Search results

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate two recent examples of the New Zealand Ministry of Education's approach to reducing the persistent disparities in achievement between students of different social and ethnic groups. The first example is cluster‐based school improvement, and the second is the development of national standards for literacy and numeracy across the primary sector.

The evaluative framework used was derived from recent international analyses of the characteristics of school systems, which are either high performers or successful reformers on recent international surveys. Policy documents and evaluation reports provided the evidence on which the evaluation of the two New Zealand (NZ) examples is based.

The six criteria associated with high system performance and/or reform success were: system‐wide commitment to educational improvement; ambitious universal standards; developing capacity at the point of delivery; professional forms of accountability; strategic resourcing; and institutionalizing the improvement of practice. The present analysis of the NZ reform examples suggests that while there is a broad commitment to more equitable outcomes, a new resolve to introduce and report against national standards, and a high level of espousal of professional accountability, there are significant contradictions between school self‐management and the work that needs to be done to reduce achievement disparities.

This paper's evaluation of these two examples raises important policy questions about the assumptions that are made in the NZ self‐managing system about teacher and leader capability and about where responsibility for school improvement lies.

New Zealand schools are now managed by parent‐elected trustees whose role is to work in partnership with school staff to formulate and monitor aspects of school policy. A sample of those involved in the partnership (principals, teachers, chairpersons and parents) were asked what role they thought the Board should play in three different types of school policy decision. The results showed that, while there were some differences between primary and secondary respondents, most respondents believed the Board should play a far less influential role in educational than in administrative decisions. Overall, less than 50 per cent of both the professional and lay groups expressed opinions about the Board′s role that were consistent with current government policy on the management of New Zealand schools.

This paper aims to serve as an introduction to and overview of this special issue of the Journal of Educational Administration entitled “Building organisational capacity in school education”. The co‐editors have solicited contributions from authors in Wales, Australia, Canada, the USA, England, Hong Kong and New Zealand.

The paper reviews past and contemporary approaches to the issue of capacity building in education and in particular, sustainable capacity building. As well as reviewing key researchers and writers in this field, including their own work, the authors foreshadow and synthesise the other seven papers that make up this special issue.

The paper contends that building capacity in schools and schooling, while no means easy, can be both understood and accomplished. However, caution needs to be exercised because hard‐fought gains in capacity building and sustainability can be quickly eroded under the influence of poor leadership or extraneous changes.

The paper serves as a framework both for the seven papers that follow and more generally for understanding and conceptualising sustainable school capacity building.

The paper performs the function of framing current debates and pressures around sustainable school capacity‐building in an international theoretical and practical context.

The present study fills some of the void in the literature on the concept and phenomenon of innovation and imitation. Basing our arguments on features that the literature indicates are characteristics of innovation, we delimit the concepts of innovation and imitation. Using these features and considering a company’s degree of entrepreneurial and market orientation, we devise a typology of companies ranging from radical innovators to strict imitators. We also argue that some key factors and the choice of appropriate strategy determine whether innovative and imitative companies can obtain and maintain their sustainable competitive advantages.

Focused on the intersection between entrepreneurial resilience and different forms of collaboration, this research makes a systematic analysis of the literature resorting to various complementary bibliometric techniques (keyword co-occurrence; bibliographic coupling of documents; bibliographic coupling of authors; co-citation of references).

According to the research protocol defined, a search by topics was made in Web of Science (WoS), with no time restriction, which led to including 97 articles in the sample. Descriptive analysis identified the evolution and tendency of publications and citations, the most productive journals, universities and countries in this topic and the research methodologies followed in the articles of the sample.

The different bibliometric techniques applied led to understanding and systematization of the tendencies and themes concerning the topic, allowing the development of a conceptual framework articulating them and revealing possible lines of research that could contribute to developing the literature.

By showing different facets of the intersection between entrepreneurial resilience and collaboration, this paper highlights the multiple implications of this area at different levels of analysis (individuals, ventures and communities) with the importance of networks of collaboration patent in each. Therefore, this study can help entrepreneurs, business and political decision-makers to make better informed decisions, which can be particularly relevant in scenarios of uncertainty and crisis, such as the present, arising from the global pandemic.

As far as the authors know, the research carried out is the first centred on systematic analysis of entrepreneurial resilience and forms of collaboration. It gives a complete conceptual and theoretical picture of the evolution of research on the topic and accordingly points out possible avenues for future research.

Recent literature has highlighted the importance of human resource management, knowledge management, and technical innovation as key elements for achieving competitive advantage. Furthermore, research has shown a positive relationship between these three variables. However, empirical research on this issue is still scarce. This paper analyzes those linkages using structural equation modeling with data collected from 373 Spanish firms. The findings show that there is a relationship among the variables, although it is more complex than described in previous studies.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether profit maximizing behaviour can be defended from an ethical point of view, and what possible restrictions should be made on following this interest.

The main structure of the paper is as follows. First, it states the problem. Second, it considers which ethical theory is relevant for evaluating the situation at hand, and argues that rule‐consequentialism is the most appropriate one, but that some constraints in the form of, e.g. protecting human rights must be used as a supplement. Third, it analyses the consequences of profit seeking and profit maximization, and argue that these have a number of beneficial effects. The methodology and approach is one of critical argumentation.

Profit maximization as a firm goal has traditionally been meet with suspicion in the literature on business ethics, being seen as either immoral or amoral. It is argued herein that this practice should be evaluated according to rule‐consequentialist ethics, but supplemented with elements that are more of a deontological ethical character. When seen from this point of view, profit maximization may be seen as ethical. This requires, however, that a number of institutional and other requirements are fulfilled.

In stead of arguing, or taking as a premise, that profit maximization is inherently unethical, researchers should argue which ethical point of view should be used to evaluate such a goal, and then argue whether business practices are ethical or not. In addition, business ethics literature should incorporate basic insights from economic theory.

The paper provides new insights in the ethical nature of profit maximization as the main corporate value. More generally, we argued that, given it is in the owner's perceived interest(s), it is ethically justifiable for executives to take profit maximization as their ultimate goal in running their businesses, as long as they do not violate law, norms or social customs.

Controversy on this subject has now ranged over our past six numbers, and still the discussion continues, but with rather less urbanity on the part of some colleagues than might have been expected. In this further Symposium the contributors are Mr. B. A. Ower, Librarian, Dominion Bureau of Statistics, Ottawa; Miss Freda F. Waldon, Librarian, Hamilton Public Library, Ontario; Mr. Eric Moon, Editor, Library Journal and lately Secretary and Director of the Newfoundland Public Library Services; Miss Dorothy McNaughton, Secretary to the Institute of Professional Librarians, Ontario Library Association; A Canadian Librarian; Mr. W. B. Paton, Honorary Secretary of the Library Association. From the nature of the comments and the theories presented, British, Canadian and American librarians who propose to be at the Montreal Conference will be enabled to follow every angle of the discussions.

The purpose of this paper is to seek to illuminate some of the dynamics of globalization that enable capital to advance its interests.

The paper uses theories of globalization focusing upon the “race‐to‐the‐bottom”. Such theories draw attention to the way major businesses are using their power to secure advantages, often by playing‐off one nation state against another. Increasingly, offshore financial centres (OFCs) are becoming key players in this race. The paper uses a case study relating to the enactment of limited liability partnership (LLP) in Jersey, a UK Crown Dependency. The legislation was financed and developed by the UK firms, Price Waterhouse and Ernst & Young in collaboration with a network of advisers.

The paper sheds light on the resources deployed by major accountancy firms to secure conditions necessary for the smooth accumulation of private wealth and power. Accountancy firms used OFCs or microstates to reposition the state‐capital relationship in globalization and reconfigure the UK auditor liability laws. The paper also highlights the importance of the state to capital and globalization.

In common with major capitalist enterprises, accountancy firms rarely provide background material to explain how they advance their interests. Inevitably, this limits the analysis. Nevertheless, the case study shows some trajectories that have enabled accountancy firms to advance their economic interests.

The paper shows that accountancy firms are able to use novel tactics to advance their interests and that national regulation cannot easily be understood without consideration of the wider international context.

Accounting researchers have rarely focused upon the use of offshore financial centres by major accountancy firms to advance their interests. It also shows that the local and the global are intertwined.