Search results

This paper aims to examine whether firms meeting or just beating an earnings benchmark engage in tone management in earnings conference calls to complement earnings management in the UK context. It also investigates whether the audience tone in beating or just meeting earnings fails to predict future performance.

This study was performed using a sample of non-financial UK firms listed in the FTSE 350 index over the period 2010–2015.

The findings show that firms that exercise more earnings management to meet or just beat earnings are positively associated with the abnormal tone during earnings conference calls. The outcomes also reveal that the audience’s tone of firms meeting or just beating an earnings benchmark fails to predict future performance. This confirms the effectiveness of the tone management in managing the perception of audience.

This study highlights the need for increased accountability by firms on earnings conference call. It also supports academics and practitioners in understanding the management discretion used in reporting and communication during the earnings conference call. Overall, the results of this study are beneficial for regulators, policymakers and professionals, regarding confirming the need for the earnings conference calls to be regulated.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that examines the association between earnings management and tone management in the UK earnings conference calls. It adds to the existing literature by examining the self-serving behaviour of managerial tone during earnings conference calls within a sitting in which meeting or just beating a benchmark is used. Unlike several studies that explain the behaviour of tone as a signalling strategy, this study reveals that the tendency of impression management behaviour can explain the tone management.

The purpose of this paper is to determine how we ought to distinguish between reference and readers' advisory (RA) service, given the latter’s turn toward a whole collection approach. In other words, the paper answers this question: If both reference and RA librarians aim to meet patrons’ information needs and may theoretically do so using the same materials, then how are we to differentiate the two services conceptually?

In this conceptual paper, we posit that we can distinguish between RA and reference using Louise Rosenblatt’s theory of the aesthetic transaction. With this theory in hand, we can redefine the service distinction in terms of the stance – aesthetic or efferent – that the patron expects to take toward the material they seek.

On our account, the reader’s desired stance becomes a kind of hermeneutical lens through which a library worker may productively evaluate plausible pathways and materials. An aesthetic lens is characteristic of RA; it makes features of potential aesthetic transactions between a particular reader and a particular text (or genre or author’s oeuvre) salient.

The proposed account constitutes a novel application of Rosenblattian response theory, one that grounds and refines the going view that RA’s proper focus is on supporting a particular sort of experience rather than providing particular sorts of texts. This theoretical emendation also better aligns the service distinction with contemporary conceptualizations of RA as a “whole collection” service. Important practical and philosophical implications follow from the new account.

Society is critically dependent on an adequate supply of hospital doctors to ensure optimal health care. Voluntary turnover amongst hospital doctors is, however, an increasing problem for hospitals. The aim of this study was to systematically review the extant academic literature to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the current knowledge base on hospital doctor turnover and retention. In addition to this, we synthesise the most common methodological approaches used before then offering an agenda to guide future research.

Adopting the PRISMA methodology, we conducted a systematic literature search of four databases, namely CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science.

We identified 51 papers that empirically examined hospital doctor turnover and retention. Most of these papers were quantitative, cross-sectional studies focussed on meso-level predictors of doctor turnover.

Selection criteria concentrated on doctors who worked in hospitals, which limited knowledge of one area of the healthcare environment. The review could disregard relevant articles, such as those that discuss the turnover and retention of doctors in other specialities, including general practitioners. Additionally, being limited to peer-reviewed published journals eliminates grey literature such as dissertations, reports and case studies, which may bring impactful results.

Globally, hospital doctor turnover is a prevalent issue that is influenced by a variety of factors. However, a lack of focus on doctors who remain in their job hinders a comprehensive understanding of the issue. Conducting “stay interviews” with doctors could provide valuable insight into what motivates them to remain and what could be done to enhance their work conditions. In addition, hospital management and recruiters should consider aspects of job embeddedness that occur outside of the workplace, such as facilitating connections outside of work. By resolving these concerns, hospitals can retain physicians more effectively and enhance their overall retention efforts.

Focussing on the reasons why employees remain with an organisation can have significant social repercussions. When organisations invest in gaining an understanding of what motivates their employees to stay in the job, they are better able to establish a positive work environment that likely to promote employee well-being and job satisfaction. This can result in enhanced job performance, increased productivity and higher employee retention rates, all of which are advantageous to the organisation and its employees.

The review concludes that there has been little consideration of the retention, as opposed to the turnover, of hospital doctors. We argue that more expansive methodological approaches would be useful, with more qualitative approaches likely to be particularly useful. We also call on future researchers to consider focussing further on why doctors remain in posts when so many are leaving.