Search results

The purpose of this paper is to reflect on how representative the literature is in identifying industrial practice to designing product‐service systems (PSSs).

The paper analyses literature to report on the existing approaches used to design PSSs. A single exploratory case study approach, based on semi‐structured interviews and archival data analysis, was used to understand an existing product‐service organisation's approach to designing PSSs. A total of 12 senior managers were interviewed from a cross section of the organisation, to gain multiple perspectives on the PSS design process and ten company reports were analysed.

The research has identified that the PSS design process reported by literature is not representative, lacking inputs and outputs to some phases and feedback. In total, 18 inputs and 11 outputs have been identified from the case study that are not reported by the literature. These create five feedback loops within the PSS design process used by the case study organisation. This suggests that the PSS design process is cyclic and iterative and not sequential, as reported by existing literature.

This research is based on a single‐case study approach, limiting the ability to generalise findings, and does not provide a complete PSS design approach.

This research compares literature against industrial practice to PSS design, presenting insight to aid practitioner's design PSSs.

This paper fills a gap in the servitization and PSS literatures; evaluating the approaches reported by literature against existing industrial practice.

Aarhus Kommunes Biblioteker (Teknisk Bibliotek), Ingerslevs Plads 7, Aarhus, Denmark. Representative: V. NEDERGAARD PEDERSEN (Librarian).

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

Case information was mainly acquired through interviews with Richard Gammans, chief operating officer. Dr Gammans was a visiting professor at Fayetteville State University for a year, and two of the case authors developed personal friendships with Richard. Interviews were conducted over a two-year period as the accelerator got started. In addition, one author conducted a team-building session with the management team and one of the bio-startup researchers. An interview was also conducted with Clayton Duncan, chief executive officer, to gain his agreement with developing the case.

The Accele website included a write-up on each of the pharmaceutical startup companies. The write-up included a company summary, description of the science (disease and cure), the size of the market, results from testing, regulatory considerations and intellectual property. A literature review was conducted as the basis for the information on the pharmaceutical industry.

This case is about a biopharmaceutical accelerator founded in 2011 by two senior executives with experience in both large pharmaceutical companies and running biotech startup companies. The founders were successful in raising capital to start their first venture capital fund which they used to invest in four biotech startups. All four startups were working in very different disease areas. For example, one developed a drug to help with hearing loss that the department of defense was funding. Another of the startups discovered drug candidates that attack antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Biopharmaceutical accelerators were relatively new. They differed from business incubators because they invest in the startups and provide operational support, but the degree of support provided varies across accelerators. The Accele BioPharma accelerator operated in virtual, network type of organization, and Accele BioPharma provided primary strategic and operational management for the startups. The challenge in this case is to identify how the leaders managed the virtual network, and what additional resources were needed so that the management team could expand their ability to assist startups to get drugs approved by the food and drug administration.

This case is suitable recommended for undergraduate/graduate strategy, undergraduate/graduate organizational behavior, entrepreneurship and health-care management courses.

Institutional investors—insurance companies, pension funds, investment trust companies and unit trusts—have increased significantly and persistently their ownership of British industry. At the end of 1977 they owned approximately 46 per cent of the ordinary shares in UK quoted companies and in recent years have accounted for over 50 per cent of stock market turnover in UK equities. Their presence in the stock market has been associated with their ability to influence share prices, decide the outcome of takeover battles, and trade outside the London Stock Exchange. As major shareholders in public companies they have been encouraged to participate in managerial decision‐making. For corporate management, the growth of institutional shareholdings provides opportunities to utilise their voting power in takeover situations, encourage their support for the market value of the company, and use financial institutions as sources of new capital.

The following classified, annotated list of titles is intended to provide reference librarians with a current checklist of new reference books, and is designed to supplement the RSR review column, “Recent Reference Books,” by Frances Neel Cheney. “Reference Books in Print” includes all additional books received prior to the inclusion deadline established for this issue. Appearance in this column does not preclude a later review in RSR. Publishers are urged to send a copy of all new reference books directly to RSR as soon as published, for immediate listing in “Reference Books in Print.” Reference books with imprints older than two years will not be included (with the exception of current reprints or older books newly acquired for distribution by another publisher). The column shall also occasionally include library science or other library related publications of other than a reference character.

From one angle, abortion law appears to confirm the regime politics account of the Supreme Court; after all, the Reagan/Bush coalition succeeded in significantly curtailing the constitutional protection of abortion rights. From another angle, however, it is puzzling that the Reagan/Bush Court repeatedly refused to overturn Roe v. Wade. We argue that time and again electoral considerations led Republican elites to back away from a forceful assertion of their agenda for constitutional change. As a result, the justices generally acted within the range of possibilities acceptable to the governing regime but still typically had multiple doctrinal options from which to choose.

It has often been said that a great part of the strength of Aslib lies in the fact that it brings together those whose experience has been gained in many widely differing fields but who have a common interest in the means by which information may be collected and disseminated to the greatest advantage. Lists of its members have, therefore, a more than ordinary value since they present, in miniature, a cross‐section of institutions and individuals who share this special interest.

The Howard Shuttering Contractors case throws considerable light on the importance which the tribunals attach to warnings before dismissing an employee. In this case the tribunal took great pains to interpret the intention of the parties to the different site agreements, and it came to the conclusion that the agreed procedure was not followed. One other matter, which must be particularly noted by employers, is that where a final warning is required, this final warning must be “a warning”, and not the actual dismissal. So that where, for example, three warnings are to be given, the third must be a “warning”. It is after the employee has misconducted himself thereafter that the employer may dismiss.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse ratings data from the recently developed Learning Disability Needs Assessment Tool (LDNAT) to identify factors associated with specialist intellectual disability (ID) hospital admissions.

Ratings from 1,692 individuals were analysed and the LDNAT items differing significantly between inpatients and non-inpatients were identified. Statistical analyses on total scores derived from these items were used to calculate an optimal cut-off. This LDNAT inpatient index score was also confirmed via an alternative statistical technique.

On average, 18 of the 23 LDNAT item ratings were significantly higher in people with ID assessed as inpatients compared to those rated in community settings. Using the total of these items, the resulting LDNAT inpatient index was analysed. A cut-off score of 22.5 was calculated to be the optimal balance between sensitivity (0.833) and specificity (0.750). This was confirmed by calculating the Youden index (j=0.583). At this level 68 per cent of inpatients and 81 per cent of non-inpatient cases were correctly identified.

Currently there is a national (UK) programme to radically reduce the amount of specialist inpatient care for people ID. This will necessitate early identification of individuals most at risk of admission together with investment in improved, proactive community services if admissions to a diminishing bed-base are to remain manageable.

This study confirms the associations between mental health difficulties, challenging behaviour and specialist hospital admissions for people with ID, extending existing research by translating these findings into a clinically usable risk index.