Search results

This study aims to examine the effect of human resource management (HRM) in mitigating negative effects of Lean management and Six Sigma (LM&SS) on employee well-being in health care. The authors subdivide well-being into three components: happiness, trust and health.

This is a cross-sectional, multisite survey study in internal service units of hospitals. Data analyzed using multivariate regression come from a sample of 1,886 survey respondents (42 units, N = 218 supervisors, N = 1,668 employees) in eight Dutch academic hospitals that have implemented LM&SS.

The present study findings show no or weak effects of LM&SS on the happiness and health component of employee well-being. In addition, the authors found a significant but weak direct positive effect (ß = 0.07) of the LM&SS bundle on the trusting relationships component of well-being. Therefore, moderating effects of HRM practices on the relationship between LM&SS and employee well-being seem less relevant because an existing relationship between LM&SS and employee well-being is a prerequisite for moderation (Hayes, 2009). There were unexpected side effects. Inspired by research that discusses direct effects of HRM on employee well-being, the authors tested this relationship and found that HRM has a direct positive effect on trust and happiness of employees in health care. For the health component of well-being, the present results show a weak negative effect of HRM.

This study results in a cautiously optimistic view about LM&SS in health care, provided that it is applied in a targeted manner (to improve the performance of their processes) and that HRM is strategically aligned with the goals of LM&SS to improve employees’ happiness and trusting relationships.

Unique features of the study are the focus on the consequences for employees’ well-being related to LM&SS in health care, the role of HRM in regard to this relationship and the participation of all eight Dutch academic hospitals in this research.

The aim of this article is to present a model for the orchestration of dynamic capabilities (ODCs) in cleantech companies that aim to obtain competitive advantage in the market.

The authors present herein descriptive research guided by a qualitative multiple case study approach carried out with 12 cleantech companies.

The results have showed that the ODC model is present in the product/process cycle, thus providing new capabilities and generating sustainable competitive advantage through the research categories presented.

This study contributes to the literature on the ODCs through microfoundations based on evidence of companies inserted in technological and intensively dynamic contexts.

This article demonstrates, through the ODC model, the main capabilities and characteristics of the assets of cleantech companies and how the process of renewing competencies to obtain competitive advantage occurs.

The ODC model utilizes technological resources in the product/process cycle. Asset specificity and the capacity for innovation allow cleantech companies to explore regulatory loopholes, making their sustainable model innovative and obtaining competitive advantage through the renewal of entrepreneurial capabilities and competencies.

The purpose of this paper is to make the case that ethical guardrails in emerging technology businesses are inadequate and to develop solutions to strengthen these guardrails.

Based on literature and first principles reasoning, the paper develops theoretical arguments about the fundamental purpose of ethical guardrails and how they evolve and then uses this along with the characteristics that distinguish emerging technology businesses to identify inadequacies in the ethical guardrails for emerging technology businesses and develop solutions to strengthen the guardrails.

The paper shows that the ethical guardrails for emerging technology businesses are inadequate and that the reasons for this are systematic. The paper also develops actionable recommendations to strengthen these guardrails.

The paper develops the novel argument that reasons for the inadequate ethical guardrails in emerging technology businesses are systematic and stem from the inadequacy of laws and regulations, inadequacy of boards and the focus of business executives.

The purpose of this paper is to explore why, despite the development of a hybrid investing logic, funding problems are so persistent for early-stage Cleantech ventures (“Cleantechs”). An institutional logics lens is adopted to analyze how key actors' perceptions and communications of the Cleantech value proposition shape information asymmetries (IAs).

A mixed methods approach draws on 82 Cleantech pitch decks and 31 investment guidance documents, and insights from interviews with 42 key informants and nine Cleantech CEOs and their investors.

IAs persist, first of all, because key investor and entrepreneurial actors combine different goals in the hybrid Cleantech value proposition. Interestingly, the analysis of Environmental Performance Indicators (EPIs) as a critical communication tool reveals a further mismatch in how actors actually combine logics. The authors ultimately identify three emergent actor roles – traditional laggard, developer and boundary spanner – that present a framework of how the three most influential actor groups develop EPIs and via that a hybrid Cleantech financing logic to overcome IAs.

The paper enhances the entrepreneurial finance literature primarily by showing that in contexts of hybrid investing a more nuanced understanding of institutional logics in terms of ends and means is critical to overcome IAs. While prior works highlight goal incompatibilities, the findings here suggest that the (in-)compatibility of goals as well as EPI choices of the same actors is likely to be the key explanandum for the stickiness of IAs and the funding gap. The novel emerging role framework offers additional theoretical, policy and practical advances for hybrid logic development.