Search results
1 – 10 of 18
Abstract
Details
Keywords
Abstract
Details
Keywords
Abstract
Details
Keywords
Abstract
Details
Keywords
Abstract
Details
Keywords
Benjamin R. Harris and Michelle S. Millet
The purpose of this paper is to critique the current wave of naming cultures in information literacy practice, the relationship between information literacy, literacy theory, and…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to critique the current wave of naming cultures in information literacy practice, the relationship between information literacy, literacy theory, and fluency theory, and suggests alternative conceptualizations for information seeking behavior.
Design/methodology/approach
After conducting literature and website reviews, a survey was posted on the Survey Monkey commercial site and librarians were invited to participate. The resulting analysis offers a synthesis of the literature and survey statistics.
Findings
Fewer programs than expected use “information fluency” as the defining factor in their library instruction programs. However, responses to the survey were useful in thinking about ways to retain a focus on information literacy theory in light of alternate naming conventions.
Research limitations/implications
With over 200 respondents, the quantitative research component is healthy though clearly not exhaustive. Future researchers may wish to focus their quantitative research on specific locations or types of libraries.
Originality/value
While a number of writers have presented practical and theoretical work related to information fluency, few authors chose to question the existence of fluency standards or the assessment of these standards. In addition, the researchers respond to concerns about linear and hierarchical constructions of literacy by offering an alternate model.
Details
Keywords
Janet L. Hartley, Michelle D. Lane and Edward A. Duplaga
To understand the differences in perceived barriers to e‐auctions both in US buying organizations that have adopted e‐auctions and in both those that have not.
Abstract
Purpose
To understand the differences in perceived barriers to e‐auctions both in US buying organizations that have adopted e‐auctions and in both those that have not.
Design/methodology/approach
Four propositions were developed based on the literature and case studies in eight companies that used e‐auctions for sourcing. Measures were developed for lack of e‐auction knowledge, lack of supplier participation, information security concerns and importance of supplier relationships. Survey data were gathered from 163 US National Association of Purchasing Management members. GLM‐MANOVA was used to test the propositions.
Findings
E‐auction adopters perceive information security to be less of a concern than non‐adopters. No significant differences were found between adopters and non‐adopters on the buyer's e‐auction knowledge, lack of supplier participation, and the importance of supplier relationships.
Research limitations/implications
The small sample size limits statistical power, so small differences may not have been detected. The results may not generalize beyond the sample.
Practical implications
Supply managers should focus on reducing information security concerns within their organizations to facilitate adoption.
Originality/value
No published studies have explored the differences between adopters and non‐adopters of e‐auctions to identify barriers.
Details
Keywords
Michelle Shumate and Liz Howard
In this case, lessons from the Chicago Benchmarking Collaborative illustrate key principles of collaborative action and the importance of using data to achieve SMART goals.In…
Abstract
In this case, lessons from the Chicago Benchmarking Collaborative illustrate key principles of collaborative action and the importance of using data to achieve SMART goals.
In 2015, the Chicago Benchmarking Collaborative (CBC) was a network of seven agencies in Chicago, Illinois, serving 12,000 low-income residents. Each of the agencies had early childhood, school-age children, and adult education programs. At the prompting of the Chicago Community Trust, they came together to (1) benchmark their education programs outputs and outcomes; (2) learn and share best practices through developing a common set of metrics and measurements and implementing these measurements into a case management software system; and (3) share the costs of the case management software system to be used for program evaluation and continuous quality improvement.
Three aspects of CBC are particularly noteworthy. First, there are no joint program activities or clients among these agencies. Their exchange is limited to sharing data and other information. This makes CBC distinct from collaborations formed to begin a program or to advocate for a policy. Second, the group requires each agency to enter data on a timely basis and to set SMART goals based on the data reports. The agencies are held mutually accountable for their work to achieve their own SMART goals during the year and report on progress. Third, CBC used monetary incentives to ensure that data entry and SMART goal action remained a priority for each agency.
Details
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1562e/1562e967296a8d8329bf59e30a25295b583517d4" alt="Kellogg School of Management"