Search results

The main purpose of this paper was to evaluate the validation process of food safety control measures.

The validation of control measures has been analyzed at 50 food companies in Serbia. The sample included companies that produce food of both plant and animal origin and have certified food safety management systems. A total of 156 control measures that combat physical hazards (41.6%), followed by microbial hazards (34.0%) and chemical hazards (24.4%), have been analyzed. To enable quantification of the validation protocols, each control measure was assigned a score.

The validation scores showed that the highest level of validation was observed in large companies, as opposed to small and medium-sized companies (p < 0.05). The type of food safety hazards and the food sector did not reveal any statistical differences in-between the scores. The main approach to validating control measures was referring to the technical documentation of equipment used (52.6%), followed by scientific and legal requirements (30.7%). Less than 20% of the analyzed control measures were validated with operational data collected on-site. No mathematical modeling was observed for the sampled food companies. Future steps should include the development of validation guides for different types of control measures and training modules.

This study can serve as an improvement guide for food safety consultants, food safety auditors, certification bodies, inspection services, food technologists and food managers.

This study is one of the first to provide an insight into how food companies validate their control measures to combat microbial, chemical and physical food safety hazards.

The purpose of this chapter is to explore whether and how angel investors’ emotions unfold in the investment opportunity evaluation process as they interact with the social environment. Complementing recent research that has emphasized the financial calculations, we add angel investors’ own emotional arousal to the list of tools that may help them to rate investment opportunities.

Drawing on semi-structured qualitative interviews, we develop a phenomenological analysis of the investment opportunity evaluation process at the level of angel investors’ lived experience.

Our findings indicate that when angel investors use their emotional arousal in evaluating investment criteria, they engage in a developmental process characterized by three elements: subjective validation, social validation, and investment decision.

We illuminate how discrete emotions can complement rational considerations in the opportunity evaluation journey. Capturing the nature of emotion as action oriented, embodied, socially situated, and distributed, we embrace its adaptive socially situated dynamics.

Taking a step toward better understanding of the soft aspects in the relationship development that leads to investments, we hope this study will help not only those entrepreneurs who need funding but also those policymakers who design new incentives that improve the flow of investment into promising new ventures.

We demonstrate how angel investors’ emotions can complement their rational considerations in the investment opportunity evaluation process as they interact with the social environment. Identifying boundary values for the conditions that are necessary and sufficient to advance in the process, we have demonstrated how emotion can serve as a driving or restraining force not only during subjective validation but also during social validation.

Previous studies on innovation tend to view innovation as consisting of a creative phase of novel and useful ideas, and a non-creative, or at least a less creative phase, as this considered to be the mere implementation and validation of the initially created ideas. In contrast, this paper aims to stress on the significance of the process of validating a new idea as being a creative, learning, exploratory process that shapes the degree of novelty of the innovation as a whole.

In driving this argument, this study deductively builds on a theoretical pre-understanding derived from extant literature related to management innovation and organizational legitimacy, and inductively draws on information gleaned from three in-depth case studies.

The study shows that the validation phase in the innovation process is a creative process, rather than just being a set of activities that relate to the mere execution of the created ideas. Viewing the validation process as an exploratory search for new knowledge, this study establishes a relationship between the form of knowledge mobilized, vertically within an organization or horizontally from outside, and the form of legitimation required. Validation based on internally generated knowledge is effective in terms of achieving pragmatic (efficiency-driven) objectives. Inter-organizational knowledge inflows are associated with cognitive legitimacy – a form of legitimacy that leads to changes in the stakeholders’ beliefs about a the product. In contradistinction, horizontal, socio–cultural inflows of knowledge are likely to improve on the product itself, thereby generating more traction for validation.

This research is based on data collected from three firms only.

The idea developed here can provide business organizations a better understanding of the validation process of management innovations. This study suggests that successful innovation often requires managers to be prepared to seek knowledge beyond the confines of their own organizations.

This study contributes in three ways: it submits that there is a dynamic interplay between the moments of creation and validation, which is largely shaped by the novelty of the mobilized knowledge, depending on whether it is internal top–down or external horizontal; relatedly, the effectiveness of validation is shaped by the novelty of the knowledge garnered to justify the initial ideas; and the present paper has extended Suchman’s (1995) framework by linking the effectiveness of the various forms of legitimacy to the source of knowledge mobilized in the validation process.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the performance of competing methods and model selection, which are non‐trivial issues given the financial implications. Researchers have adopted various methods including statistical models and machine learning methods such as neural networks to assist decision making in direct marketing. However, due to the different performance criteria and validation techniques currently in practice, comparing different methods is often not straightforward.

This study compares the performance of neural networks with that of classification and regression tree, latent class models and logistic regression using three criteria – simple error rate, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and cumulative lift – and two validation methods, i.e. bootstrap and stratified k‐fold cross‐validation. Systematic experiments are conducted to compare their performance.

The results suggest that these methods vary in performance across different criteria and validation methods. Overall, neural networks outperform the others in AUROC value and cumulative lifts, and the stratified ten‐fold cross‐validation produces more accurate results than bootstrap validation.

To select predictive models to support direct marketing decisions, researchers need to adopt appropriate performance criteria and validation procedures.

The study addresses the key issues in model selection, i.e. performance criteria and validation methods, and conducts systematic analyses to generate the findings and practical implications.

Mobile technologies are increasingly used as a data source to enable big data analytics that enable inventory control and logistics planning for omnichannel businesses. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the use of mobile technologies to facilitate customers’ shopping in physical retail stores and associated implementation challenges.

First, the authors introduce three emerging mobile shopping checkout processes in the retail store. Second, the authors suggest that new validation procedures (i.e. exit inspections) necessary for implementation of mobile-technology-enabled checkout processes may disrupt traditional retail service processes. The authors propose a construct labeled “tolerance for validation” defined as customer reactions to checkout procedures. The authors define and discuss five dimensions – tolerance for: unfair process; changes in validation process; inconvenience; mistrust; and privacy intrusion. The authors develop a measurement scale for the proposed construct and conduct a study among 239 customers.

The results show that customers have higher tolerance for validation under scenarios in which mobile technologies are used in the checkout processes, as compared to the traditional self-service scenario in which no mobile technology is used. In particular, the customers do not show a clear preference for specific mobile shopping scenarios.

These findings contribute to our understanding of a challenge that omnichannel businesses may face as they leverage data from digital technologies to enhance collaborative planning, forecasting, and replenishment processes. The proposed construct and measurement scales can be used in future work on omnichannel retailing.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a method to measure the difficulties of items required to achieve Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) validation and investigated companies’ abilities to obtain AEO certification based on an empirical analysis of 201 supply chain-related companies in Taiwan.

The Rasch model was applied to convert the ordinal raw data collected from questionnaire surveys into values on an interval scale to measure companies’ abilities and item difficulties for AEO validation. The model was estimated using WINSTEP, which is an iterative computer program.

The study results show that self-risk assessment and the formulation of security policies are the most difficult items to accomplish for AEO validation, whereas establishing security facilities is the easiest task to accomplish. Additionally, a company’s ability to obtain AEO validation was found to be positively correlated with a company’s turnover volume and its number of staff.

This research focusses on supply chain-related companies in Taiwan. Thus, the findings may not be transferable directly to other companies, circumstances, or countries.

Using the Rasch analysis, both company’s abilities and item difficulties could be measured numerically and compared meaningfully. The study results could be used as references for the government to create polices to guide companies to meet the requirements of AEO validation in the future.

According to the study results, only 43.28 percent of the respondent companies have sufficient confidence to completely comply with all 26 security items for AEO validation; this implies that AEO validation criteria should be adjusted or some programs should be provided by the government to improve companies’ abilities for AEO validation, if the government genuinely wants to effectively encourage companies to obtain AEO certification.

This study introduced a method to estimate items’ difficulties and companies’ abilities for AEO validation with values on a consistent interval scale. Thus, a comparison between companies’ abilities and items’ difficulties could be graphically illustrated. The results of this study provide a useful tool to investigate whether the AEO validation criteria are appropriate for the potential companies that can apply for AEO validation.

This paper aims to compare the ways in which a range of quality frameworks have been validated and to identify a number of factors that have an impact on validation processes.

Seven examples of published quality frameworks applicable to the field of e‐learning are described and the methods used to validate each of the frameworks are identified and compared. The article concludes by considering a range of factors that have the potential to have an impact on such validation processes.

Six methods of validation were found to have been used in relation to development of the seven frameworks that were examined: reviewing the research literature related to effectiveness in online learning; seeking input from an expert panel; undertaking empirical research; undertaking survey research; conducting pilot projects; and drawing on case studies. From the variety of approaches used and the ways in which they were used it was concluded that a recognised set of procedures for validation of quality frameworks has not yet emerged.

The most important limitation of this study is that its findings are dependent on the particular quality frameworks selected for inclusion.

The paper draws attention to the need for more attention to be paid to the development of methods of validation that are both objective and robust.

No previous studies were located that have looked specifically at the processes used to validate quality frameworks. This paper therefore provides some initial baseline data upon which to base future work.

Inspired by objective hermeneutics (Oevermann, 1984, 1996, 1999; Oevermann et al., 1979; Weller, 2010; Wohrab-Sahr, 2003) and qualitative validation (Adcock and Collier, 2001; Martis, 2006; Maxwell, 1992), the authors present this essay with the aim of proposing an objective hermeneutic approach to qualitative validation.

In order to develop this approach, the authors consider the contributions of Martis (2006) and Maxwell (1992) about theoretical–empirical validity, Adcock and Collier's propositions (2001) regarding the conceptualization and evaluation of phenomena through specific levels, tasks and stages of validation and the principles of objective hermeneutic interpretation proposed by Wohlrab-Sahr (2003).

Three main contributions are considered: theoretical–empirical validity (Martis, 2006; Maxwell, 1992); levels of validation – theoretical framework, systematized concept, indicators and results (Adcock and Collier, 2001); stages of validation – content validity, convergent validity and nomological validity (Adcock and Collier, 2001); and principles of objective hermeneutic interpretation – sequential interpretation, mental–experimental explanation of possible interpretations, preservation rule, literal character of interpretation, totality, reflection about knowledge used in the analysis and group of interpreters (Wohrab-Sahr, 2003). These contributions were related to establishing a framework that illustrates the proposed objective hermeneutic approach to qualitative validation.

The authors intend to offer to the scope of organization studies an alternative for validation, so that the voices of the researched can be heard. Furthermore, the authors seek to guide researchers as to how to respect and protect what is heard, in order to avoid any invasion of others' discourse.

Our concern in this article is with the feeding back of sociological descriptions to those whom these descriptions purport to be about. This in particular is what we mean in our title by the ‘retrieval of sociological description’. We would like to consider here some of the issues surrounding any attempt on the part of the sociologist to offer his account for inspection by his research respondents, why one may attempt such an exercise and, tentatively, what any such exercise might look like. In particular, we wish to link such ‘feeding back’ of the sociologist's descriptions to the related issue of the validation of social research. Conventionally, validation of sociological research is thought to consist in internal methodological procedures, e.g. triangulation, random allocation, etc., but validation by respondents may represent a feasible alternative to such procedures. By respondent validation is meant here any attempt on the part of the researcher to establish a

The research aims to show that validation and legitimisation of an information systems (IS) project need to be treated simultaneously to improve software project management. A starting assumption is that traditional aspects of model validity and legitimisation in operational research can be applicable to the field of IS. However, non‐traditional types of IS are more suitable to be viewed from an interpretive viewpoint. Validation is explored both from hard systems and also from soft systems point of view. Some extensions on the notion of validation for soft systems are provided for that purpose. Issues regarding both validation and legitimisation in IS are illustrated on a case study regarding the management of an academic research management IS project. Issues related both validation and legitimisation in IS are illustrated on a case study regarding the management of an academic research IS project. The latter had eventually to be abandoned. The case study shows how the non‐adherence to the principles of validation and legitimisation lead to that situation.