Convergence of corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in weak economies : the case of Bangladesh

The convergence of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate governance (CG) has changed the corporate accountability mechanism. This has developed a socially responsible ‘corporate self-regulation’, a synthesis of governance and responsibility in the companies of strong economies. However, unlike in the strong economies, this convergence has not been visible in the companies of weak economies, where the civil society groups are unorganised, regulatory agencies are either ineffective or corrupt and the media and non-governmental organisations do not mirror the corporate conscience. Using the case of Bangladesh, this article investigates the convergence between CSR and CG in the self-regulation of companies in a less vigilant environment.

Leveraging power of learning capability upon manufacturing operations

Learning capability (LC) is a special dynamic capability that a firm purposefully builds to develop a cognitive focus, so as to enable the configuration and improvement of other capabilities (both dynamic and operational) to create and respond to market changes. Empirical evidence regarding the essential role of LC in leveraging operational manufacturing capabilities is, however, limited in the literature. This study takes a routine-based approach to understand capability, and focuses on demonstrating leveraging power of LC upon two essential operational capabilities within the manufacturing context, i.e., operational new product development capability (ONPDC), and operational supplier integration capability (OSIC). A mixed-methods research framework was used, which combines sources of evidence derived from a survey study and a multiple case study. This study identified high-level routines of LC that can be designed and controlled by managers and practitioners, to reconfigure underlying routines of ONPDC and OSIC to achieve superior performance in a turbulent environment. Hence, the study advances the notion of knowledge-based dynamic capabilities, such as LC, as routine bundles. It also provides an impetus for managing manufacturing operations from a capability-based perspective in the fast changing knowledge era.

Do we need to use an accountant? The sales growth and survival benefits to family SMEs

This article explores the relationship between the usage of an external accountant and family firm sales growth and survival. Using a longitudinal panel of Australian small and medium sized family enterprises, we find that external accountants have a positive impact on sales growth and survival. We also find that the degree to which the accountant is acquainted with the family and the firm’s needs, which we term as embeddedness, moderates these positive outcomes. Furthermore, we find that appropriate strategic planning processes are necessary to maximize the sales growth benefit; however, these processes are not necessary to gain the survival benefit.

How two-tier boards can be more effective

Purpose: This study explores how non-executive directors address governance problems on Dutch two-tier boards. Within this board model, challenges might be particularly difficult to address due to the formal separation of management boards’ decision-management from supervisory boards’ decision-control roles. Design/methodology/approach: Semi-structured interviews and a questionnaire among non-executive directors provide unique insights into three major challenges in the boardrooms of two-tier boards in the Netherlands. Findings: The study indicates that non-executive directors mainly experience challenges in three areas: the ability to ask management critical questions, information asymmetries between the management and supervisory boards and the management of the relationship between individual executive and non-executive directors. The qualitative in-depth analysis reveals the complexity of the contributing factors to problems in the boardroom and the range of process and social interventions non-executive directors use to address boardroom issues with management and the organization of the board. Practical implications: While policy makers have been largely occupied with the ‘right’ board composition, the results highlight the importance of adequately addressing operational challenges in the boardroom. The results emphasize the importance of a better understanding of board processes and the need of non-executive directors to carefully manage relationships in and around the boardroom. Originality/value: Whereas most studies have focussed on regulatory initiatives to improve the functioning of boards (e.g., the independence of the board), this study explores how non-executive directors attempt to enhance the effectiveness of boards on which they serve.

Sustainability reporting in construction contractors : a case study

Construction activities have significant impacts on the environment, economy and society. As a result, sustainability has become an agenda in construction related business. This is evidenced by an increasingly number of construction related companies adopting sustainability reporting practice. Construction contractors are no exception. This study aims to investigate the sustainability reporting practices adopted by top Chinese contractors active in the international arena. The focus is placed on those Chinese contractors ranked top 50 by the Engineering News Record (ENR) top 225 international contractors. The results showed that the sustainability reporting practices of these top Chinese contractors, in terms of both approaches and the depth, varied significantly however there is a clear trend of growing level of disclosure of sustainability related information. Similarly, environmental sustainability seems the predominate focus of sustainability reporting exercises of top international contractors from China. These findings help to assist senior management of construction contractors to form business strategies to facilitate disclosure and other sustainability related practices.

From concept to capability : developing design thinking within a professional services firm

Corporate business and management are embracing design thinking for its potential to deliver competitive advantage through helping them be more innovative, differentiate their brands, and bring more customer centric products and services to market (Brown, 2008). As consumers continue to expect more personalisation and customisation from their service providers, the use of design thinking for innovation within organisations is a logical progression. To date however, there is little empirical literature discussing how organisations are setting about integrating design thinking into their culture and innovation practices. This paper is a first step in initiating a scholarly discussion on the integration of design thinking within organisational culture. Deloitte Australia is a large professional services firm employing over 5700 staff in 12 offices across Australia. The company provides a range of services to clients in the areas of audit, tax, financial advisory and consulting. In early 2011 the company made a strategic commitment to introducing design thinking into the organisation’s practices. While it already maintains a strong innovation culture, to date it had largely been operating within an analytical business environment. For Deloitte, design thinking is an opportunity to create better outcomes for the people they serve – both internal and external stakeholders (Brown and Wyatt, 2010). Research was conducted using case study methodology and ethnographic methods from June to September 2011 at the Melbourne Deloitte office. It involved three methods of data collection: semi structured interviews, participant observation and artifact analysis. This paper presents preliminary case study findings of Deloitte’s approach to building awareness and a consistent understanding of design thinking, as well as large scale capability, across the firm. Deloitte’s commitment to transforming its culture to one of design thinking poses significant potential for understanding how design thinking is comprehended, enabled and integrated within a complex organisational environment.

Interim financial reporting in the Asia-Pacific region : a review of regulatory requirements

This paper addresses the question of how interim financial reporting regulation varies across the Asia-Pacific region. Using a content analysis method, the study investigates the relevant regulations in eight selected countries in the Asia-Pacific region which differ in a number of country-level attributes. We find that the regulations in the region show considerable variation in terms of the form of regulatory enforcement, reporting lag, audit requirements, and reporting form. By providing the first in-depth review of the nature of differences in interim financial reporting in key countries in the Asia-Pacific region, the findings of this study will be of interest to investors, regulators and researchers in their quest for international “convergence” in financial reporting practices.

Strategies for embedding agile decision making in aviation infrastructure

As highlighted by previous work in Normal Accident Theory1 and High Reliability Organisations, 2 the ability of a system to be flexible is of critical importance to its capability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disturbance and disasters. This paper proposes that the research into ‘edge organisations’3 and ‘agility’4 is a potential means to operationalise components that embed high reliable traits in the management and oversight of critical infrastructure systems. Much prior work has focused on these concepts in a military frame whereas the study reported on here examines the application of these concepts to aviation infrastructure, specifically, a commercial international airport. As a commercial entity functions in a distinct manner from a military organisation this study aims to better understand the complementary and contradictory components of the application of agility work to a commercial context. Findings highlight the challenges of making commercial operators of infrastructure systems agile as well as embedding traits of High Reliability in such complex infrastructure settings.

A critical analysis of crisis escalation models : understanding stages and severity in infrastructure disturbance

A range of authors from the risk management, crisis management, and crisis communications literature have proposed different models as a means of understanding components of crisis. A generic component of these sources has focused on preparedness practices before disturbance events and response practices during events. This paper provides a critical analysis of three key explanatory models of how crises escalate highlighting the strengths and limitations of each approach. The paper introduces an optimised conceptual model utilising components from the previous work under the four phases of pre-event, response, recovery, and post-event. Within these four phases, a ten step process is introduced that can enhance understanding of the progression of distinct stages of disturbance for different types of events. This crisis evolution framework is examined as a means to provide clarity and applicability to a range of infrastructure failure contexts and provide a path for further empirical investigation in this area.

The getting of wisdom : the future of PM university education in Australia

The dynamic and complex nature of project management (PM) in Australia provides exciting opportunities for universities to that are willing to actively engage with their corporate partners and other key stakeholders to develop program and course offerings that simultaneously address the needs of students, employers, and other stakeholders and further the current body of PM knowledge and research. This article identifies key challenges and opportunities for the future direction of PM university education. This draws on descriptions of successful program models, examining teaching on PM skills on generic business and engineering degrees, dedicated graduate masters programs in PM, doctoral research programs in PM, and forms of effective collaboration between industry and academia.

What is a good project manager? Reconceptualizing the “do” : an Aristotelian perspective

In Social Science (Organization Studies, Economics, Management Science, Strategy, International Relations, Political Science…) the quest for addressing the question “what is a good practitioner?” has been around for centuries, with the underlying assumptions that good practitioners should lead organizations to higher levels of performance. Hence to ask “what is a good “captain”?” is not a new question, we should add! (e.g. Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997, p. 670; Söderlund, 2004, p. 190). This interrogation leads to consider problems such as the relations between dichotomies Theory and Practice, rigor and relevance of research, ways of knowing and knowledge forms. On the one hand we face the “Enlightenment” assumptions underlying modern positivist Social science, grounded in “unity-of-science dream of transforming and reducing all kinds of knowledge to one basic form and level” and cause-effects relationships (Eikeland, 2012, p. 20), and on the other, the postmodern interpretivist proposal, and its “tendency to make all kinds of knowing equivalent” (Eikeland, 2012, p. 20). In the project management space, this aims at addressing one of the fundamental problems in the field: projects still do not deliver their expected benefits and promises and therefore the socio-economical good (Hodgson & Cicmil, 2007; Bredillet, 2010, Lalonde et al., 2012). The Cartesian tradition supporting projects research and practice for the last 60 years (Bredillet, 2010, p. 4) has led to the lack of relevance to practice of the current conceptual base of project management, despite the sum of research, development of standards, best & good practices and the related development of project management bodies of knowledge (Packendorff, 1995, p. 319-323; Cicmil & Hodgson, 2006, p. 2–6, Hodgson & Cicmil, 2007, p. 436–7; Winter et al., 2006, p. 638). Referring to both Hodgson (2002) and Giddens (1993), we could say that “those who expect a “social-scientific Newton” to revolutionize this young field “are not only waiting for a train that will not arrive, but are in the wrong station altogether” (Hodgson, 2002, p. 809; Giddens, 1993, p. 18). While, in the postmodern stream mainly rooted in the “practice turn” (e.g. Hällgren & Lindahl, 2012), the shift from methodological individualism to social viscosity and the advocated pluralism lead to reinforce the “functional stupidity” (Alvesson & Spicer, 2012, p. 1194) this postmodern stream aims at overcoming. We suggest here that addressing the question “what is a good PM?” requires a philosophy of practice perspective to complement the “usual” philosophy of science perspective. The questioning of the modern Cartesian tradition mirrors a similar one made within Social science (Say, 1964; Koontz, 1961, 1980; Menger, 1985; Warry, 1992; Rothbard, 1997a; Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997; Flyvbjerg, 2001; Boisot & McKelvey, 2010), calling for new thinking. In order to get outside the rationalist ‘box’, Toulmin (1990, p. 11), along with Tsoukas & Cummings (1997, p. 655), suggests a possible path, summarizing the thoughts of many authors: “It can cling to the discredited research program of the purely theoretical (i.e. “modern”) philosophy, which will end up by driving it out of business: it can look for new and less exclusively theoretical ways of working, and develop the methods needed for a more practical (“post-modern”) agenda; or it can return to its pre-17th century traditions, and try to recover the lost (“pre-modern”) topics that were side-tracked by Descartes, but can be usefully taken up for the future” (Toulmin, 1990, p. 11). Thus, paradoxically and interestingly, in their quest for the so-called post-modernism, many authors build on “pre-modern” philosophies such as the Aristotelian one (e.g. MacIntyre, 1985, 2007; Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997; Flyvbjerg, 2001; Blomquist et al., 2010; Lalonde et al., 2012). It is perhaps because the post-modern stream emphasizes a dialogic process restricted to reliance on voice and textual representation, it limits the meaning of communicative praxis, and weaking the practice because it turns away attention from more fundamental issues associated with problem-definition and knowledge-for-use in action (Tedlock, 1983, p. 332–4; Schrag, 1986, p. 30, 46–7; Warry, 1992, p. 157). Eikeland suggests that the Aristotelian “gnoseology allows for reconsidering and reintegrating ways of knowing: traditional, practical, tacit, emotional, experiential, intuitive, etc., marginalised and considered insufficient by modernist [and post-modernist] thinking” (Eikeland, 2012, p. 20—21). By contrast with the modernist one-dimensional thinking and relativist and pluralistic post-modernism, we suggest, in a turn to an Aristotelian pre-modern lens, to re-conceptualise (“re” involving here a “re”-turn to pre-modern thinking) the “do” and to shift the perspective from what a good PM is (philosophy of science lens) to what a good PM does (philosophy of practice lens) (Aristotle, 1926a). As Tsoukas & Cummings put it: “In the Aristotelian tradition to call something good is to make a factual statement. To ask, for example, ’what is a good captain’?’ is not to come up with a list of attributes that good captains share (as modem contingency theorists would have it), but to point out the things that those who are recognized as good captains do.” (Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997, p. 670) Thus, this conversation offers a dialogue and deliberation about a central question: What does a good project manager do? The conversation is organized around a critic of the underlying assumptions supporting the modern, post-modern and pre-modern relations to ways of knowing, forms of knowledge and “practice”.

Acting and knowing in temporary and project-based organizing : turning from the practice world to a liberation praxeology?

The purpose of this article is to offer a critical discussion about the “practice” lens and its weaknesses in addressing acting and knowledge & competence development in the context of temporary and project-based organizing. I demonstrate that “practice turn” and “phronetic proposal” are dual and opposite perspectives within the “practice” world, none of them being fully relevant to grasp project organizing and that each of them maintain the opposition between the “observer” and the “natives “of the practices. I suggest an alternate style of reasoning in order to address the dissatisfaction in face of problems, antinomies, perplexities and contradictions generated by the dichotomous thinking: a liberation praxeology rooted in Aristotle philosophy aiming, through praxis & phronesis and practical acquired experience & perfecting actualization, at reconciling facts & values and means & ends, and Ethics & Politics in the quest for human happiness and social good through project organizing.

Prolegomenon to the study of the concepts of maturity and maturity model : from Black Horse to White Knight?

This paper takes its root in a trivial observation: management approaches are unable to provide relevant guidelines to cope with uncertainty, and trust of our modern worlds. Thus, managers are looking for reducing uncertainty through information’s supported decision-making, sustained by ex-ante rationalization. They strive to achieve best possible solution, stability, predictability, and control of “future”. Hence, they turn to a plethora of “prescriptive panaceas”, and “management fads” to bring simple solutions through best practices. However, these solutions are ineffective. They address only one part of a system (e.g. an organization) instead of the whole. They miss the interactions and interdependencies with other parts leading to “suboptimization”. Further classical cause-effects investigations and researches are not very helpful to this regard. Where do we go from there? In this conversation, we want to challenge the assumptions supporting the traditional management approaches and shed some lights on the problem of management discourse fad using the concept of maturity and maturity models in the context of temporary organizations as support for reflexion. Global economy is characterized by use and development of standards and compliance to standards as a practice is said to enable better decision-making by managers in uncertainty, control complexity, and higher performance. Amongst the plethora of standards, organizational maturity and maturity models hold a specific place due to general belief in organizational performance as dependent variable of (business) processes continuous improvement, grounded on a kind of evolutionary metaphor. Our intention is neither to offer a new “evidence based management fad” for practitioners, nor to suggest research gap to scholars. Rather, we want to open an assumption-challenging conversation with regards to main stream approaches (neo-classical economics and organization theory), turning “our eyes away from the blinding light of eternal certitude towards the refracted world of turbid finitude” (Long, 2002, p. 44) generating what Bernstein has named “Cartesian Anxiety” (Bernstein, 1983, p. 18), and revisit the conceptualization of maturity and maturity models. We rely on conventions theory and a systemic-discursive perspective. These two lenses have both information & communication and self-producing systems as common threads. Furthermore the narrative approach is well suited to explore complex way of thinking about organizational phenomena as complex systems. This approach is relevant with our object of curiosity, i.e. the concept of maturity and maturity models, as maturity models (as standards) are discourses and systems of regulations. The main contribution of this conversation is that we suggest moving from a neo-classical “theory of the game” aiming at making the complex world simpler in playing the game, to a “theory of the rules of the game”, aiming at influencing and challenging the rules of the game constitutive of maturity models – conventions, governing systems – making compatible individual calculation and social context, and possible the coordination of relationships and cooperation between agents with or potentially divergent interests and values. A second contribution is the reconceptualization of maturity as structural coupling between conventions, rather than as an independent variable leading to organizational performance.

Simplifying process model abstraction : techniques for generating model names

The increased adoption of business process management approaches, tools and practices, has led organizations to accumulate large collections of business process models. These collections can easily include hundred to thousand models, especially in the context of multinational corporations or as a result of organizational mergers and acquisitions. A concrete problem is thus how to maintain these large repositories in such a way that their complexity does not hamper their practical usefulness as a means to describe and communicate business operations. This paper proposes a technique to automatically infer suitable names for business process models and fragments thereof. This technique is useful for model abstraction scenarios, as for instance when user-specific views of a repository are required, or as part of a refactoring initiative aimed to simplify the repository’s complexity. The technique is grounded in an adaptation of the theory of meaning to the realm of business process models. We implemented the technique in a prototype tool and conducted an extensive evaluation using three process model collections from practice and a case study involving process modelers with different experience.

Does board gender diversity have a financial impact? Evidence using stock portfolio performance.

There is growing regulatory pressure on firms worldwide to address the under-representation of women in senior positions. Regulators have taken a variety of approaches to the issue. We investigate a jurisdiction that has issued recommendations and disclosure requirements, rather than implementing quotas. Much of the rhetoric surrounding gender diversity centres on whether diversity has a financial impact. In this paper we take an aggregate (market-level) approach and compare the performance of portfolios of firms with gender diverse boards to those without. We also investigate whether having multiple women on the board is linked to performance, and if there is a within-industry effect. Overall, we do not find evidence of an association between diversity and performance. We find some weak evidence of a negative correlation between having multiple women on the board and performance, but that in some industries diversity is positively correlated with performance.