Search results

Many entrepreneurs are enthralled with their company's technologies, products and potential markets. Invariably these emerging ventures present bedazzling business plans with industry-wise vernacular, detailed market research, and sophisticated financial spreadsheets. They often flaunt their “optimized business models.” Investors, however, typically want to know when and how the sales will start meeting the Plan. “Whereʼs the purchase order?” is the refrain. In this article, our “Practitionerʼs Corner” associate editor Joe Levangie collaborates with a long-time colleague, Deaver Brown, to address how businesses should “make sales happen.” Levangie warns that Brownʼs elitist education (Choate, Harvard College, Harvard Business School) should not be interpreted as a lack of “street smarts”; Brownʼs more entrepreneurially friendly credentials include winning Golden Gloves boxing medals and selling Fuller Brush products door-to-door! To ascertain how the entrepreneur can wrest an order from a prospective customer, read on.

For several decades, human and financial resources have been the focus of academic institutions in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics fields of study because of low matriculation and graduation involving diverse student populations. However, there is a paucity of research about pathways to doctoral-level education and completion for these underrepresented populations. The purpose of this paper is to explore conceptually how STEM doctoral programs can implement a critical multiculturalist framework to recruit, increase persistence and completion to abate the attrition rate of women and students of color in doctoral programs.

Through a critical multiculturalist framework, issues of access and attainment central to the pipeline of traditionally underrepresented populations in to the STEM fields are addressed in this paper in an effort to support equity and inclusion at the doctoral level. Approaching this issue through critical multiculturalism takes the issue of access and attainment beyond sheer numbers by addressing the limited opportunity of women and students of color to see themselves in graduate faculty within STEM.

This paper reviews literature regarding the STEM pipeline’s “glass ceiling” that exists at the graduate level for students from marginalized communities, including gender and race. This paper proposes a multicultural doctoral persistence model.

Despite the efforts of many institutions of higher education to diversify the STEM fields, a “glass ceiling” remains at the doctoral level. There appears to be a pipeline for women and minorities from K-12 to the undergraduate level, but the doctoral level has been largely left out of the conversation.

The purpose of this study is to introduce new tools to develop a more precise and focused bibliometric analysis on the field of digitalization in healthcare management. Furthermore, this study aims to provide an overview of the existing resources in healthcare management and education and other developing interdisciplinary fields.

This work uses bibliometric analysis to conduct a comprehensive review to map the use of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology 2 (UTAUT2) research models in healthcare academic studies. Bibliometric studies are considered an important tool to evaluate research studies and to gain a comprehensive view of the state of the art.

Although UTAUT dates to 2003, our bibliometric analysis reveals that only since 2016 has the model, together with UTAUT2 (2012), had relevant application in the literature. Nonetheless, studies have shown that UTAUT and UTAUT2 are particularly suitable for understanding the reasons that underlie the adoption and non-adoption choices of eHealth services. Further, this study highlights the lack of a multidisciplinary approach in the implementation of eHealth services. Equally significant is the fact that many studies have focused on the acceptance and the adoption of eHealth services by end users, whereas very few have focused on the level of acceptance of healthcare professionals.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to conduct a bibliometric analysis of technology acceptance and adoption by using advanced tools that were conceived specifically for this purpose. In addition, the examination was not limited to a certain era and aimed to give a worldwide overview of eHealth service acceptance and adoption.