Search results

Geopolitical risks associated with the return of great power politics and growing nationalism have generated new challenges for foreign investors across industries. Oil and gas companies are well acquainted with such risks and have developed strategies to manage them. This paper reviews five of these strategies: divorcing ownership control from operating control in designing collaborative ventures; proactively managing stakeholder relationships; ensuring transparency and communication; diversifying risks while proactively positioning for emerging opportunities; and deliberately planning for exit should such an eventuality arise. Firms outside of oil and gas can draw on these strategies as they navigate the emerging geopolitical context.

This paper reviews five strategies that oil and gas companies can use to manage geopolitical risk: divorcing ownership control from operating control in designing collaborative ventures; proactively managing stakeholder relationships; ensuring transparency and communication; diversifying risks while proactively positioning for emerging opportunities; and deliberately planning for exit should such an eventuality arise.

This study identifies several strategies that oil and gas companies have used to manage geopolitical risks. These tools will be increasingly important in the shifting global political landscape.

Drawing on the experiences of oil and gas companies, this study has identified several strategies that companies can use to shield themselves from the risks that are currently emanating from geopolitics. While these best practices originate in the experiences of oil and gas firms, the ability to deftly manage geopolitical risks is becoming an important prerequisite for companies across industries.

Cooperative agreements between universities and firms (U–F) have gained prominence. However, the literature on organisational culture and the formation of cooperation agreements is scarce. This study aims to analyse, from the perspective of the managers of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and those in charge in universities, the perceptions of the influence of organisational culture on this type of U–F cooperation.

To this end, multiple case studies were adopted, involving cooperation agreements between a Portuguese and eight SMEs incubated in UBImedical. Semi-structured interviews were used to gather information, aiming to understand the meaning, importance and possible obstacles caused by organisational culture in this U–F cooperation agreement.

Content analysis of the results obtained leads to the conclusion that cultural compatibility is a crucial factor for successful U–F cooperation. The exchange of knowledge, mutual trust and flexibility between those involved are identified as key determinants to build shared norms that allow a more productive, assertive union.

The study represents an important tool to support SME managers and those in charge of universities, as the evidence obtained can help them to define policies and actions with regard to the U–F cooperation process. More precisely, these SME and university managers could give more attention to culture in future cooperation agreements.

This study advances understanding of the role of organisational culture in a cooperation agreement since this was a gap identified in the literature on the topic. It also contributes to the existing body of work on U–F cooperation, demonstrating that organisational culture is considered important by partners in these agreements and should be adjusted towards compatible alignment of each party’s expectations.

The purpose of this study is to observe the practice of integrated reporting (IR) and investigate the impact of board characteristics on IR in three South Asian economies: Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka.

The study uses the content analysis approach to measure the integrated reporting index (IRI) based on a structured checklist. To examine the impact of board characteristics (board size, board independence and gender diversity) on IRI, a multivariate analysis using pooled ordinary least square with panel-corrected standard error (PCSE) model has been conducted.

The content analysis findings show that the disclosure practice of IR is highest in India, followed by Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. The regression result indicates that all the proxies of board characteristics have a positive and significant impact on IRI.

The study’s outcomes may not be generalised for every region due to the differences in institutional contexts.

The findings of this study will assist the policymakers in understanding the importance of effective boards in enhancing the IR practice in their respective countries where the adoption of IR is still a voluntary requirement.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study in the field of existing literature to conduct a comparative analysis of IR practice among three South Asian countries. It shows how an effective board improves IR practice using a broader institutional context by underpinning the agency theory and legitimacy theory.