Search results

As the Academy for Business in Society considers the theme “Business in Society: Measuring Impact and Creating Change,” one fundamental question emerges and that is how to collaborate with universities to create positive impact and sustainable business models. The purpose of this paper is to address that question and offer one apt illustration for how to collaborate effectively across sectors.

This paper offers a case study of the Honey Bee Initiative (HBI) from George Mason University’s School of Business.

In this case study, the authors discuss the Initiative’s tri-sector domestic and global partnerships, community-driven development approach and innovative solutions as an exemplar of business as a force for good.

This paper provides unique insight into how universities can partner with non-profits, business and policy leaders to effect positive change. As such, the HBI program contributes to the growing body of research on the benefits of tri-sector partnership models as a means of addressing global goals and provides a valuable case study to understand better the necessity of multi-stakeholder partnerships. Moreover, the HBI’s tri-sector partnership model offers important insights into what makes these partnerships successful and serves as a replicable model that can be instituted in other regions around the globe.

The following theoretical concepts are applicable to the case and its learning objectives: Stakeholder Power-Interest Matrix and Carroll’s Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility.

Information was obtained in three separate interviews with PSEG. In February 2018, an introductory phone conference was conducted with a number of senior managers within PSEG, including the Director of Development and Strategic Issues, Kate Gerlach. In April 2018, an onsite interview was conducted with Gerlach, who connected the author with Scott Jennings. A phone interview was conducted with Scott Jennings in May 2018 and follow-up communication with him was handled via e-mail. The information obtained from these interviews was supplemented by material obtained from secondary sources. None of the information in the case has been disguised.

Scott Jennings, a Vice President at PSEG, the diversified New Jersey-based energy company, was the project leader for a large commercial wind farm that was to be built off the coast. The project, Garden State Offshore Energy, a joint venture between PSEG and Deepwater Wind, an experienced developer of offshore wind projects, had been announced over six years earlier, in late 2008. In the time that had passed, the Garden State Offshore Energy project team had waited for the New Jersey Bureau of Public Utilities, which had been tasked by Governor Chris Christie to evaluate the project costs before it could authorize the actual construction of the wind turbines. Justifying the project on a cost basis proved to be difficult; despite the growing public sentiment in favor of projects that utilized renewable energy sources such as wind power, the Garden State Offshore Energy team was unable to move the project forward. Scott needed to decide whether it made sense to continue to hold regular meetings with the Garden State Offshore Energy team. Scott’s colleagues suggested that Scott speak with senior management at PSEG to find out if the resources that had been dedicated to the Garden State Offshore Energy project could be shifted to other projects that might be more feasible.

This case is suitable for courses in Sustainability. It is appropriate to use the case in undergraduate courses to illustrate decision making in a regulated industry. Sufficient information is presented in the case to debate both sides of the offshore wind authorization issue.

Although the sabbatical leave is an integral part of academic life, there has been relatively little empirical, theory-driven research of the process. The purpose of this paper is to integrate the limited research on faculty sabbaticals with the careers literature to offer a new approach for the study of this important tool for faculty development.

A review of the empirical studies on faculty sabbaticals was performed and used in conjunction with the kaleidoscope career model (KCM) and the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to develop a model to guide future research.

The decision to take a sabbatical is complex and may have long-lasting implications for an individual's career. It is important to examine how factors that impact the perceived feasibility of the sabbatical (e.g. organization, country social norms) and desirability (e.g. need for authenticity, balance and challenge) influence the decisions, goals and outcomes of the sabbatical.

The use of the KCM, the TPB and the careers literature provides a theoretical foundation to study faculty sabbaticals as a distinct event in an individual's career development.

The proposed framework can be used by faculty members to determine the feasibility and desirability of taking a sabbatical as well as what factors which may encourage or limit sabbatical opportunities.

This conceptual paper uses a careers lens to provide a theory-driven framework which can be used to conduct much needed research on faculty sabbaticals.

Co‐branding is an increasingly popular technique marketers use in attempting to transfer the positive associations of the partner (constituent) brands to a newly formed co‐brand (composite brand). This research examines the effects of co‐branding on the brand equity of both the co‐branded product and the constituent brands that comprise it, both before and after product trial. It appears that co‐branding is a win/win strategy for both co‐branding partners regardless of whether the original brands are perceived by consumers as having high or low brand equity. Although low equity brands may benefit most from co‐branding, high equity brands are not denigrated even when paired with a low equity partner. Further, positive product trial seems to enhance consumers’ evaluations of co‐branded products, particularly those with a low equity constituent brand. Co‐branding strategies may be effective in exploiting a product performance advantage or in introducing a new product with an unfamiliar brand name.

Mining activities can promote development despite issues of environmental and social impact; however, corporate social responsibility (CSR) implementation is still an issue in the industry, which has received little attention in the literature and almost none to the operational level. This paper aims to address this gap by adopting the perspective of CSR practitioners to explore the way mining companies implement CSR at site level.

This paper uses an exploratory approach with in-depth interviews to investigate site-level CSR implementation and challenges in the context of mining in Brazil.

This study identifies primary challenges in CSR implementation and several ways in which they might be addressed. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper identifies for the first time two implementation-hindering aspects of the routine of CSR practitioners – excessive time spent at the office as opposed to in the field engaging in the community and a disproportionate amount of time spent on complaint management. In addition, this paper demonstrates the applicability of stakeholder theory in the CSR field, highlighting the need for increased collaboration among internal and external stakeholders to advance CSR implementation.

This study adopts the perspective of CSR practitioners, who are key stakeholders in CSR implementation, working in mining sites in Brazil, as the impact of mining can be especially marked in developing countries.