Search results

Experts contend that knowledge of the personal labor market penalties (loss of employment and future wealth) incurred by past chief executive officers (CEOs) forced to restate their firms' earnings may induce current CEOs to refrain from fraudulent disclosures. Because of the increased incidence of earnings restatements and the importance of augmenting investor trust, this paper aims to examine empirically nonprofessional investors' impressions of managerial earnings restatement penalties as fraud deterrents.

The restatement penalties were explored in an experimental setting with nonprofessional investors as subjects. Using an experimental case as a basis, the study compared subjects' predictions of the probability that a CEO would fraudulently report a particular transaction under two general conditions: the absence of a specific fraud deterrent; and the presence of two potential deterrents, earnings restatement penalties and CEO financial statement certifications.

Statistical analyses revealed that investors viewed the earnings restatement penalties as fraud deterrents, providing a level of protection comparable to that offered by financial statement certifications, a mandated practice originally intended to deter fraud. These results suggest that investors' awareness of past restatement penalties could help to enhance the credibility of currently reported earnings.

The investigation of this topic makes two contributions to existing research. First, it provides empirical evidence concerning a potential fraud deterrent (earnings restatement penalties) previously unexamined in prior studies. Second, it represents a new area of inquiry in earnings restatement research, both in topic (the perceived deterrence qualities of restatement penalties) and in method (empirical research vs traditional archival studies).

This paper reviews the progress that Cornwall County has made since the murder of Steven Hoskin and the resulting Serious Case Review (Flynn, 2007). Interviews were held with senior and frontline personnel, whose agencies were in contact with Steven and the people who moved into his bedsit. The agencies have progressed significantly, in terms of attitude and reforming the way in which they work. The outcomes and processes that have resulted from the action plans that were drawn up have been welcomed, although there are still challenges to overcome.

Operational practices and operational capabilities are critical yet distinct elements in operations strategy. The purpose of this paper is to examine their conceptual differences and explore how they are developed in a portfolio, considering the potential for practices and capabilities to be either compensatory or additive in nature.

The compensatory model argues that the lack of investments in certain practices or capabilities can be offset by higher level of investments in other practices or capabilities. In contrast, the additive model argues that the firm must invest in certain practices or capabilities and that trade‐offs are impossible. The authors examine evidence for these two competing models using an approach borrowed from studies of multi‐attribute consumer preference models and statistical comparisons of non‐nested models.

Data for the study were collected from operations managers who were members of a large professional organization. The findings indicate that the effects of operational practices are additive for some operational outcomes and compensatory for others. However, the combinatorial nature of operational capabilities is purely compensatory.

The results imply that adequate investment in a wide range of operational practices is necessary to enhance operations performance. However, operations units appear to have more flexibility in choosing to develop a distinctive operational capability set.

The study clarifies the different orientation of operational practices and operational capabilities as they contribute to operations strategy. The findings provide guidelines regarding the combinatorial natures of operational practices and operational capabilities. These guidelines have critical strategic implications for resource allocation schemes and how these schemes affect operational performance.

This study aims to investigate the extent to which the presence of chief supply chain officers (CSCOs) in top management teams (TMTs) helps firms to reduce the incidence of product recalls.

The authors identified all recalls for the period 2010–2017 issued by publicly held firms regulated by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission. These data were subsequently combined with information on TMT composition from BoardEx and financial performance data from Compustat to create a unique data set.

The study identified a significant and negative association between CSCO presence and incidence of product recalls. The evidence also supports the conjecture that this association is stronger in larger firms, indicating that CSCOs are especially effective when operating within more complex supply chains.

The findings provide important insights into quality management in contemporary supply chains and indicate that assigning specific responsibility for supply chain management to a TMT member improves product reliability.

These findings contribute to the growing literature on the underlying causes of a product recall by identifying corporate governance antecedents of external quality failures of this kind.

Cornwall has implemented significant changes to the way that it delivers its safeguarding adults training. This paper outlines the benefits of combining safeguarding adults, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (HM Government, 2005a) and equality and diversity training within a human rights framework. It examines the notion of learning transfer and considers how the design and delivery of training can improve the transfer of learning into practice. Finally, it highlights the importance of a receptive workplace culture to promote effective learning transfer.

The purpose of this paper is to overcome evaluative limitations of previous studies to provide a more decisive test of the causal relationships implied in the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence (CPE) using a unique data source.

The authors employ partial least squares path modeling on blinded scoring data from Baldrige Award applicants. In addition, the authors conduct multi-group analysis to examine whether the hypothesized causal model is universal across different industry sectors.

The path analysis provided strong support for the CPE framework in its entirety. However, analysis of sector-specific subsets of the data did not confirm all relationships, suggesting the possibility of industry-dependent performance excellence frameworks and raising new research questions to be explored.

This research offers several pertinent implications for managers who seek to translate the theoretical CPE framework to actionable quality-improvement efforts.

CPE operationalizes many total quality management (TQM) concepts and provides guidelines to TQM programs. This study validates the CPE framework using the most relevant data set to date – the applicant scoring data. The authors are also the first to investigate the cross-industry differences in the relationships between the CPE constructs.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the productivity performance at the firm level from the perspective of manufacturing capability development at the process level. Moreover, it reveals how alignment of manufacturing capabilities with market requirements has influenced a firm’s productivity over a period that includes the 2008 global recession.

A conceptual framework was derived from established theories and employed as part of a case study design encompassing a multiple methods research approach. The case of a UK SME was selected to reflect some of the issues associated with the wider productivity stagnation experienced by the UK economy in recent years.

The firm’s manufacturing strategy had become incrementally misaligned with market requirements due to external changes in its business environment. The complex relationships between capabilities such as quality, speed and cost were characterised. Realigning the firm’s manufacturing strategy to regain productivity performance required a range of prioritised actions including capital investment and changes in management practices concerning bottom-up process improvement and regular, top-down strategy review.

The findings of the case study cannot be generalised and the outcomes are specific to just one firm. However, the approach lends itself to replication, particularly within SMEs.

Prior studies have focussed on capability development at higher levels of abstraction. The study operationalized established theoretical perspectives at the firm level to derive context-based outcomes that can be used to improve manufacturing strategy alignment and productivity. Furthermore, the study contributes empirical evidence from the SME sector to the ongoing debate regarding the UK’s productivity puzzle.

An extensive literature search was conducted to better understand and to dispel the current stereotypes in the workplace regarding Generation X and Baby Boomers. For the purpose of the article Generation X consisted of those born between 1961 and 1981, while Baby Boomers consisted of those born between 1943 and 1960. The purpose of this article was to use an exhaustive review of eclectic/multidisciplinary literature to address six commonly held myths presented by Paul and Townsend (1993). Furthermore, it was intended to examine empirical research gathered by a literature review of the stereotypes in the workplace, to better understand the profiles and factors that motivate the Baby Boomers and Generation X, in conjunction with the following independent variables: age, productivity, motivation, training, and mentoring and job satisfaction. Selected hypotheses were tested suggesting Generation Xers are more productive, more motivated, easily trainable and exhibit higher job satisfaction levels as compared to Baby Boomers. Results were convergent and divergent in several cases worth noting. It is important for organizations to recognize the limitations that stereotypes create in the workplace. As was demonstrated by the varied research, Baby Boomers and Generation Xers are not dissimilar as employees; they possess more similarities than differences. Organizations need to engineer/design an environment of respect for both groups to create synergies between them to build and maintain a productive workforce.