Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between privatization of state‐owned enterprises (SOEs), organizational change and performance. It explores the processes by which privatization affects corporate performance through the internal changes within organizations in a developing country context.

The methodology involved the use of a survey questionnaire. Responses were obtained from 86 managers in 86 organizations, comprised of SOEs, privatized firms and private enterprises in Indonesia.

Cross‐sectional analysis shows that there had been a statistical significant difference across the types of ownership pertaining to organizational elements that were expected to change. The evidence suggested that privatization brought about important alignments among the organization's goals, design elements and resources and between the organization and its competitive environment.

The implications of the study are discussed in relation to the organizational changes that take place in the transition from public to private sector ownership. The study contributes to our understanding about the relationship between ownership‐performance by providing an organizational change perspective on the examination of privatization‐performance effect.

The paper provides insights into how privatization processes alter the behavior, incentives and performance of formerly SOEs in Indonesia.

Privatisation is occurring at various levels within government in many countries around the world. So extensive is the reform programme that the term “re‐inventing government” has taken on a fashionable gloss.

The project – AskingBristol – uses university students to connect third sector organizations with particular “asks” to organizations which might be able to respond with “offers”. The authors describe the task of the experiment as being an attempt to embed students and their universities within the cities that they are based in, but are often not really very connected to.

This reflective report on practice describes an initiative aimed at producing a piece of “social infrastructure”. Written by the four people involved, the authors theorize and evaluate what we have done so far and what we hope to do in future.

Over two phases, it has had some success, and we think represents a concrete approach to thinking about how “civic” ideas might gain traction within universities. Using ideas about social networks, boundary objects and infrastructure the authors explore the opportunities and problems of such a project, stressing that it allows co-ordination between a wide variety of people and organizations that do not necessarily share common interests.

This is one “experiment”, in one city, but it demonstrates the possibilities of getting “civic” universities engaged with local third sector organizations.

If it became a piece of social infrastructure, such a project could embed ideas about “civic”, “impact”, “engagement” and so on into the routines of the city and the university.

Though Asking Bristol cannot solve the problems of the city, it shows that we can transfer resources, time, skills and space to where they are needed.

The authors do not think anything like this has been attempted before, and hope that sharing it will stimulate some comparisons, and perhaps some dissemination of the idea.

To compare the profitability and technical efficiency of firms in a monopoly industry, airports, operating with different degrees of market power and under differing regulatory regimes, minimalist in New Zealand and interventionist in Australia.

Unlike previous privatisation studies, this study measures efficiency and profitability separately. Using data envelopment analysis (DEA), the technical efficiency of privatised airports is assessed, and this independent measure is used in regression analyses to determine whether efficiency, regulation or privatisation is related to airport profitability.

For firms with monopolistic characteristics operating under minimalist regulation, profitability is related to market power, not efficiency improvements. For firms operating in a regulated environment, profitability is related to regulation, which constrains market power but does not impede efficiency.

This study is limited by its small sample size and its generalisability due to its single industry and regional focus. However, the findings support assertions that the impact of privatisation cannot be assessed independently of industry structure and regulation.

Policy makers considering SOE privatisation in non‐competitive markets should introduce either competition or regulation if firm efficiency is a desired outcome.

Academics and policy makers should be aware that privatisation and competition are not only complementary, as per the extant literature, but they are essential bedfellows. In the absence of competition, regulation is required to control for market power.

The European telecommunications sector is undergoing major structural change in the face of new technology, privatisation and European Commission directives requiring market liberalisation. This study considers the comparative performance of the major European telecommunications operators between 1978 and 1998. This period encompasses an era of state monopolies, market liberalisation initiatives and a number of privatisations. The objectives are to assess: the extent so far to which market liberalisation and privatisation have impacted on the efficiency with which telecommunications services are provided in Europe; and changes in the performance of the different telecommunications operators over time with a view to providing an insight into the comparative efficiency performance of the different telecommunications operators in Europe. Performance is measured in terms of profit margins and labour and total factor productivity.

The purpose of this study is to examine the COVID-19 pandemic risk disclosures in a sample of annual reports of Australian public universities. These universities rely heavily on fee-paying onshore overseas students. Analysing these risk disclosures is essential to understanding the COVID-19 crisis and the implications for organisational change.

Document analysis and content analysis of the 2019 annual reports of all Victorian public universities were undertaken to identify the disclosure of COVID-19 risk impacts. Applying Laughlin's Habermasian insights of change, the study explores the pathways of change adopted by universities to overcome the risk impacts. However, financial risk disclosures about income from this source were virtually non-existent.

Any risk associated with COVID-19 disclosed was minimal in a qualitative, neutral and constant format. The quality of disclosures was low. Media statements, however, pointed to significant income loss and suggested a strategy of substantial cost-cutting, including employee redundancies, which we identified as morphostatic changes of universities to overcome the risk impacts.

The study reveals the risk associated with sector's aggressive growth strategy, jeopardising their financial viability and quality of teaching and research.

The findings provide insights to the Australian higher education sector. The low quality of external risk disclosures of these universities suggests an urgent need for transformation.

Australian public universities play a crucial role in society. This role will be diminished by a failure to disclose and manage significant risks adequately.

The purpose of this paper is to reveal a qualitative researcher’s journey into finding her sense of self during a trial she faced while conducting her dissertation research.

Indigenous research methodologies (IRM) mixed with an autoethnography were used. A critical reflexivity position, with respect to being in the field, was adopted, melding in the Universe, the Sun and the Earth as objects that the author can talk and interact with. This reflexivity was captured within the letter to the Universe.

Three outcomes are discussed. Notably, the implications of this work with respect to power-relations and gender. The issue of being in the field is then discussed. Finally, untangling the practical implications of using IRM/autoethnography as a combined method is presented.

The letter to the Universe offers a guide of sorts to other qualitative researchers, via one person’s experience in the field. The letter is, in the end, a cautionary story for others, acknowledging that the author can respond to a trial in a gendered fashion, that one needs to be humble along with being persistent, flexible and resourceful toward achieving “good” research.

As a Western, White woman scholar, who circles Indigenous influences, the author demonstrated (through this letter) one possible way of embracing, and acknowledging, IRM without appropriating it.

The purpose of this study was to explore the cultural and structural conditions that influence male and female physicians’ career choices and career expectations. Although women constitute 59 percent of the physicians and 55 percent of the specialists in Finland in 2014, the rate of women in oto-rhino-laryngology (38 percent) was one of the lowest among the specialties. The data consist of semi-structured interviews with young physicians (N = 19), who have entered a career in oto-rhino-laryngology (ORL) in Finland.

The results point to three features which characterize the career pattern in the specialty. First, the specialty is not one that draws students to medicine per se but rather one that is chosen during medical training. The decision to specialize in ORL was by many respondents framed as a “coincidence,” while others were attracted by the diverse character of the specialty. Second, the skills needed for being a “good” practitioner were defined as handiness, courage, and social skills, but these were not defined in a gendered way. Third, the career prospects for women within the specialty were defined by a neutralizing or a gendering framework. The neutralizing framework was represented by the pipeline argument which suggests that there is a temporary time lag in women’s representation in higher positions and that women are advancing steadily in the academic and administrative pipeline. The gendering framework pointed to the male ethos of the surgical tasks in the specialty as a barrier for women’s advancement in those areas. This chapter concludes that the pipeline view belittles existing gender inequalities in men’s and women’s medical careers and views gender differences as temporary maladjustments rather than inherent features of gendered organizations.