Search results

This paper aims to take a step in this direction and use the high dimensional fixed effects and quantile regression discontinuity design to test the managerial Coase theorem, which provides an institutional perspective for us to gauge the impact of private property rights on firm performance and the effect of management costs on intermediate inputs.

This study first uses high dimensional regression discontinuity designs to examine the impact of privatization on firm performance in China between 1998 and 2013.

Results indicate that privatization effects increase average outputs of the firm by around 10% given lower management costs, and management costs increase intermediate inputs by more than 50% points. Using data from annual surveys to test managerial Coase theorem, the authors show that management costs negatively affect the marginal effect of privatization on the average outputs of the firm. The positive impact on the investment in intermediate goods and services is larger in magnitude under higher management costs.

The authors develop the managerial Coase theorem. Today, given lower management costs, private property rights provide an incentive structure for a firm to maximize the value of the assets and expand the boundaries.

This real estate insight scrutinises the emerging role of Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, in property valuation, advocating for establishing standardised reporting guidelines in AI-enabled property valuation.

Through a conceptual exploration, this piece examines the shift towards AI integration in property valuation and the critical role of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) in this transition. It discusses the CANGARU framework for developing inclusive and universally applicable reporting guidelines and the importance of human oversight in validating AI-enabled valuations.

Integrating LLMs into property valuation signifies potential efficiency gains and task automation but also introduces risks related to accuracy, bias, and ethical dilemmas. Standardised reporting guidelines are identified as essential for responsibly harnessing AI’s benefits.

The article underscores the need for the real estate industry to adopt transparent reporting practices, with valuers acting as expert interpreters of AI outputs. Emphasising error reporting in XAI not only aids in understanding AI-generated insights but also builds trust among stakeholders, ensuring AI’s ethical and effective application in property valuation.

This commentary contributes to the discourse on AI’s role in property valuation by focusing on the need for standard reporting guidelines that align with professional standards and legal frameworks. It advocates for a balanced approach to AI integration, where technological advancements complement traditional valuation expertise, ensuring accurate, fair, and transparent property valuations.

The rise of the regulatory state during the Gilded Age was closely associated with the development of institutionalist ideas in American academia. In their analysis of the emergent regulatory environment, institutionalists like John Commons operated with a fundamentally marginalist theory of value and distribution. This engagement is a central explanation for the ultimate ascendancy of neoclassical economics, and the limitations of the regulatory environment that emerged in the Progressive Era. The eventual rise of the Chicago School and its deregulatory ambitions did constitute a rupture, but one achieved without rejecting preceding conceptions of competition and value. The substantial compatibility of the view of markets underlying both the regulatory and deregulatory periods is stressed, casting doubt about the transformative potential of the resurgent regulatory impulse in the New Gilded Age.

This study aims to present a pedagogical approach that allows students to discuss and debate the differences between two competing models of corporate governance – the shareholder primacy philosophy and the stakeholder value viewpoint.

This study first presents the conceptual bases for each framework, noting that while shareholder primacy is the historically dominant approach to corporate governance that guide strategic business actions in the USA, pressures from investor and societal groups and government agencies have forced publicly traded companies to recognize the need to take stakeholder interests into account in strategic decision-making, as is the dominant model in Europe and other parts of the world. This study then provides a pedagogical structure on how these opposing perspectives can be used to foster discussion, debate and reflection within the classroom.

This paper presents a pedagogical structure that allows students to recognize the competing pressures that businesses face of maximizing profits versus concerns over social causes. There are a number of positive pedagogical outcomes that can be realized from a classroom discourse on the differing perspectives on strategic management, corporate governance and social responsibility.

This pedagogical structure should help future business leaders throughout the world understand the differences between the two models of corporate governance. This study offers suggestions on how this pedagogical structure can be used in the student assessment process.

This study fills a gap in the literature by providing a pedagogical structure to guide discussion and debate on the competing theories of corporate governance and how organizational decision-makers can devise strategies to manage the potential competing demands that can arise from the shareholder versus stakeholder models. It is highly relevant and well-suited for courses such as Business Law, Business Policy, Business and Society and Ethics.

This essay charts an intellectual journey. Geoffrey M. Hodgson became an institutional economist in the 1980s. He explains how he discovered institutional economics and what strains of institutional thought were attractive for him. Another issue raised in this essay is how institutional researchers organize and move forward. Hodgson argues for an interdisciplinary approach, but this is not without its problems.

The paper provides a detailed historical account of Douglass C. North's early intellectual contributions and analytical developments in pursuing a Grand Theory for why some countries are rich and others poor.

The author approaches the discussion using a theoretical and historical reconstruction based on published and unpublished materials.

The systematic, continuous and profound attempt to answer the Smithian social coordination problem shaped North's journey from being a young serious Marxist to becoming one of the founders of New Institutional Economics. In the process, he was converted in the early 1950s into a rigid neoclassical economist, being one of the leaders in promoting New Economic History. The success of the cliometric revolution exposed the frailties of the movement itself, namely, the limitations of neoclassical economic theory to explain economic growth and social change. Incorporating transaction costs, the institutional framework in which property rights and contracts are measured, defined and enforced assumes a prominent role in explaining economic performance.

In the early 1970s, North adopted a naive theory of institutions and property rights still grounded in neoclassical assumptions. Institutional and organizational analysis is modeled as a social maximizing efficient equilibrium outcome. However, the increasing tension between the neoclassical theoretical apparatus and its failure to account for contrasting political and institutional structures, diverging economic paths and social change propelled the modification of its assumptions and progressive conceptual innovation. In the later 1970s and early 1980s, North abandoned the efficiency view and gradually became more critical of the objective rationality postulate. In this intellectual movement, North's avant-garde research program contributed significantly to the creation of New Institutional Economics.

This research delves into a comprehensive examination of Amazon’s Vendor Flex (VF) model, seeking to illuminate the intricacies of supply chain innovation through alliances between Amazon and its suppliers. Employing a multiple case study methodology, the study investigates the reduction of transaction costs, the establishment of strategic alliances for supply chain innovation and governance issues within these alliances.

A multiple case study methodology, incorporating personal interviews and triangulation with primary sources, was employed to unravel the dynamics of the VF model.

Results indicate that the VF model aligns with the reduction of transaction costs by leveraging Amazon’s specialized knowledge, although not necessarily through direct knowledge sharing. Amazon suppliers highlight competitive advantages gained through VF, showcasing efficient navigation of peak seasons and a focus on core activities with online retailing integration. The VF alliance represents a collaborative model where Amazon’s technological prowess enables a streamlined and innovative supply chain for online retailing, which resembles a vertical integration process.

This research underscores the potential of strategic alliances to drive innovation by incorporating industry-leading practices. The governance issues within the VF alliance reveal power imbalances, emphasizing the need for managers to govern dynamics, disclose information and build trust in large-scale alliances.

This paper aims to examine whether reconciling profit maximization and social welfare as two possible aspirations of company is feasible.

The possible corporate goals are presented by drawing an arc from purely profit-maximizing organizations via a combination of profit and social objectives to organizations clearly serving social utility. In addition to this sorting principle, the order of the different positions presented also takes into account the number of goals and goal-setters.

The primary finding of the study is that none of the business concepts discussed here met the initial expectations as for economic and social objectives. The study points to the need to redefine the purpose of business within a broader social science framework.

For a critical perspective, this paper considers only those standpoints that emphasize a certain form of social utility beyond profitability resulting from business activity directly or indirectly.

In addition to revealing the relationship between the two aspirations, the novelty of the paper lies in the attempt to explore through normative critique and empirical evidence the validity of the expectations regarding the goals.

Exponential organizations (ExOs) are purpose-driven companies that leverage exponential technologies and exponential business practices to grow and scale rapidly, transform industries and create massive value and impact. In contrast, non-ExOs follow a linear approach to business and organizational strategy design and execution. This study aims to validate the hypothesis, based on financial metrics, that ExOs outperform their competitors and linear counterparts. Furthermore, it also brings a new understanding of the gap raised in the past eight years about how ExOs can achieve significantly better performance, measured with financial metrics.

For measuring how exponential an organization is, this study elaborated a completely new assessment tool called Exponential Quotient (ExQ). This study applied ExQ to the 100 largest US headquartered companies as ranked by Fortune magazine in 2014. Calculating the ExQ enabled this study to rank these Fortune 100 companies and identify the most and the least exponential firms. This study tracked these companies as to how they performed on different financial metrics over the eight years of 2014–2021 and analyzed the results.

Through the analysis, this study revealed that the top 10 ExOs have significantly outperformed their bottom 10 non-exponential peers, delivering 40x higher shareholder returns, 2.6x better revenue growth, 6.8x higher profitability and 11.7x better asset turnover. Furthermore, this study could identify commonalities and similarities between the two groups. This means that ExOs can thrive even in tough times and that accelerating technologies unlock abundance and allow every organization to become a disruptive innovator and stay ahead of the competition. These are novel results in the research focusing on the gap between exponential and traditional organizations.

Using the ExQ diagnostics tool, every organization can see how flexible, scalable and agile they are, which is the starting point for an exponential transformation program. Although this approach has already found its way into practice and is applied globally by thousands of organizations (startups, scaleups and incumbents), so far, the academic establishment is in its nascent phase. With this research, the authors wanted to extend this field of science. On the other hand, because of its novelty, no appropriate previous studies existed to compare the results.

The possible implications showed that there is a plannable way for significantly increasing an organization’s ExQ and advance it from a linear toward an exponential organizational model.

The results validated the robustness of the ExO framework and philosophy and shed light on the importance of exponential transformation – a proven method to increase an organization’s ExQ. This framework is not a “how to be successful” guide. Instead, it uncovered some of the previously unknown and universal mechanisms of scalability – which, in turbulent times, make companies successful (based on financial metrics). To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study was among the first kind of in-depth analyses to validate the whole ExO model.