the contribution of multiple stakeholder team production theory (MSTP) to effectively deal with the issue of how to include interests of different stakeholders and the general public interest in the governance of and policy making by boards of semipublic organizations. This includes the identification, raising awareness and analysis of various interests and their implications.

The authors use a literature review and their own experience.

Based on our literature review and experience converging in a case study design, we hold that a semipublic organization’s exposure to public interests and how it deals with that will remain a critical issue.

We develop a research approach for dealing with stakeholders’ and the public interest and conclude that a governance perspective grounded in team production theory allows for a much better focused incorporation of possibly conflicting stakeholder interests, including public stakeholder interests and stakeholder commitment and cooperation than the dominant control perspective that is currently prevailing.

We contribute to the literature by arguing that the combined MSTP approach offers a pre-eminent approach to influence and shape board behaviour, an increased awareness of interests of different stakeholders coalescing in the public interest and an alternative, complementary view on decision-making by boards viewed as a team.

Sudden crises, known as environmental jolts, can cripple unprepared organizations. In recent years, financial jolts have led many organizations, particularly government organizations, to respond by furloughing employees. Furloughs can engender various responses in employees that can lead to negative work outcomes for both the employees and the organization. Previous research shows that the implementation of strategic human resource management (SHRM) practices, such as commitment-based systems, can mitigate the negative effects of environmental jolts. Utilizing the knowledge-based view and affective events theory, we propose a multilevel model where SHRM practices moderate employee affective responses to furloughs, which, in turn, drive subsequent employee behavioral outcomes.

The aim of this chapter is to approach marketing organization from a research perspective, research that reflects contemporary practices of the time. This is done through a review of some of the central texts in the field. The chapter starts by drawing attention to two previous attempts to review and revisit the field, two influential and frequently cited researchers and texts: Achrol’s (1991) frequently cited article entitled “Evolution of the marketing organization: New forms for turbulent environments” and Homburg and colleagues’ (2000) review a decade later entitled “Fundamental changes in marketing organization: The movement toward a customer-focused organizational structure.”

The chapter then reviews the field around 2010, leading into the author’s own concluding reflections on how circumstances internal and external to organizations have affected the organizing of marketing. The chapter argues that while some ideas and changes after 2010 might be viewed as new, other changes are apparently old changes in new shapes. Attention is drawn to six areas of marketing organization research that have emerged and taken a central position in marketing organization research: (1) the adaptation of marketing practice and organization to various business trends, (2) market- and customer-oriented organizations, (3) shifts in marketing’s general role and influence within the firm, (4) marketing’s strategic role and connection to business management, (5) marketing’s interactions with other internal functions, and (6) marketing organization and the application of a wider spectrum of organization theories.