Search results

To understand the use of metrics to attain alignment between the needs of the customer, strategic objectives, and the execution system. This paper examines the process by which metrics at the various levels are developed and the factors affecting this process.

The paper draws on a series of “deep” case studies and 45 interviews of key managers at various levels within three related businesses. Open and axial coding on the data was performed and themes reported.

The findings show how metrics can generate two types of synergy, financial, and strategic and that numerous factors affect metrics deployment and alignment. There also exists a tension between those metrics that encourage sales growth through innovation and market development (i.e. the so‐called top line metrics) and those metrics that reduce costs or asset investments (i.e. bottom line metrics).

Selective coding of the data to develop theoretical insight has yet to be performed.

Alignment is affected by both the goals used and the processes used in developing and implementing metrics. Furthermore, the study shows that those actions that foster cost reduction (e.g. through lean systems) may unintentionally hinder and limit those actions aimed at encouraging innovation.

The metrics alignment process is vital to effective management, yet the mechanisms of this process leading from understanding of the customer goals appropriate metrics for the execution system is effectively unexplored – a shortcoming that this paper begins to rectify.

Research on weighting of measures often examines only one incentive at a time (usually bonus) and provide mixed findings regarding the relevance of non-financial performance (NFM) measures to evaluate and reward long-term time horizon employees. Using proprietary data from an auto dealership organization, we show that financial measures (FM) are weighted more for bonus than they are weighted for merit raise and promotion but NFM are weighted more than FM for merit raise and promotion. Thus, the temporal orientations of the measures and incentives seem to be aligned: the short-term (long-term) nature of FM (NFM) parallel’s the time horizon of the incentives. Next, our exploratory research questions find that for bonuses, both FM and NFM exert similar levels of significant and positive influence on junior and senior managers. But for promotions, the influence of FM is insignificant for both groups. In contrast, the influence of NFM on promotions is not only significant for both groups but is significantly greater for junior managers than it is for senior managers. That is, the evaluations of NFM for senior managers are less influential on their promotion than they are for junior managers suggesting that promotions for senior managers are often based on factors other than their formal performances.

Refers to previous research to suggest that US commercial bank managers use discretion to “manage” regulatory capital and that accounting discretion can influence a bank’s investment opportunity set (IOS) and therefore its share price. Challenges the assumption that using accounting discretion to manipulate contracting variables will only result in a redistribution of wealth. Develops a mathematical model based on Feltham and Ohlson (1995) and uses it to explore the bank manager’s optimal investment in risky assets, the constraint on investment choice produced by minimum regulatory capital requirements and how accounting discretion can reduce this. Shows that regulatory requirements do constrain a bank’s IOS but that discretion (e.g. over loan loss provisions) can only mitigate this if dividend and financing policies depend on the discretionary components.

This research is a 6-year extension of Bernardi's (2005) initial ranking of the top ethics authors in accounting; it also represents a broadening of the scope of the original data into accounting's top-40 journals. While Bernardi only considered publications in business-ethics journals in his initial ranking, we developed a methodology to identify ethics articles in accounting's top-40 journals. The purpose of this research is to provide a more complete list of accounting's ethics authors for use by authors, administrators, and other stakeholders. In this study, 26 business-ethics and accounting's top-40 journals were analyzed for a 23-year period between 1986 through 2008. Our data indicate that 16.8 percent of the 4,680 colleagues with either a PhD or DBA who teach accounting at North American institutions had authored/coauthored one ethics article and only 6.3 percent had authored/coauthored more than one ethics article in the 66 journals we examined. Consequently, 83.2 percent of the PhDs and DBAs in accounting had not authored/coauthored even one ethics article.

Purpose – This chapter reflects on the interpretation and effects of the term intersectionality within the academy and across a broad spectrum of institutional and grassroots environments in which it is operationalized and deployed.

Design/methodology/approach – Based on the authors’ experiences within the academy and their respective participation as researchers and organizers within feminist, queer, and racial and economic justice movements, the chapter surveys the rhetorical, political, and organizational uses of intersectionality across these realms.

Findings – Five general challenges to intersectional practice are identified and described: misidentification, appropriation, institutionalization, reification, and operationalization. The authors trace these challenges across the academy, grassroots movements, and nonprofit organizations.

Originality/value – Offers a new articulation of intersectional practice as the application of scholarly or social movement methodologies aimed at intersectional and sustainable social justice outcomes.

It is not widely understood how much society, even the world, loses because managers are not sufficiently competent. Part of the reason for the problem is that managers are not adequately aware of the importance, the implications, and the scope, of the “leadership” issues that should enter their decisions. This paper briefly presents three basic guideline questions for this leadership component, which should be considered in every decision, together with the technical/functional component. The three guideline questions, with great depth of meaning, serve as reminders of all the issues to consider. They can be applied by managers immediately, to improve decisions, based on their own experience. Because such application raises questions about what else might be useful to think about, the basic guidelines motivate to further learning.

Reports of a number of countries imposing a limited ban on the use of D.D.T. have appeared from time to time in the B.F.J., but in the last few months, what was a trickle seems to have become an avalanche. In Canada, for example, relatively extensive restrictions apply from January 1st, permitting D.D.T. for insect control in only 12 agricultural crops, compared with 62 previously; there is a reduction of maximum levels for most fruits to 1 ppm. Its cumulative properties in fat are recognized and the present levels of 7 ppm in fat of cattle, sheep and pigs are to remain, but no trace is permitted in milk, butter, cheese, eggs, ice cream, other dairy products, nor potatoes. A U.S. Commission has advised that D.D.T. should be gradually phased out and completely banned in two years' time, followed by the Report of the Advisory Committee on Pesticides and Other Toxic Chemicals recommending withdrawal in Britain of some of the present uses of D.D.T. (also aldrin and dieldrin) on farm crops when an alternative becomes available. Further recommendations include an end to D.D.T. in paints, lacquers, oil‐based sprays and in dry cleaning; and the banning of small retail packs of D.D.T. and dieldrin for home use in connection with moth‐proofing or other insect control. The Report states that “domestic users are often unaware that using such packs involve the risk of contaminating prepared food immediately before it is eaten”.