Search results

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

Ascension Health has developed a leadership formation program and decision‐making process specifically designed to tap into the inner spiritual strengths of its religiously pluralistic workforce in order to foster leadership that is more effective in initiating organizational cultural changes necessary for making successful quality improvements vital for the transformation of healthcare. This paper aims to focus on this initiative.

The paper is a case study, describing how Ascension Health designed a quantified measurement tool used to test the degree to which key characteristics of its mission, vision and values are implemented in its policies, practices and outcomes. Applying principles of decision‐making theory from Lonergan, Harrison and Nutt, Ascension Health also created an organizational discernment process designed to habitualize best practices of decision making that support the organization's mission and transformational goals.

The authors describe how their organization's interventions have strengthened the practical wisdom of its leaders, helping it to improve on its faith‐based mission and transformational goals. Case examples are included to illustrate the transformational effects of these interventions.

Applying formation practices that engage a spiritually diverse workforce and adopting disciplined processes of decision making can be adapted to any complex organization willing to dedicate itself to the inner transformation, participation and empowerment of its leaders and associates.

The formation program, decision‐making approach and measurement tool are all original. Business leaders and leadership development programs will find the experience of Ascension Health to be a valuable reference for their own organizational change initiatives.

The global economic fallout following the unexpected onset and rapid spread of COVID-19 pandemic worldwide, in early 2020, has necessitated international and national action plans towards new normal models of realignment in enterprise bottom-line and management. In 2020, ‘Supporting Small Business through the COVID-19 Crisis’ was declared the lead theme of the MSME Day – June 27 – by the UN. A ‘COVID Response Alliance for Social Entrepreneurs’ was launched by an affiliate of the World Economic Forum (WEF). Drawing inspiration from the ‘small business’ focus of the UN MSME Day declaration and the ‘social entrepreneurship’ perspective of the WEF, the study seeks to draw few perceptions and conclusions in the post-COVID economic recovery context of India, where Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) are observed to be a key driver of development, thanks to an add-on supportive package in the wake of the COVID-19 economic crisis. It is found that the package fails to provide a direct push for promotion of social enterprises/entrepreneurship in the Indian MSME sector, as there is no focused policy approach on leveraging ‘entrepreneurship resources’. Hence, the general trend of the sector continues to be dominated by the ‘for-profit first’ concern rather than a fair blend of ‘social value creation first’, with ‘profit’. Discourse on social entrepreneurship and action-oriented rehabilitation tools proposed in the Covid context globally have failed to reorient the dominant outlook of social enterprises in India – business as a tool for achieving social impact – to social impact as a spontaneous/positive outcome from business. The study highlights the lapses on the ground, of theoretical formulations, despite their couching in Covid contexts, and the need for a more institutionalised enabling environment for social value creation, impact investment and social stock exchange in the social enterprise ecosystem.

Apparel firms have been discouraged from investing in advanced manufacturing technology because it is difficult to justify. To help to resolve this problem, members of the Clemson Apparel Research group have designed a personal computer‐based system specifically to provide decision support to apparel firms which are considering the acquisition of new equipment. Describes the Apparel Manufacturing Capital Investment Adviser (AMCIA) system which includes worksheets which help to quantify cash flows typically associated with apparel‐manufacturing technology. In addition to “traditional” cash flows (those which are normally considered), the system accounts for two “non‐traditional” cash flows which are often overlooked in justifications: quality revenues and response‐time revenues. Results in a summary sheet which provides decision criteria for the overall investment: net present value (NPV), pay‐back, and return on investment (ROI). Reports a field study involving justification of unit production systems, which showed that the AMCIA system was well suited to analysing such an investment. Representatives of the two participating apparel companies each reviewed the AMCIA justification prepared for their firm and were favourably impressed by it.