Search results

The relationship between diversification and organizational performance has been the subject of numerous studies over the years (Palepu, 1985; Rumelt, 1974). However, strategy scholars have universally defined diversification using a narrow definition, namely that corporate diversification is a function or reflection of the number of products/businesses in a firm's portfolio. The present study argues that such a definition has become outdated given the impact of international market diversification (Kim, Hwang, & Burgers, 1989; Rugman, 1979). Integrating these two views of corporate diversification, we investigate diversification‐performance differences using market‐ and product‐based measures of diversification and an international sample. Results suggest that the traditional model of diversification may not be applicable to all countries and that international differences exist.

This paper examines the relationship between international diversification and performance by matching a sample of 400 U.S. and 400 Korean firms on industry type and testing the relationship over five years (1992–1996). Results indicate that U.S. firms show a positive association with regard to international diversification and performance, but a negative relationship between product diversification and performance. Korean firms, however, show a positive association with both types of diversification. In addition, Korean firms' strategies were associated more with sales‐based measures, while U.S. firms were associated more closely with profit‐based measures. These results suggest that the two countries do not approach diversification in the same way.

Aarhus Kommunes Biblioteker (Teknisk Bibliotek), Ingerslevs Plads 7, Aarhus, Denmark. Representative: V. NEDERGAARD PEDERSEN (Librarian).

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Tenn. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.

ANOTHER Annual Meeting has come and gone. It was scarcely to be expected that the meeting at Bradford would be a record in the number of members attending, seeing that it is only three years ago since the Association met in the neighbouring city of Leeds, and that Bradford cannot boast either the historical associations or the architectural and scenic setting of many other towns. For the most part therefore the members who did attend, attended because they were interested in the serious rather than the entertainment or excursion side of the gathering, which was so far perhaps to the advantage of the meetings and discussions. Nevertheless, the actual number of those present—about two hundred—was quite satisfactory, and none, we are assured, even if the local functions were the main or an equal element of attraction, could possibly have regretted their visit to the metropolis of the worsted trade. Fortunately the weather was all that could be desired, and under the bright sunshine Bradford looked its best, many members, who expected doubtless to find a grey, depressing city of factories, being pleasingly disappointed with the fine views and width of open and green country quite close at hand.

EVERY librarian in his inmost heart dislikes newspapers. He regards them as bad literature; attractors of undesirable readers; a drain upon the limited resources of the library; and a target against which the detractors of public libraries are constantly battering. From the standpoint of the librarian, newspapers are the most expensive and least productive articles stocked by a library, and their lavish provision is, perhaps, the most costly method of purchasing waste‐paper ever devised. Pressure of circumstances and local conditions combine, however, to muzzle the average librarian, and the consequence is that a perfectly honest and outspoken discussion of the newspaper question is very rarely seen. In these circumstances, an attempt to marshal the arguments for and against the newspaper, together with some account of a successful practical experiment at limitation, may prove interesting to readers of this magazine.

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Term. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.

WHEN the open access method of lending books was first introduced on safe‐guarded lines at Clerkenwell, over twelve years ago, a considerable amount of dolorous prophecy was set free, which sometimes formed rather depressing reading for those responsible for the experiment. As time went on, it became clear that many of the prophets based their vaticinations on imperfect knowledge of the actual arrangements in use, and it was then only a simple matter of allowing complete play to one's sense of humour, while the comedy of errors proceeded. One imaginative prophet pictured the time when painstaking librarians would be supplanted by a uniformed janitor, who would assume the functions of librarian, by the easy process of supervising the filtration of readers through a turnstile, like sheep through a hurdle. Another equally resourceful Quidnunc saw in his mind's eye, all the riff‐raff of London, filing through the little Clerkenwell wicket, like a Cup‐tie crowd at the Crystal Palace, without introduction, guarantee, or slightest degree of responsibility. Probably it was only a humorist, and not a prophet, who forsaw the introduction of weighing machines at both entrance and exit wickets, as a means of preventing wholesale thefts. These, and many other absurd misconceptions of the actual mechanical arrangements employed to overcome various anticipated difficulties, formed a considerable proportion of the prophetic utterances which advertised the open access system in its early days.

The management of children′s literature is a search for value and suitability. Effective policies in library and educational work are based firmly on knowledge of materials, and on the bibliographical and critical frame within which the materials appear and might best be selected. Boundaries, like those between quality and popular books, and between children′s and adult materials, present important challenges for selection, and implicit in this process are professional acumen and judgement. Yet also there are attitudes and systems of values, which can powerfully influence selection on grounds of morality and good taste. To guard against undue subjectivity, the knowledge frame should acknowledge the relevance of social and experiential context for all reading materials, how readers think as well as how they read, and what explicit and implicit agendas the authors have. The good professional takes all these factors on board.

Liverpool Conference was amongst the largest, as it was amongst the most successful, of recent years. In all but the weather it excelled, and there were fine intervals even in that. We publish the “Letters on our Affairs” by our well known correspondent, Callimachus, so far as it covers the first three days; the conclusion will follow next month, with what futcher comments seem to be necessary. The Annual Business Meeting was a little less rowdy than that at Scarborough, but one thing emerged from it and that was the determination of the A.A.L. to survive independently. There is more in this than meets the eye, and discussion on it may be postponed until a calmer mood prevails on all sides.