Search results

The purpose of this paper is to introduce and develop the methodology of journal benchmarking.

The journal benchmarking method is understood to be an analytic procedure of continuous monitoring and comparing of the advance of specific journal(s) against that of competing journals in the same subject area, together with the application of best practices defined in order to improve a journal's own advance and gain a position among leading scientific journals.

As a realization of this method, it is suggested to build up a journal scoreboard, which is a matrix of journal indicators, distributed for different journals. For the journal scoreboard on the subject of lasers and optics (36 journals, five indicators) a series of regression equations was built up that allow forecasts to be made for journals’ impact factor levels, depending on the International Collaboration and Reference per Document indicators included in the SCIMAGO database.

The detailed journal scoreboard and prediction calculations allow elaborating strategies and policies for the promotion of journals in the Web of Science and Scopus databases.

The research presents the building up of a journal scoreboard in combination with prediction calculations that can be helpful for improving journal positioning in international Scientometric databases.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the information content of the variables that can help detecting external and internal imbalances in an early stage. The starting point is the Scoreboard, where nine indicators are chosen in order to increase macroeconomic surveillance of all member states.

This paper provides an overview of the variables that could be informative for imbalances by focusing on EU-27 countries over the period 1960-2010. The number of chosen variables is 28, and they are aggregated in six macro-areas. Therefore, once an imbalance is observed in any of those areas, it is possible to detect in a simple way which specific variable is determining such outcome.

In general, this approach provides reliable signal to the policy-makers about the indicators that can drive imbalances within the area, shedding light on the relationship among the variables included in the analysis, too.

In fact, the empirical results underline some well-known critical issue for several countries, and is largely in line with results obtained in a variety of EC and OECD studies.

The main added value of the approach adopted in this paper is the introduction of more variables than those initially proposed by the European Commission in the construction of the Scoreboard. This provides more information about the macroeconomic situation in each country, preserving, however, the simplicity of the analysis as the variables are aggregated by homogeneous areas.

In 2000, the European Union called for the enhancement of innovation performance within member states. As part of the support for this exhortation, it has since provided the latest version of a set of indicators, which are collectively referred to as the European Innovation Scoreboard. This paper describes these indicators, shows summary results from the 2001 data and comments on these results.

To explain how R&D is becoming a globally popular business function.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer.

The R&D Scoreboard 2005 has recorded an overall annual rise of 5 percent in R&D investment by world's top 1,000 organisations, whose R&D budgets total £220bn. This recent analysis of R&D investment has also revealed that the business climate for R&D‐active companies has continued to improve. The top 1,000 companies across the world saw increases in overall sales growth, profitability and R&D levels, with growth in all three measures stronger in the Americas than in the Asia‐Pacific region or Europe.

Despite the importance of R&D investment, and its link with company performance, the report also cautions that company success depends not only on wise and balanced investment in R&D and other factors (capital investment, brands, skills, market development) but also on good strategic choices and operational excellence.

Gives a good overview of how R&D is used across the world and how it is benefiting global business.

The fact that UK companies, in general, under invest in R&D as compared to international competition is probably no surprise. That many UK CEOs have tended to look for a quick fix to this under investment by concentrating on acquisitions rather than investing more in R&D and capital expenditure is also probably no surprise. And, it should hardly be a surprise that analysis now shows that this approach does not work, with growth by acquisition frequently inferior to that achieved by “organic” investment in R&D and capital spending. These findings are some of the main points raised by the 2002 R&D Scoreboard, which has been produced by the UK Government’s Department of Trade and Industry. The production of the annual scoreboard, now in its 12th year, offers companies a unique international benchmarking tool. The analysis provides insights into R&D dependent sectors of the economy and is aimed at helping UK companies determine if they are investing the right amount compared to competitors within their sector as part of their overall business strategy. The latest scoreboard contains 600 UK and 600 international companies for the first time, with the total R&D for the UK at £16bn, as opposed to £206bn for the international 600.

The purpose of this study is to develop a methodology to help manufacturers determine and rank key internal business processes based on critical success factors (CSF).

First, company CSF and key performance measures were determined based on vision, mission and strategic objectives statements. Second, most important CSF were prioritized according to rating scores such as cost savings, necessary improvement, and own discretion using a balanced scoreboard procedure and a prioritization matrix. Third, CSF were related to internal business processes based on “strength of relationship” in order to define the most critical internal processes. Fourth, possible differences in the perception of CSF and strategic objectives among different management levels were compared. Fifth, the methodology was validated in three furniture manufacturing companies.

It was found that when a firm is missing vision or mission statements, it is imperative to define them before CSF can be identified. The CSF found through this case study were related to customer service, manufacturing management, quality and price of the products. The key internal business processes identified for the companies in this study were customer engagement, product operations and supply chain management. Conclusions show that better results were obtained when this methodology was applied to highest‐level of management.

This study has proved to be a useful tool to determine a strategy based on CSF and their relationship to internal business processes. Plant managers in our case studies were able to prioritize the critical internal business processes for their plants based on the most important CSF.

Examines the impact of a video screen on spectator satisfaction and the advertising effectiveness of rotational‐signage systems. A total of 181 spectators at a major college football game were interviewed during the half‐time of a regular season contest. Results demonstrate that the screen is a significant component of a stadium’s servicescape which can increase the satisfaction of fans and their intentions to attend future events. While fans recognized less than half the companies that were advertised, firms with the most exposure on rotational systems were more readily identified. Results also suggest that companies are likely to generate substantial goodwill if fans recognize them as sponsors of events. Implications, directions for future research, and limitations are discussed in conclusion.

Innovation policy and innovation systems undoubtedly play a crucial role in shaping the path of economic development of contemporary economies. A particularly interesting context for studying the evolution of this area is offered by post-transition economies which had to undergo fundamental structural changes and face the global competition where the advances in knowledge and technological progress ultimately decide between success or failure.

The chapter aims to portray and evaluate the key developments in the innovation policy and national innovation system of Poland – one of the largest and most successful post-transition economies.

The methodological framework of the study involves a descriptive analysis of the major changes in the regulatory and institutional settings as well as an analysis of statistical data on the crucial dimensions of Poland's innovation policy and innovation system over the period 2000–2021. Additionally, the overall effects of the policy have been assessed using the data from the European Innovation Scoreboard (over 2015–2022) and the Global Innovation Index (over 2008–2022).

The findings suggest that the significant changes in Poland's innovation policy and innovation system frameworks introduced since the mid-2000s have resulted in a dynamic increase in the intensity of R&D efforts, especially in the business enterprise sector, allowing to narrow the structural gaps dividing the country from more advanced economies and markedly improve its overall research and innovative performance. A key role in this process has been played by the direct and indirect government support for innovative activities.

This paper aims to provide an overview of the development of approaches to measuring and reporting on intangibles since the mid‐1990s, and to identify intellectual capital self‐accounts as a possible means of continuing this process in a beneficial way.

Principally a literature review, the paper provides the opportunity to extend earlier, initial thoughts on the promise of intellectual capital self‐accounts.

Given the importance of primary intellectual capital (“people”) in the creation of intangibles (secondary intellectual capital), the paper draws attention to the limited role hitherto ascribed to people in reporting on intangibles in particular.

The value of the paper lies principally in the identification of possible content for self‐accounts in the context of brands and health and wellbeing as important intangibles.