Search results

The authors offer the viewpoint that a requirement to put the value of intangible assets like brands on a company's balance sheet may be in prospect – and that such a requirement would benefit businesses.

Brands and elements of brands like a package can be valued, the authors assert, and describe an experiment to value the Gateway “cowbox” package. In the study, 61 university students saw identical ads for a computer, except that half saw one with a generic name, half with the name Gateway, and half of each of these two subgroups saw a “cowbox,” the other half no package.

The box did not influence the price respondents who saw the Gateway name in their ad said they would expect to pay for the computer. However, the box's presence in an ad for the “no‐name” computer boosted the expected price from $515 to $648.

If one brand element has a measurable value, investors have a right to know that value. The same applies for the brand as a whole. Furthermore, managers benefit from directing marketing dollars to the promotion of valuable brand elements, to associate them in the public mind with their brand.

This chapter investigates the nature of the transformation of macroeconomics by focusing on the impact of the Great Depression on economic doctrines. There is no doubt that the Great Depression exerted an enormous influence on economic thought, but the exact nature of its impact should be examined more carefully. In this chapter, I examine the transformation from a perspective which emphasizes the interaction between economic ideas and economic events, and the interaction between theory and policy rather than the development of economic theory. More specifically, I examine the evolution of what became known as macroeconomics after the Depression in terms of an ongoing debate among the “stabilizers” and their critics. I further suggest using four perspectives, or schools of thought, as measures to locate the evolution and transformation; the gold standard mentality, liquidationism, the Treasury view, and the real-bills doctrine. By highlighting these four economic ideas, I argue that what happened during the Great Depression was the retreat of the gold standard mentality, the complete demise of liquidationism and the Treasury view, and the strange survival of the real-bills doctrine. Each of those transformations happened not in response to internal debates in the discipline, but in response to government policies and real-world events.

We have before us the recently‐issued Annual Report of the Local Government Board on the work done by the Local Authorities under the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts. While preserving the general form and arrangement of its predecessors, it shows that not only the Board itself, but the local authorities also, are coming to an increasing realisation of the importance of the subject. Six years ago we had occasion to point out some of the defects attaching to these reports, and to suggest various improvements that might be made in them. We felt, and expressed at the time our belief, that the Board was much handicapped by the form of quarterly reports imposed on the Public Analyst by the Food and Drugs Acts, and by the non‐existence of any machinery by which it could get together and collate the vast amount of information which those reports ought to, but do not, yield. Until the law is altered the present system must continue, but it is striking evidence of the lack of serious study spent on the matter that for want of effective coordination and control more than one‐half of what may be considered the real and permanent value of the Public Analyst's work goes into the waste‐paper basket. The work done by most Public Analysts as individuals is limited to some few hundreds of samples of any one article of food, but the combined expeperience of them all would in most cases — assuming it could be accurately ascertained—go far towards settling in a single year many of the thorny questions relative to standards and limits which are fought out at such great length and still greater cost to the community in the courts of law.

In 1899 the medical practitioners of Dublin were confronted with an outbreak of a peculiar and obscure illness, characterised by symptoms which were very unusual. For want of a better explanation, the disorder, which seemed to be epidemic, was explained by the simple expedient of finding a name for it. It was labelled as “beri‐beri,” a tropical disease with very much the same clinical and pathological features as those observed at Dublin. Papers were read before certain societies, and then as the cases gradually diminished in number, the subject lost interest and was dropped.

This research provides accounting-ethics authors and administrators with a benchmark for accounting-ethics research. While Bernardi and Bean (2010) considered publications in business-ethics and accounting’s top-40 journals this study considers research in eight accounting-ethics and public-interest journals, as well as, 34 business-ethics journals. We analyzed the contents of our 42 journals for the 25-year period between 1991 through 2015. This research documents the continued growth (Bernardi & Bean, 2007) of accounting-ethics research in both accounting-ethics and business-ethics journals. We provide data on the top-10 ethics authors in each doctoral year group, the top-50 ethics authors over the most recent 10, 20, and 25 years, and a distribution among ethics scholars for these periods. For the 25-year timeframe, our data indicate that only 665 (274) of the 5,125 accounting PhDs/DBAs (13.0% and 5.4% respectively) in Canada and the United States had authored or co-authored one (more than one) ethics article.

“Hitherto,” remarked the Provost, Sir Gregory Foster, at the University College School of Librarianship Social on March 3rd, “The librarian has been in an unfortunate position. He was thought to know so much that it was unnecessary to teach him anything, and when he had been persuaded to become a librarian, it was thought to be unnecessary to pay him anything.” Allowing for a certain telling and colouring irony, this does really represent the position of some librarians in the past; and the hope that Sir Gregory Foster then expressed, which was echoed by Sir John MacAlister, that the new School would play its part in altering the position, is one that all librarians, however ruefully, must share. Ruefully, because the School was not established twenty or more years ago, so that they might have enjoyed its advantages, and have been prepared, in an orthodox academic sense, for the great days which are undoubtedly ahead for libraries and librarians.