The role of rules-based compliance systems in the new EU regulatory landscape: perspectives of institutional change

Purpose The research objective of this study is to understand how institutional changes to the EU regulatory landscape may affect corresponding institutionalized operational practices within financial organizations. Design/methodology/approach The study adopts an Investment Management System as its case and investigates different implementations of this system within eight financial organizations, predominantly focused on investment banking and asset management activities within capital markets. At the systems vendor site, senior systems consultants and client relationship managers were interviewed. Within the financial organizations, compliance, risk and systems experts were interviewed. Findings The study empirically tests modes of institutional change. Displacement and Layering were found to be the most prevalent modes. However, the study highlights how the outcomes of Displacement and Drift may be similar in effect as both modes may cause compliance gaps. The research highlights how changes in regulations may create gaps in systems and processes which, in the short term, need to be plugged by manual processes. Practical implications Vendors abilities to manage institutional change caused by Drift, Displacement, Layering and Conversion and their ability to efficiently and quickly translate institutional variables into structured systems has the power to ease the pain and cost of compliance as well as reducing the risk of breeches by reducing the need for interim manual systems. Originality/value The study makes a contribution by applying recent theoretical concepts of institutional change to the topic of regulatory change uses this analysis to provide insight into the effects of this new environment

Bioethics through the telescope: institutional ethics in the NHS

The article argues for a broader conception of bioethics. The principles that dominate current thinking are generally individualistic and do not represent the real world inhabited by patients, doctors, hospitals and the NHS as a whole. Rather than focus almost exclusively on the micro-end of the analytical spectrum, bioethics, and medical lawyers in particular, should take the institutional dimensions of health and health care more seriously, ie use a telescope to understand the dynamics that drive the subject, not just a microscope.

Research data management and openness: the role of data sharing in developing institutional policies and practices

Purpose: To investigate the relationship between research data management (RDM) and data sharing in the formulation of RDM policies and development of practices in higher education institutions (HEIs). Design/methodology/approach: Two strands of work were undertaken sequentially: firstly, content analysis of 37 RDM policies from UK HEIs; secondly, two detailed case studies of institutions with different approaches to RDM based on semi-structured interviews with staff involved in the development of RDM policy and services. The data are interpreted using insights from Actor Network Theory. Findings: RDM policy formation and service development has created a complex set of networks within and beyond institutions involving different professional groups with widely varying priorities shaping activities. Data sharing is considered an important activity in the policies and services of HEIs studied, but its prominence can in most cases be attributed to the positions adopted by large research funders. Research limitations/implications: The case studies, as research based on qualitative data, cannot be assumed to be universally applicable but do illustrate a variety of issues and challenges experienced more generally, particularly in the UK. Practical implications: The research may help to inform development of policy and practice in RDM in HEIs and funder organisations. Originality/value: This paper makes an early contribution to the RDM literature on the specific topic of the relationship between RDM policy and services, and openness – a topic which to date has received limited attention.

Sources of stakeholder salience in the responsible investment movement: why do investors sign the Principles for Responsible Investment?

Since its inception in 2006, the United Nations-backed Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) have grown to over 1300 signatories representing over $45 trillion. This growth is not slowing down. In this paper, we argue that there is a set of attributes which make the PRI salient as a stakeholder and its claim to sign the six PRI important to institutional investors. We use Mitchell et al.’s (Acad Manag Rev 22:853–886, 1997) theoretical framework of stakeholder salience, as extended by Gifford (J Bus Eth 92:79–97, 2010). We use as evidence confidential data from the annual survey of signatories carried out by the PRI in a 5-year period between 2007 and 2011. The findings highlight pragmatic and organizational legitimacy, normative and utilitarian power, and management values as the attributes that contribute most to the salience of the PRI as a stakeholder.