Search results

The purpose of this paper is to progress operations management theory and practice by organising contributions to knowledge production, in industrial sustainability, from disparate researcher communities. It addresses the principal question “What scholarly dialogues can be explicated in the emerging research field of industrial sustainability?” and sub-questions: what are the descriptive characteristics of the evidence base? and what thematic lines of scientific inquiry underpin the body of knowledge?

Using an evidenced-based approach, a systematic review (SR) of 574 articles from 62 peer-reviewed scientific journals associated with industrial sustainability is conducted.

This paper distinguishes three prevailing dialogues in the field of industrial sustainability, and uses Kuhn’s theory of paradigms to propose its pre-paradigmatic scientific status. The three dialogues: “productivity and innovation”, “corporate citizenship” and “economic resilience” are conjectured to privilege efficiency strategies as a mode of incremental reductionism. Industrial sustainability espouses the grand vision of a generative, restorative and net positive economy, and calls for a future research trajectory to address institutional and systemic issues regarding scaling-up and transition, through transformative strategies.

The review is limited by the nature of the inquiries addressed in the literatures by specific researcher communities between 1992 and 2014.

This study performs the first SR in the field of industrial sustainability, synthesises prevailing scholarly dialogues and provides an evaluation of the scientific status of the field.

The purpose of this paper is to argue that academic librarians must learn to use web service APIs and to introduce APIs to a non-technical audience.

This paper is a viewpoint that argues for the importance of APIs by identifying the shifting paradigms of libraries in the digital age. Showing that the primary function of librarians will be to share and curate digital content, the paper shows that APIs empower a librarian to do that.

The implementation of web service APIs is within the reach of librarians who are not trained as software developers. Online documentation and free courses offer sufficient training for librarians to learn these new ways of sharing and curating digital content.

The argument of this paper depends upon an assumption of a shift in the paradigm of libraries away from collections of materials to access points of information. The need for libraries to learn APIs depends upon a new role for librarians that anecdotal evidence supports is rising.

By learning a few technical skills, librarians can help patrons find relevant information within a world of proliferating information sources.

The literature on APIs is highly technical and overwhelming for those without training in software development. This paper translates technical language for those who have not programmed before.

Recently, the author facilitated a particularly difficult organization development (OD) intervention with a private non‐profit organization. It was an organization whose staff and governing board were deeply divided by interpersonal conflict. Although he tried to avoid it, the author found himself pulled into the politics of this organization. This intervention caused him to ask the question: Who is the client in an OD intervention? Is it the person who hired him? The entire organization? The organization's board? OD practitioners, as reflected in the academic literature, either provide conflicting views on this point or ignore the question altogether. Citing quotations from many prominent OD practitioners, including Golembiewski, Bennis, Burke, French and Bell, and Weisbord, the author searches for a definitive answer in the literature. In this paper, which is part literature review and part case study, he takes a critical look at the OD literature on this topic; ties OD to Jean Jacques Rousseau's concept of the general will; writes an in‐depth case study; and provides his reflections on this issue. The author concludes that within a highly politicized and contentious organization, it can be highly problematic for the OD practitioner to work for the organization as a whole, since he/she may, at times, be forced to take sides.

Follows up an earlier article which held that consumer power would change the market, forcing manufacturers and retailers to respond to social and ethical concerns. Shows that, in practice, the trend has been driven by industry rather than the consumer, as conscious consumerism has been hard hit by the recession of the late 1980s/early 1990s, whereas the long‐term policies initiated by industry are now coming to maturity. Considers the social implications, the cost of manufacturers and discusses recent research which gives a confusing picture of the degree to which companies have accepted and are acting on their social responsibilities. Suggests that only the top 25 corporations have set a really strong lead. Discusses the proposed introduction of the Fairtrade Mark at the end of 1993 which will indicate that a product has been assessed against social and environmental criteria and conforms to a high standard which provides genuine benefits to poor products.

There is a rising tide of ethical consumerism, encouraged by economic affluence but also by an awareness of personal and global issues. Green consumerism is the strongest manifestation of this trend to date but there is evidence that other social issues, beyond the environment, are subjects of public concern. The food industry is already on the receiving end of serious questioning about various aspects of its social purpose and environmental sustainability. This article examines these issues in more detail.

The purpose of the study is to test the utility of a taxonomy of innovation based on perceived characteristics in the context of healthcare by exploring the extent to which discrete innovation types could be distinguished from each other in terms of process antecedents.

A qualitative approach was adopted to explore the process antecedents of nine exemplar cases of “challenging”, “under‐cover” and “readily‐adopted” healthcare innovations. Data were collected by semi‐structured interview and from secondary sources, and content analysed according to a theoretically informed framework of innovation process. Cluster analysis was applied to determine whether innovation types could be distinguished on the basis of process characteristics.

The findings provide moderate support for the proposition that innovations differentiated on the basis of the way they are perceived by potential users exhibit different process characteristics. Innovations exhibiting characteristics previously believed negatively to impact adoption may be successfully adopted but by a different configuration of processes than by innovations exhibiting a different set of characteristics.

The findings must be treated with caution because the sample consists of self‐selected cases of successful innovation and is limited by sample size. Nevertheless, the study sheds new light on important process differences in healthcare innovation.

The paper offers a heuristic device to aid clinicians and managers to better understand the relatively novel task of promoting and managing innovation in healthcare. The paper advances the argument that there is under‐exploited opportunity for cross‐disciplinary organisational learning for innovation management in the NHS. If efficiency and quality improvement targets are to be met through a strategy of encouraging innovation, it may be advantageous for clinicians and managers to reflect on what this study found mostly to be absent from the processes of the innovations studied, notably management commitment in the form of norms, resource allocation and top management support.

This paper is based on original empirical work. It extends previous adoption related studies by applying a configurational approach to innovation attributes to offer new insights on healthcare innovation and highlight the importance of attention to process.

Crop yield variability is a defining characteristic of agriculture. Variations in yield and production are strongly influenced by fluctuations in weather. Concern has been expressed about the consequences of the buildup of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere on long-term climate patterns, including the frequency of extreme events, and the subsequent effect on crop yields and yield variability. In this chapter we present background on the variability issue, including a review of the physical and human dimensions of climate change as related to agricultural production. We also present the results of two recent studies; the first focuses on the effects of climatic variability on yields and the second on the effects of increases in extreme weather events on agriculture. The first study shows that temperature and precipitation changes affect both the mean and variances of crop yields, usually in opposite ways, e.g. under increasing temperatures, corn yields decrease and yield variance increases, while increases in precipitation increase corn yields and reduce variability. In the second study, increases in the frequency and strength of one type of extreme event, the El Niño-Southern Oscillation or ENSO, results in economica damages to agriculture. These damages can be averted by using forecasts of such events in agricultural planting decisions.

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Tenn. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.

A pæan of joy and triumph which speaks for itself, and which is a very true indication of how the question of poisonous adulteration is viewed by certain sections of “the trade,” and by certain of the smaller and irresponsible trade organs, has appeared in print. It would seem that the thanks of “the trade” are due to the defendants in the case heard at the Liverpool Police Court for having obtained an official acknowledgment that the use of salicylic acid and of other preservatives, even in large amounts, in wines and suchlike articles, is not only allowable, but is really necessary for the proper keeping of the product. It must have been a charming change in the general proceedings at the Liverpool Court to listen to a “preservatives” case conducted before a magistrate who evidently realises that manufacturers, in these days, in order to make a “decent” profit, have to use the cheapest materials they can buy, and cannot afford to pick and choose; and that they have therefore “been compelled” to put preservatives into their articles so as to prevent their going bad. He was evidently not to be misled by the usual statement that such substances should not be used because they are injurious to health— as though that could be thought to have anything to do with the much more important fact that the public “really want” to have an article supplied to them which is cheap, and yet keeps well. Besides, many doctors and professors were brought forward to prove that they had never known a case of fatal poisoning due to the use of salicylic acid as a preservative. Unfortunately, it is only the big firms that can manage to bring forward such admirable and learned witnesses, and the smaller firms have to suffer persecution by faddists and others who attempt to obtain the public notice by pretending to be solicitous about the public health. Altogether the prosecution did not have a pleasant time, for the magistrate showed his appreciation of the evidence of one of the witnesses by humorously rallying him about his experiments with kittens, as though any‐one could presume to judge from experiments on brute beasts what would be the effect on human beings—the “lords of creation.” Everyone reading the evidence will be struck by the fact that the defendant stated that he had once tried to brew without preservatives, but with the only result that the entire lot “went bad.” All manufacturers of his own type will sympathise with him, since, of course, there is no practicable way of getting over this trouble except by the use of preservatives; although the above‐mentioned faddists are so unkind as to state that if everything is clean the article will keep. But this must surely be sheer theory, for it cannot be supposed that there can be any manufacturer of this class of article who would be foolish enough to think he could run his business at a profit, and yet go to all the expense of having the returned empties washed out before refilling, and of paying the heavy price asked for the best crude materials, when he has to compete with rival firms, who can use practically anything, and yet turn out an article equal in every way from a selling point of view, and one that will keep sufficiently, by the simple (and cheap) expedient of throwing theory on one side, and by pinning their faith to a preservative which has now received the approval of a magistrate. Manufacturers who use preservatives, whether they are makers of wines or are dairymen, and all similar tradesmen, should join together to protect their interests, for, as they must all admit, “the welfare of the trade” is the chief thing they have to consider, and any other interest must come second, if it is to come in at all. Now is the time for action, for the Commission appointed to inquire into the use of preservatives in foods has not yet given its decision, and there is still time for a properly‐conducted campaign, backed up by those “influential members of the trade” of whom we hear so much, and aided by such far‐reaching and brilliant magisterial decisions, to force these opinions prominently forward, in spite of the prejudice of the public; and to insure to the trades interested the unfettered use of preservatives,—which save “the trade” hundreds of thousands of pounds every year, by enabling the manufacturers to dispense with heavily‐priced apparatus, with extra workmen and with the use of expensive materials,—and which are urgently asked for by the public,—since we all prefer to have our foods drugged than to have them pure.