Search results

Josh Williams is a Student at the NAU who has driven buses on campus and wants to improve the transportation on campus. He is convinced that purchasing a new type of bus that is more fuel efficient, has larger capacity, better designed for boarding, and has a longer life is worth the higher purchase cost. He sets out to prove it by creating a discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis. Since many of the estimates for the DCF analysis are uncertain, he decides to perform a Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) analysis. Students are asked to step into Josh’s role and perform the analysis.

Josh Williams was a Student in the authors’ MBA program. Both authors teach in this program and one author was the Advisor for Net Impact and worked with Josh to present his idea to the university administration. The authors have changed a name or two but otherwise, the case describes a real situation in a real organization without disguise.

The authors have used this case in a first semester MBA-Applied Management course, Decision Modeling and Simulation. Students already have experience with DCF analysis and have been introduced to MCS. With this case, students apply MCS at the conclusion of a three-week module on predictive analytics. Students have run at least two MCS models and have become comfortable with the software. The case would also be appropriate for a senior-level undergraduate course such as business analytics or management science. It might also be useful for other courses that include the MCS modeling technique learning objectives such as project management.

This case provides an opportunity for students to perform an MCS analysis. MCS is useful when many of the inputs to a DCF analysis (or any model) have been estimated and the modeler is concerned that the estimates are uncertain and could perhaps be a range of values. MCS can be used to understand the effect of this uncertainty on NPV which in turn may affect the decision. The case could also be used without MCS focusing just on the DCF analysis with deterministic sensitivity analysis.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the link between corruption and government debt through a regime-based approach.

The empirical analysis makes use of a panel of 120 countries, spanning the period 1999–2015. The study makes use of the Panel Smooth Transition Regression (PSTR) methodological approach, as well as two alternative measures of corruption.

The empirical results document that the relationship between corruption and debt is non-linear, while a strong threshold effect was present as well. Public debt appears to respond faster to a high corruption regime compared to a low corruption regime, while an increase in the size of the shadow economy, government expenses, the inflation rate, interest payments on debt and military expenditure all increased the debt to GDP ratio. By contrast, an increase in GDP per capita, the secondary school enrollment ratio and the ratio of tax revenues to GDP led to a fall in the debt to GDP ratio. The findings survive certain robust checks when the role of the 2008 financial crisis is explicitly considered, as well as when two separate country samples were considered, i.e. developed vs developing countries.

Governments should aim to control both corruption and the size of the shadow economy if they really wish to reduce any high levels of their public debt. As debt levels respond faster to high corruption regimes, it is necessary that measures to reduce corruption are complemented by higher GDP per capita growth rates, enrolment rates and higher tax revenues.

The novelty of the paper is that it investigates for the first time, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the presence of non-linearity between corruption and government debt. It proposes non-linear panel cointegration and causality tests, as well as a non-linear panel error correction model that allows for smooth changes between regimes, hence, examining causal relationships in each regime separately.

This paper aims to focus on the absence of a direct criterion for the ideal level of net working capital (NWC) for which Acikgoz (2014) theoretically demonstrates that this NWC can be treated in a manner that allows the assessment of repayments. The study presents and discusses a new multiplier (i.e. the afa coefficient), defined as the ratio of cash equivalents ratio to NWC, measured as the percentage of short-term liabilities (Acikgoz, 2014). In other words, the study explores whether NWC could be an indicator of the ratios of corporate short-term bank credit to STL and of bank credit to total assets.

Sectoral panel regressions are used in the case of Turkey, spanning the period 1996-2013, on data obtained from the Central Bank of Turkey. Through second-generation panel unit root tests for cross-section dependence and panel cointegration methodologies, the results illustrate the statistical significance of the CD statistics, indicating the presence of cross dependence, the presence of non-stationary variables and the presence of a long-run association for the variables under study.

The findings document that a transformed variable of NWC is more substantive than the explicatory quality of the current ratio and may potentially be used in the prediction of bank credit in corporate liabilities.

The afa coefficient shows the ratio of liquid assets to NWC as a percentage of STL. The results illustrate that this coefficient plays a significant role for corporate bank credit usage in the case of the Turkish sectoral analysis.

In this chapter we present an indicative exemplar of continuity between economics and sociology. This exemplar involves Adam Smith and Max Weber, two major protagonists in the establishment and development of economics and sociology. The point of departure is that Weber's work implies substantial continuities or serendipitous points of overlap with Smith's. The major continuity lies in Weber's elaboration and specification of Smith's political economy into social economics. This is epitomized by Weber's extension of Smith's implicit ‘economic sociology’ or ‘sociological economics’ dealing with the social setting of the economy into an explicit social economics, as an analysis of the ‘sociological categories of economic action’. There is some gap in exploring this continuity in the present literature on the history of economic thought and methodology, and this chapter contributes toward spanning this gap.

The authors of this book (hereafter BLS) reject the notion that the term “capitalism” denotes a unique type of economic system and distinguish instead among four forms it can take: state-guided capitalism, oligarchic capitalism, big-firm capitalism, and entrepreneurial capitalism. As suggested by the terms “good capitalism, bad capitalism” in the title, they examine both the positive and the normative implications of each type of capitalism and how consistent each type has been, in the various economies that adopted it, with the overall objective of promoting growth and prosperity. This book is thus about economic systems, the principles on which they are built, and economic growth. There are occasional references to authors of the classical, neoclassical, and Keynesian eras such as Richard Cantillon, John M. Keynes, T. Robert Malthus, David Ricardo, Jean-Baptiste Say, Joseph Schumpeter, Adam Smith, and Max Weber. Some of these are accompanied by brief quotations, but (as is to be expected from the very different interests of the authors of this book) no textual analysis of them or speculations about their influence on the history of economic thought. Given the authors’ emphasis on the effects of capitalism on economic growth, they also briefly discuss early theorists of economic growth such as Roy Harrod, Evsey Domar, Nicholas Kaldor, Robert Solow, and Trevor Swan and – in much greater detail – the theoretical, empirical, and historical work on growth theory that followed them, up to and including the “new growth theory” of Arrow, Romer, Lucas, and others. Chapters 2 and 3, titled “Why economic growth matters” and “What drives economic growth?,” introduce the general reader to the importance of economic growth to both developed and developing economies and the essentials of modern growth theory. While these are valuable supplements to the book for readers not familiar with them, these chapters are not discussed here since their main features are found in textbooks on economic development, macroeconomics, and growth theory.

Surveys, from an American perspective, the existing literature on economic explanations of the behaviour of universities and scholars. The modern literature is put in historical perspective introduced by a brief discussion of the positions of two of the earliest and most distinguished contributors to the literature: Adam Smith and Max Weber. Discusses the human capital and implicit contracts literatures of the behaviour of scholars, the latter elaborated in terms of the issue of tenure. The most common theoretical economic analysis of the university is the view that it is best thought of as a non‐profit organization. Discusses variants of this view, with special attention to the literature on rent‐seeking in academe. Goes on to the empirical literature on the economics of academe in the areas of academic institutions, academic earnings functions, the earnings and status of minority scholars and academic production functions. Briefly considers the relevance of the current literature to the Althoff system, suggesting that Althoff′s able, trusted advisers, and his system of institutes, may have allowed him to avoid several inefficiences that have been identified by economists as present in other academic institutions. Although the centralization of decision making in the hands of one decision maker may be efficient if the decision maker is exceptionally able, more commonly the most efficient system will be a decentralized system that allows for greater diversity and competition. Concludes with a discussion of how hypotheses on the efficiency (and fairness) of various aspects of the Althoff system could, in principle, be tested.

Gender balance has been a declared goal in business and society for decades as gender diversity leads to more equality and better decision-making, enhances financial performance of organizations, and fosters creativity and innovation. Although there is a steady upward trend in the number of women actively participating in the workplace, there is still a dearth of women in top leadership positions. This motivates a closer look at the reasons why this happens. Stigmatization – a social process of disapproval based on stereotypes or particular distinguishing characteristics of individuals (e.g. gender) – has been recognized as one of the primary explanations for the barriers to career advancement of women. This chapter aims to address workplace inequality by analysing different sources of stigma women face in the workplace. Previous research has mostly focused on visible sources of stigma, such as gender or race/ethnicity. We propose to go beyond visible sources of stigma and expand the focus to other physical (e.g. physical appearance, age, childbearing age), emotional (e.g. mental health) and societal (e.g. flexibility) sources of stigma. We are especially interested in the consequences of stigma for women in the workplace. Stigmatization of women is a multi-level process, so this chapter focuses on the antecedents (sources of stigma) and outcomes (consequences of stigma) for women at the individual level, organizational level and the societal level. The proposed chapter will make contributions to the areas of management, diversity and gender studies.

To provide a small overview of genre theory and its associated concepts and to show how genre theory has had its antecedents in certain parts of the social sciences and not in the humanities.

The chapter argues that the explanatory force of genre theory may be explained with its emphasis on everyday genres, de facto genres.

By providing an overview of genre theory, the chapter demonstrates the wealth and richness of forms of explanations in genre theory.

To advance the scholarly understanding of family firm management by outlining the Australian experience with “real” differences between family and non‐family firms.

Utilising data from 2,190 Australian SMEs, industry based analysis focused on whether family businesses differ significantly from non‐family businesses within the framework of multivariate regression models that control for size and age of the firm.

The level of difference with non‐family firms is industry specific, varied, and generally lower than reported in the past. Manufacturing is the industry with most differences.

There are fewer differences between family and non‐family firms than we have been led to believe. Methodologies that control for context are essential. Studies are needed that explain why family firms differ more with non‐family firms in some industries than they do in others. Studies that uncover the “real” differences between large family and non‐family firms are also called for as the results shown here may be specific to SMEs. Agency theory may be more appropriate to large rather than small firms.

The level of context and size of dataset utilised in this study is rarely seen in family business research. Its value lays in bringing “real” Australian differences to the attention of scholars, supporting the need for better methodologies, demonstrating the importance of industry and size as determinants of context and outlining the heterogeneous nature of family firms.

This study aims to demonstrate al-Biruni’s originality in the study of religion and the exploration of religious truth, while his firm stance on his religion effectively advocated his need to understand others more accurately.

This study is a review of al-Biruni’s literature that uses content analysis method in establishing al-Biruni’s approach in understanding other religions through three main methodologies. From these approaches, this paper advocates al-Biruni’s firm stance toward his own faith despite using a scientific study on Hindu, which is in contrary to other phenomenological scholars who find that religious truth is relative in nature.

Al-Biruni’s methods have proven that researchers are not necessarily required to dispose off their religious identity and commitment to faith, while simultaneously achieving objectivity and accuracy. Al-Biruni’s approach to understanding others may be seen as a remarkable early model of interfaith, intercultural and inter-civilizational dialogue seeking, eventually, to promote a harmonious co-existence within a highly polarized cultural and religious context. This inquiry demonstrates al-Biruni’s scholarly depth in his attempt to harmonize his methodology with the study of religious phenomena in compliance with Islam.

This study signifies al-Biruni’s intellectual background with his mastery of first-hand information as a solid basis and grounds for the effective understanding of others in a descriptive, systematic and comparative manner. This paper also signifies al-Biruni’s methods of understanding others without having to dispose off one’s religious identity and commitment to faith which could be exemplified by other religious scholars.