Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide an organizing lens for viewing the distinct contributions to knowledge production from those research communities addressing the impact of competitive strategy on company performance in general, and the influence of cost leadership and differentiation strategy on organizational performance in detail.

The research methodology was based on the PRISMA review, and thematic analysis based on an iterative process of open coding was analyzed and then the sample was analyzed by illustrating the research title, objectives, method, data analysis, sample size, variables and country.

The main factor that influenced the competitive strategy is strategic growth; strategic growth has a significant influence on competitive strategy. Furthermore, competitive strategy will boost firm network, performance measurement and organization behavior. In the same way, the internal goal factor will enhance organizational effectiveness. Also, a differentiation strategy will support management practice factors, strategic positions, product price, product characteristics and company performance.

This study contributes to the literature by identifying a framework of competitive strategy factors, company performance factors, cost leadership strategy factors, differentiation strategy factors and competitive strategy with global market factors. This study provides a complete picture and description of the resulting body knowledge in competitive strategy and organizational performance.

Over its almost 25 years of existence (1964–1988), the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS, or Centre) was chronically understaffed, at times thriving academically and politically, and all too often on the edge of closure. It however left a tangible trace in the history of academia and political activism, not only by laying the groundwork for a new research field, that of cultural studies, but also by having been a place of nearly constant pedagogical freedom and experimentation. By being a space of cooperation and confrontation both within and without, the Centre has been deeply influenced by political events and university reforms alike. It became a democratic space: guarding the walls of an unstable academic praxis, reinventing itself over and over, redefining its aims and objects, publishing ground-breaking research in the realm of social science and doing field work in constant relationship to left wing politics. This paper aims at situating the CCCS and analysing the ways in which it has invested the concept of fragmented powers: first, by replacing the Centre in the wider context of British post-war politics, then by retracing its steps alongside the evolution of the British university system over the second half of the 20th century and finally by examining its administrative, pedagogical and publishing practices, as so many instances of fragmented powers inside a university research study.

Though scholarship has documented Black opera leaders' contributions to the art form in the United States (André, 2018; Caplan, 2017; Cuyler, 2021; Southern, 1997; Turner, 2015), they have received scant attention in rubrics that theorize a definition of Black opera (André, 2018; Cheatham, 1997; Schmidt & Schroeder, 1999). However, as their recent advocacy for racial justice (Cuyler, 2022) through their Letter to the Opera Field in 2020 revealed (Cuyler, 2023), Black opera leaders play a powerful and unique role in shaping audiences' appreciation, engagement with, and understanding of Black opera (André, 2018; Cuyler, 2023; Floyd & Cuyler, 2023). In addition to their positionality as observers of and participants in opera companies' decision-making processes, their advocacy for racial justice can compel an opera company to program Black opera, or not (Cuyler, 2021, 2022, 2023). Therefore, in this chapter, I explore the research question, what is the role of Black opera leaders in Black opera? Lastly, I propose a theory of the dynamic process that includes artistic programming and casting, hiring, community engagement, and audience development which enables the development of an audience for Black opera when Black opera leaders view their leadership of these areas of work through the lens of racial justice.

This chapter draws together the previous sections on academic identity and the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education to draw out the transformative influence of AI on various elements of academia. The chapter explores the profound shifts in the roles of educators, researchers, and academic administrators in a rapidly evolving digital landscape by exploring the opportunities for an AI-powered pedagogy, the use of AI as a research tool, and streamlining administrative tasks using AI. The text will examine AI pedagogical approaches through personalised learning, adaptive feedback, and intelligent content delivery and the potential of AI to enhance the learning experience for diverse student needs and increase student engagement. An argument will develop on the role of the human instructor by stating that, while AI could play a significant role in the classroom, it does not replace the essential human touch. The text will also explore the expanding applications of AI in research, from data analysis to hypothesis generation. AI’s contribution to scientific discovery, data-driven insights, and computational power is discussed in detail, alongside discussions of the use of AI by staff and students for teaching and learning. The chapter will also address the ethical considerations and challenges related to AI-powered research, including issues of bias, data privacy, the responsible use of AI tools, and whether AI can be referenced as a co-author.

To present a method for calculating the discount rate that teams apply to future-year draft picks relative to current-year draft picks and then apply that method to the actual draft picks and trades over the period 2011–2022.

The National Football League (NFL) Draft permits teams to trade the selection rights for current-year and future-year draft picks. We seek to calculate the discount rates associated with NFL Draft trades. With this method, we calculate the discount rate for each trade by NFL teams involving a combination of current-year and future-year draft picks since 2011, when the NFL ratified a new collective bargaining agreement that instituted a draft-pick salary scale and capped the length of draftees’ contracts.

We find that teams' annualized discount rates in trading away future-year draft picks are quite steep, averaging more than 100% per year. These steep discount rates suggest that teams are pressured by market competition to adopt a “win now” approach in devaluing the future draft choices relative to the present draft choices.

The actual discount rate for each trade is not known with certainty when the trade is transacted. This uncertainty arises because the within-round order of future-year picks is determined by teams’ future performance, which is not known at the time of the transaction.

In reporting these findings, we acknowledge the limitations of our analysis. The dataset is small, as there are on average between five and six trades per year involving current-year and future-year picks. More observations could have been included by extending the timeframe to before 2011, but we opted against doing so because the NFL’s 2011 CBA changed teams’ draft calculus by imposing a draft-pick salary scale and capping the length of draftees’ contracts. In addition, our discount rates as calculated are ex post facto in that they are calculated after the future-year drafts have been held. While these are the actual discount rates for the trades as transacted, the actual discount rate for each trade is not known with certainty when the trade is transacted. This uncertainty arises because the within-round order of future-year picks is determined by teams’ future performance, which is not known at the time of the transaction. As an aside, we also re-estimated each trade’s discount rate with an adjustment for that uncertainty, and the median discount rate for all 61 trades was still over 100% per year.

Providing insights into NFL Draft management behavior and decision-making for current-year and future-year draft picks since 2011, when the NFL ratified a new collective bargaining agreement that instituted a draft-pick salary scale and capped the length of draftees’ contracts.

Leadership development programs (LDPs) have emerged relatively recently in the healthcare context as a mechanism not only to develop capable and competent leaders but also to retain them. The purpose of this paper is to describe a perspective on practice by illustrating a case example that showcases a pilot LDP for newly promoted healthcare leaders. The details about how it was developed and implemented collaboratively by a healthcare consortium and higher education institution (HEI) to address shared healthcare leadership talent pipeline and retention challenges are provided.

This perspective on practice describes how a consortium of competitive healthcare organizations, a type of branded Inter-organizational Relationship referred to as “Coopetition,” contracted with a HEI to design, develop and launch a pilot LDP, referred to as the Academy for Healthcare Education and Development program, using the analyze, design, develop, implement and evaluate model.

The significance of this illustrative case example is discussed along with some initial lessons learned based upon this pilot LDP that 24 program participants completed. Implications for research, theory and practice are presented, followed by limitations and a conclusion.

Inter-organizational relationships, particularly coopetition, are relatively new in the healthcare sector, along with collaboration with HEIs to develop interventions to solve compelling industry problems. This illustrative case example offers insights that address scholars’ calls and practitioners’ needs to explicate different approaches for LDPs to build the healthcare leadership talent pipeline.

Competitiveness is an important personality trait that has been studied in various disciplines and has been shown to predict critical work outcomes at the individual level. Despite this, the role of competitiveness in groups and teams has received scant attention amongst organizational researchers. Aiming to promote future research on the role of competitiveness as both an adaptive and maladaptive trait – particularly in the context of work – the authors review competitiveness and its effects on individual and team stress and Well-Being, giving special attention to the processes of cohesion and conflict and situational moderators. The authors illustrate a dynamic multilevel model of individual and team difference factors, competitive processes, and individual and team outcomes to highlight competitiveness as a consequential occupational stressor. Furthermore, the authors discuss the feedback loops that inform the different factors, highlight important avenues for future research, and offer practical solutions for managers to reduce unhealthy competition.