In 2017, companies woke up to realize that they were in the process of being disintermediated by West Coast technology players, from Google, Uber and Amazon to Facebook and Apple…
Abstract
Purpose
In 2017, companies woke up to realize that they were in the process of being disintermediated by West Coast technology players, from Google, Uber and Amazon to Facebook and Apple. Boardroom conversations were all about the need to make a play in technology, and CEOs, CHROs and heads of Talent all began recruiting Chief Digital Officers. However, newly minted Chief Digital Officers have found themselves in new, often strange, and overly ornamental and nonfunctional environments. This paper aims to discuss how to set a Chief Digital Officer up for success.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper presents interviews with over 100 senior Digital and Workforce Technology executives.
Findings
The emergence of the Chief Digital Officer is fast tracking the evolution of old industries as they compete in a tech-first world. However, without creating a proper support function, many CEOs, CHROs and Heads of Talent will find themselves cleaning up a mess rather than basking in the sun of a digital transformation. Being able to spot what type of workplace IT executive fits your company, along with having the right expectations and support in place for them to be successful, will allow you to have happy, more engaged and more productive employees for years to come.
Originality/value
If you plan to operate in a world of digital innovation and in the process hire a Chief Digital Officer, here are the things you need to know to ensure this executive’s success.
Details
Keywords
Michael L. Barnett, Irene Henriques and Bryan W. Husted
In this chapter, we explain why firms selectively responding to the most powerful, legitimate, and urgent demands of their stakeholders will not bring about sustainability and…
Abstract
In this chapter, we explain why firms selectively responding to the most powerful, legitimate, and urgent demands of their stakeholders will not bring about sustainability and offer suggestions on what we should do in light of this shortcoming. Sustainability issues tend to be wicked problems that require cooperation across parties and over time to define and resolve. Stakeholder pressures can bring sustainability to the fore, but government intervention is necessary to drive meaningful action to resolve such issues. Without government intervention, self-interested stakeholders can pressure firms to move away from the complex, long-term challenges of wicked problems. Yet, stakeholder pressure is also necessary, as without it, industries may self-regulate in self-serving ways. Our analysis thus suggests that collaboration between business, government, and other stakeholders is necessary to resolve the wicked problems of sustainability. We therefore urge the stakeholder literature to move beyond its libertarian underpinnings by (re)incorporating government into models of effective corporate governance.
Details
Keywords
Suzy Braye, David Orr and Michael Preston‐Shoot
The purpose of this article is to report the findings from research into the governance of adult safeguarding policy and practice in England, with particular focus on interagency…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this article is to report the findings from research into the governance of adult safeguarding policy and practice in England, with particular focus on interagency partnership arrangements expressed through Safeguarding Adults Boards.
Design/methodology/approach
The study comprised a systematic search and thematic analysis of English‐language literature on adult safeguarding governance, a survey of Safeguarding Adults Board documentation, and key informant interviews and workshops with professionals involved in adult protection.
Findings
The effectiveness of adult safeguarding governance arrangements has not been subject to prior formal evaluation and thus the literature provided little research‐led evidence of good practice. The survey and workshops, however, revealed a rich and complex pattern of arrangements spanning a number of dimensions – the goals and purpose of interagency working, the structures of boards, their membership, chairing and rules of engagement, their functions, and their accountabilities.
Research limitations/implications
The research focus here is England, and thus does not incorporate learning from other jurisdictions. Whilst the research scrutinises the extent to which Boards practise empowerment, service users and carers are not directly involved in the fieldwork aspects of this study. In view of the absence of outcomes evidence identified, there remains a need to investigate the impacts of different forms of governance.
Practical implications
Drawing on this research and on governance frameworks in the context of related interagency fields, the article identifies standards to benchmark the approach to governance taken by Safeguarding Adult Boards.
Originality/value
The benchmarking framework will enable Safeguarding Adults Boards to audit, evaluate, and further develop a range of robust governance arrangements.