Search results

Seeks to explore the characteristics of organisational performance management with a view to speculating on the way the development of this emerging academic sub‐discipline might evolve. Identifies just what the nature of a research contribution to the field of performance management might be by briefly reviewing the nature of management as a discipline and how performance management might be located within this context. Performance management is located within two main dimensions: cognitive, and those relating to social organisation as proposed by Becher and Gibbons et al. The methodology compares the field of performance management with analysis that has already been undertaken in an attempt to analyse management as discipline. Analysis shows that research in the performance management field, unlike other more mainstream management research, is likely to be “hard” and “applied” (on the main cognitive dimensions – Becher) and convergent and urban (on the main dimensions in relation to its social organisation – Gibbons). Conclusions are discussed in detail.

The regulations concerning preliminary profit announcements are contained in the Listing Rules of the Stock Exchange. The disclosure provisions are modest and there is no requirement for the document to be audited. There have been criticisms concerning the ambiguity of the auditors’ involvement and the timing of the release of information for a number of years. Amendments introduced in 1993 have done little to resolve the matter. As an empirical study of 148 randomly selected listed companies, seeks answers to the following three questions: Does the audit status have any relationship with the size or type of company? Is the audit status associated with the timing of the release of information? Is the audit status associated with the voluntary provision of additional financial statements? Concludes that there is considerable variety in company practice and that the Stock Exchange should take action to dispel the ambiguities concerning auditors’ involvement with preliminary profit announcements.

This paper aims to understand the social dynamics surrounding the consumption of non-native, ethnic cuisines in the multicultural context of an Asian city.

Data were collected via in-depth interviews with 21 culturally diverse residents of Dubai. Data were analysed inductively, leading to the emergence of three themes characterising social dynamics underpinning the consumption of non-native cuisines in an Asian multicultural environment.

Three types of social dynamics were identified: instrumental uses, expressive uses and conviviality considerations.

The study suggests that the different types of cultural dynamics at play have different roles; some act as influencing or constraining factors in the everyday practice of multicultural consumption, whereas others are used more proactively as enablers.

This paper contributes to the authors’ understanding of how people “practice conviviality” in multicultural marketplaces, providing insights into the complex social dynamics, underpinning the consumption of non-native cuisines in multicultural marketplaces. Although the consumer literature on food and cuisines has acknowledged the social influences surrounding cuisines and food consumption, these have typically been viewed in a single block. This study shows the importance of conviviality considerations in non-native cuisine consumption. Further, the paper shows that the consumption of non-native cuisines is an everyday practice in a multicultural context, which is used with varying degrees of proactiveness for social lubrication and multicultural socialisation.

This paper aims to examine consumption behavior to understand how individuals become culturally plural consumers through exploratory research conducted in one of the world's most urban multi‐cultural environments, the UAE. As a starting point consumption was deemed as “consummatory” in accord with Holbrook.

The data were collected through 20 interviews with UAE residents. This included men and women, ages ranging from 20s to 60s, representing 11 countries from five continents. Broadly a hermeneutic approach was followed in eliciting how culturally plural consumption behaviors emerged and interpreting how the process unfolded. The study examined multicultural habits pertaining to products or services chosen by the respondents. These covered food, cuisine, books, beverages, music, dance, clothes, TV and health treatments among others.

Patterns of consumption acts create a consumption behavior that may be described as extemporaneous, expedient and emergent. The nature of the consumption process depends on a host of triggers that includes culturally diverse predisposition of the consumer, multi‐cultural identities, social cues, contextual factors and individuals' proclivity towards experimentalism. Taken together it is found that the praxis of becoming a culturally plural consumer is a learning process that has an emergent quality.

This study is exploratory and qualitative in nature with no firm conclusions.

In culturally plural markets consumers have to be approached with a fine brush. Many of the current taken‐for‐granted ideals of marketing will be questioned by the approach suggested in this paper. As Stewart aptly said, understanding of praxis “would allow for practical action, based on edifying philosophy”.

While Holbrook's idea of consummation is a metaphor for consumption that is well‐known, it is not adequately understood nor followed up with research. This inquiry into consumption praxis is a contribution to that end with significant implications for twenty‐first‐century marketing.

This paper aims to explore current management attitudes towards benchmarking and its implementation within small business‐to‐business service firms in order to enhance a deeper understanding of benchmarking within such contexts.

The paper uses in‐depth case analysis of small architectural services to collect empirical data on benchmarking initiatives, attitudes, key characteristics and constraints on benchmarking.

Findings suggest that there are significant variations in the receptiveness of small business‐to‐business firms towards the adoption of benchmarking. There may be an inherent distrust of benchmarking, as it is primarily perceived as being a tool for larger organizations, where productivity improvements are the main driver. Evidence of perceived constraints in both the implementation of benchmarking and in the definition of what constitutes best practice highlighted a cultural difficulty for small architectural firms when adopting a business process orientation. Traditionally, when evaluating their services, architectural practices are oriented towards professional design criteria, often with creative rather than business process priorities. Results suggest less cumbersome measurement models than key performance indicators (KPI) are needed to allow organically developing firms, such as architectural services, to apply benchmarking and quality ideas flexibly.

Research on current management attitudes towards benchmarking or actual implementation of benchmarking techniques in small business‐to‐business service firms is scarce. This paper addresses this by developing a deeper and richer contextual understanding of benchmarking within such contexts.

In North America, the profession known as ‘research management’ elsewhere across the globe, is often known as ‘research administration’ and encompasses the activities and work associated with developing, administering, accounting for and complying with sponsor requirements, guidelines, procedures, and laws relating to externally funded projects. In the United States and Canada, the expansion of respective federal government agencies and programmes was the major factor for the need and growth of the research administration profession. Initially, administrative and business staff often administered research funding, however over the decades, a fully-fledged profession has evolved with distinct specialisations. Both the United States and Canada now have maturing professions and professional societies to organise and advance research administration. This chapter outlines the chronological origins, growth, and professionalisation of research administration in North America, with a focus on the United States and Canada. Mexico has not yet evolved a formalised research administration infrastructure.