Search results

This article aims to consider teacher's views about intervisitations regarding its application and its usefulness as a community-enhancer. Many educators venture into the world of teaching because they love learning and value learning from their peers (rather than merely from text or administrators); however, teacher reservations or hesitations towards the practice of engaging in intervisitations do exist and can serve as an obstacle.

The findings reported in this study resulted from the analysis of two teacher's perspectives towards classroom intervisitations. The subset of data presented in this study resulted from the surveys and semi-structured interviews that were conducted. Qualitative methodology was used to address the research question as it allows for a greater exploration, description and ideally the emotions of participants/teachers. The coding process consisted of open coding, which then led to axial coding and the elevation of codes to themes.

In this study, teacher buy-in would be enhanced through the protocol feeling more personalized, less-dictated and more flexible in its execution, especially through the support of administrators and district leaders. In addition, teacher mindsets and perceptions also need some reshifting and should be part of the professional development process involving intervisitation roll-outs as any hesitations/limitations/and lack of willingness need to be honed in on and prioritized. Lastly, limiting teachers from an appropriate amount of time to complete such work may also encourage shallow collaboration among teachers instead of in-depth reflexive practice. By prioritizing intervisitations and/or inter-teacher collaboration in the building and allowing teachers to embark on professional development sessions with each other as a means of growing as a teacher and community, all will flourish.

Through examining the narratives of two educators, it was found that teacher willingness to partake in intervisitations is dependent on the school climate, particularly with regards to trust and a yearn-to-learn among inter-school peers and administrators. In addition, providing ample time and educating teachers on the benefits of such practices enhances one's wanting to independently venture into such work.

This study aims to address the question of why managers make different decisions in employee downsizing when their firms face external threats. Our research intends to shed light on whether and how CEOs' cognition (motivational attributes associated with regulatory focus) influences their decision-making and firms’ strategic actions on downsizing under high resource scarcity in the industry environment.

We used a longitudinal panel of 5,544 firm-year observations of US firms from 2003 to 2015 to test our conceptual model. The data was obtained from various sources, including corporate earnings call transcripts and archival databases. We used panel logistic regressions with both fixed and random effects in our research design.

Our results suggest that CEOs' motivational attributes could influence their employee downsizing decisions in response to external threats. We find that CEOs who are more promotion-focused (a stronger drive towards achieving ideals) are less likely to lay off employees during high resource scarcity. Conversely, CEOs with a higher prevention focus (a greater concern for security) do not have a meaningful impact on employee downsizing during periods of external resource scarcity.

Previous research has argued that a significant external threat would diminish individuals' impact on firm strategies and outcomes. Our findings challenge this idea, indicating that CEOs with a stronger drive towards achieving ideals are less inclined to lay off employees when resources are scarce in the environment. This study contributes to behavioral strategy research by providing new insights into how upper echelons’ cognition can influence their decision-making and firms’ employee downsizing.

The paper's objective is to explore the effect of downsizing on both a firm's financial performance in terms of profitability and efficiency, and a firm's employee productivity.

Analyzed six‐year longitudinal financial data of 258 listed Korean firms between 1997 and 2002 along with survey data of 2000. Using multiple regression, the paper investigated the relationship between downsizing and three measures of financial performance and two measures of organizational performance: return on assets, asset turnover, operating income per employee, sales per employee, and value added per employee. Five dependent variables were standardized by industry average.

First, firms implementing downsizing tended to suffer more financial difficulties than their counterparts. Second, downsizing showed a positive effect by improving a firm's profitability and efficiency, but no effect on employee productivity. Third, the improvement of financial performance (ROA) by downsizing was greater among companies that had not experienced any loss than among those that had experienced loss.

First, there is a possibility of overestimation or underestimation since we do not know if firms classified as non‐downsizers actually downsized during 2000‐2002. Second, the magnitude of downsizing was not measured. Third, the effect of layoff and “honorable retirement” was not analyzed separately.

Downsizing is more effective when a firm implements it proactively, and less effective when a firm implements downsizing after a financial loss as a “quick fix” to a financial problem.

The paper utilizes a unique experiment opportunity with Korean firms since the economic crisis in 1997 to investigate the recent phenomenon of downsizing in Asian countries. The paper provides new evidence for why downsizing can improve a firm's financial performance, but not employee productivity in Korean firms.