The Effect of Sales Promotion on Consumer Based Brand Equity

The study was an attempt to find out the effect of Sales Promotion,Price and Premium Promotion,on Consumer Based Brand Equity.The dimensions of consumer Based Brand Equity under study were Brand Awareness and Associations,Perceived Quality and Brand Loyalty.The Product categories under study were Convenience Products,shopping Products and Specialty Products and the product classes taken were Toothpastes,Colour Television and Athletic Shoes.The brands under study were Convenience Products-Anchor,Closeup,Colgate and Dabur:Shopping products-LG,Onida,Samsung and Sony and Specialty Products-Action,Adidas,Nike and Reebok.The primary objective of the study was to examine the effect of Sales Promotion,Price and Premium Promotion,on Consumer Based Brand Equity(CBBE)

Knowledge Building in Landscape Architecture

The objective of this study was to develop an internet-based seminar framework applicable for landscape architecture education. This process was accompanied by various aims. The basic expectation was to keep the main characteristics of landscape architecture education also in the online format. On top of that, four further objectives were anticipated: (1) training of competences for virtual team work, (2) fostering intercultural competence, (3) creation of equal opportunities for education through internet-based open access and (4) synergy effects and learning processes across institutional boundaries. This work started with the hypothesis that these four expected advantages would compensate for additional organisational efforts caused by the online delivery of the seminars and thus lead to a sustainable integration of this new learning mode into landscape architecture curricula. This rationale was followed by a presentation of four areas of knowledge to which the seminar development was directly related (1) landscape architecture as a subject and its pedagogy, (2) general learning theories, (3) developments in the ICT sector and (4) wider societal driving forces such as global citizenship and the increase of open educational resources. The research design took the shape of a pedagogical action research cycle. This approach was constructive: The author herself is teaching international landscape architecture students so that the model could directly be applied in practice. Seven online seminars were implemented in the period from 2008 to 2013 and this experience represents the core of this study. The seminars were conducted with varying themes while its pedagogy, organisation and the technological tools remained widely identical. The research design is further based on three levels of observation: (1) the seminar design on the basis of theory and methods from the learning sciences, in particular educational constructivism, (2) the seminar evaluation and (3) the evaluation of the seminars’ long term impact. The seminar model itself basically consists of four elements: (1) the taxonomy of learning objectives, (2) ICT tools and their application and pedagogy, (3) process models and (4) the case study framework. The seminar framework was followed by the presentation of the evaluation findings. The major findings of this study can be summed up as follows: Implementing online seminars across educational and national boundaries was possible both in term of organisation and technology. In particular, a high level of cultural diversity among the seminar participants has definitively been achieved. However, there were also obvious obstacles. These were primarily competing study commitments and incompatible schedules among the students attending from different academic programmes, partly even in different time zones. Both factors had negative impact on the individual and working group performances. With respect to the technical framework it can be concluded that the majority of the participants were able to use the tools either directly without any problem or after overcoming some smaller problems. Also the seminar wiki was intensively used for completing the seminar assignments. However, too less truly collaborative text production was observed which could be improved by changing the requirements for the collaborative task. Two different process models have been applied for guiding the collaboration of the small groups and both were in general successful. However, it needs to be said that even if the students were able to follow the collaborative task and to co-construct and compare case studies, most of them were not able to synthesize the knowledge they had compiled. This means that the area of consideration often remained on the level of the case and further reflections, generalisations and critique were largely missing. This shows that the seminar model needs to find better ways for triggering knowledge building and critical reflection. It was also suggested to have a more differentiated group building strategy in future seminars. A comparison of pre- and post seminar concept maps showed that an increase of factual and conceptual knowledge on the individual level was widely recognizable. Also the evaluation of the case studies (the major seminar output) revealed that the students have undergone developments of both the factual and the conceptual knowledge domain. Also their self-assessment with respect to individual learning development showed that the highest consensus was achieved in the field of subject-specific knowledge. The participants were much more doubtful with regard to the progress of generic competences such as analysis, communication and organisation. However, 50% of the participants confirmed that they perceived individual development on all competence areas the survey had asked for. Have the additional four targets been met? Concerning the competences for working in a virtual team it can be concluded that the vast majority was able to use the internet-based tools and to work with them in a target-oriented way. However, there were obvious differences regarding the intensity and activity of participation, both because of external and personal factors. A very positive aspect is the achievement of a high cultural diversity supporting the participants’ intercultural competence. Learning from group members was obviously a success factor for the working groups. Regarding the possibilities for better accessibility of educational opportunities it became clear that a significant number of participants were not able to go abroad during their studies because of financial or personal reasons. They confirmed that the online seminar was to some extent a compensation for not having been abroad for studying. Inter-institutional learning and synergy was achieved in so far that many teachers from different countries contributed with individual lectures. However, those teachers hardly ever followed more than one session. Therefore, the learning effect remained largely within the seminar learning group. Looking back at the research design it can be said that the pedagogical action research cycle was an appropriate and valuable approach allowing for strong interaction between theory and practice. However, some more external evaluation from peers in particular regarding the participants’ products would have been valuable.

"Thematically Analysing Social Network Content During Disasters Through the Lens of the Disaster Management Lifecycle" & "Investigating Similarity Between Privacy Policies of Social Networking Sites as a Precursor for Standardization"

Abstract 1: Social Networks such as Twitter are often used for disseminating and collecting information during natural disasters. The potential for its use in Disaster Management has been acknowledged. However, more nuanced understanding of the communications that take place on social networks are required to more effectively integrate this information into the processes within disaster management. The type and value of information shared should be assessed, determining the benefits and issues, with credibility and reliability as known concerns. Mapping the tweets in relation to the modelled stages of a disaster can be a useful evaluation for determining the benefits/drawbacks of using data from social networks, such as Twitter, in disaster management.A thematic analysis of tweets’ content, language and tone during the UK Storms and Floods 2013/14 was conducted. Manual scripting was used to determine the official sequence of events, and classify the stages of the disaster into the phases of the Disaster Management Lifecycle, to produce a timeline. Twenty- five topics discussed on Twitter emerged, and three key types of tweets, based on the language and tone, were identified. The timeline represents the events of the disaster, according to the Met Office reports, classed into B. Faulkner’s Disaster Management Lifecycle framework. Context is provided when observing the analysed tweets against the timeline. This illustrates a potential basis and benefit for mapping tweets into the Disaster Management Lifecycle phases. Comparing the number of tweets submitted in each month with the timeline, suggests users tweet more as an event heightens and persists. Furthermore, users generally express greater emotion and urgency in their tweets.This paper concludes that the thematic analysis of content on social networks, such as Twitter, can be useful in gaining additional perspectives for disaster management. It demonstrates that mapping tweets into the phases of a Disaster Management Lifecycle model can have benefits in the recovery phase, not just in the response phase, to potentially improve future policies and activities. Abstract2: The current execution of privacy policies, as a mode of communicating information to users, is unsatisfactory. Social networking sites (SNS) exemplify this issue, attracting growing concerns regarding their use of personal data and its effect on user privacy. This demonstrates the need for more informative policies. However, SNS lack the incentives required to improve policies, which is exacerbated by the difficulties of creating a policy that is both concise and compliant. Standardization addresses many of these issues, providing benefits for users and SNS, although it is only possible if policies share attributes which can be standardized. This investigation used thematic analysis and cross- document structure theory, to assess the similarity of attributes between the privacy policies (as available in August 2014), of the six most frequently visited SNS globally. Using the Jaccard similarity coefficient, two types of attribute were measured; the clauses used by SNS and the coverage of forty recommendations made by the UK Information Commissioner’s Office. Analysis showed that whilst similarity in the clauses used was low, similarity in the recommendations covered was high, indicating that SNS use different clauses, but to convey similar information. The analysis also showed that low similarity in the clauses was largely due to differences in semantics, elaboration and functionality between SNS. Therefore, this paper proposes that the policies of SNS already share attributes, indicating the feasibility of standardization and five recommendations are made to begin facilitating this, based on the findings of the investigation.

La responsabilidad social en países andinos: un enfoque de negocios

La Responsabilidad Social Empresarial (RSE), no es un tema nuevo pero en la actualidad se ha convertido en una estrategia de negocios que le permite a las empresas mejorar a su interior y así obtener mas beneficios externos ya que cuenta con mayor credibilidad y más aún con proyectos sostenibles en pro del la comunidad y de factores tales como el ambiente, los clientes entre otros. Este trabajo de investigación busca dar a conocer como alrededor de los negocios las empresas si pueden llegar a ser responsables socialmente, dando a conocer inicialmente los fundamentos teóricos del tema y posteriormente realizando un análisis a tres multinacionales con presencia en Colombia y simultáneamente en otros países de América Latina, tal como lo son Unilever, Telefónica y Coca Cola. Estos casos específicos, en su diagnóstico, dejan ver de una forma u otra como a través de los compromisos que han asumido estas empresas, los proyectos sostenibles que se han desarrollado a su interior han permitido mejorar aspectos de la comunidad que necesitada de estas soluciones muestran interés generando resultados que se dan por la gestión que se define con la ética de la misma empresa. Esto permite ver como de esta forma se puede preservar los recursos ambientales y culturales para las generaciones futuras, respetando la diversidad y promoviendo la disminución de las desigualdades sociales.

La satisfacción del cliente bancario en Canadá: Diferencias entre canadienses e inmigrantes de la América Latina – Revisión y traducción

The measure of customer satisfaction level is one of the most important topics at present time in marketing science. In addition, its measure in the bank field takes force in view of the high level of competition inside it, even more so if the study counts “immigrants” as a variable in analysis, a much important variable in the demographic situation of Canada. Oliver (1980) proposes the model of “disconfirmation” to measure customer satisfaction level; this model confirms that the difference between customer perceived performance and customer expectations gives as result his satisfaction level (additional model). Presently multiple scales exist to evaluate and to quantify this satisfaction level, Parasuraman (1987) is the creator of the servqual scale, while Avkiran (1999) developed the bankserv scale in order to evaluate customer expectations and customer satisfaction level specifically inside the bank field; this scale was divided in four factors via factorial analysis. Literature suggests the presence of a relation between individual expectations and/or satisfaction level, and the individual tolerance level towards non-constructed situations (Newman, 2001). Hofstede (1980) developed five cultural dimensions worldwide; among these is the Uncertainty Avoidance Index (uai) that fits to the dimension directly related to customer expectations and customer satisfaction levels, since it measures the tolerance levels towards non-structured ituations. For this research I focused on the satisfaction model analysis proposed by Oliver (1980) based on Avkiran´s scale (1999), having the Latin American or Canadian origin as variables. The concept of Hofstede’s cultural differences leads me to propose two samples: 50 Canadian French speakers and 50 Latin American individuals (Canadian residents). Results demonstrate that in the Latin American group the expectations are in average higher that in the Canadian group, considering all four factors (Avkiran). Perceived performance and satisfaction level are higher in the Latin American group that in the Canadian group for “personal branch conduct” and “access to personalized services” factors, nevertheless, no statistically significant difference has been proved for “credibility” and “communication” factors. The expectations variable presents a mediating effect over the relation between variables uai (Latin American or Canadian origin) and satisfaction level. This effect is partial for “personal branch conduct” and perfect for “access to personalized services”.

Twitter en Colombia: ¿Cómo lo están usando las cadenas radiales para informar?

En Colombia los medios de comunicación, más específicamente las cadenas radiales nacionales más importantes, no se han quedado atrás y han optado por unirse desde hace unos años a twitter, incursionando sobre la marcha. Las cuentas de twitter de Bluradio, Caracol Radio y RCN Radio analizadas junto a las entrevistas con los encargados de las mismas y las emisiones de los programas de noticias escogidos, muestran que las redes sociales siguen siendo un desafío en la actualidad. Uno de esos desafíos es encontrar el verdadero objetivo de los medios en twitter y que este no sólo consista en la escucha activa en busca de las noticias de último momento. Para alcanzar una legitimidad comunicativa en la web 2.0 es necesario adaptarse a la cultura de la participación de las redes, de lo contrario se está condenado a obtener tan solo un nuevo canal de difusión de noticias.

ELEMENTOS PARA LA RELACIÓN ENTRE CULTURA ORGANIZACIONAL Y ESTRATEGIA: CASO SEMCO

Este trabajo es un insumo para proyecto de investigación del Profesor Carlos Eduardo Méndez Álvarez, Elementos para la relación entre cultura organizacional y estrategia, proyecto que hace parte de la línea de investigación de Estrategia de la Escuela de Administración de la Universidad del Rosario, este trabajo fue desarrollado como proyecto de grado el cual se complementa con el trabajo de grado “ELEMENTOS PARA LA RELACIÓN ENTRE CULTURA ORGANIZACIONAL Y ESTRATEGIA: CASO IBM.” elaborado por Angélica Marie Barón, por ende contó con un desarrollo conjunto con la autora antes mencionada en los temas referentes al marco teórico. Este trabajo busca reunir información teórica acerca del concepto de Cultura organización y la Estrategia organizacional, Si se busca poder vislumbrar la relación entre la cultura organizacional y la estrategia dentro de una organización. Actualmente se encuentran en una carrera competitiva en la que no solo participan por un pedazo cada vez más fraccionado y diferenciado del mercado, sino que también por la credibilidad social, la gestión de sus capital intelectual, elevar la calidad de vida de la comunidad medioambiental y cultura así como por trascender la inmediatez de los planes para estimular las proyecciones de las estrategias organizarles, por otra parte las apariciones de creación masiva de las micro, pequeña y mediana empresa, pero estas no logran contar con una alta expectativa de vida.

Prevalencia de los factores de riesgo psicosocial presentes en la población trabajadora de una entidad de salud de segundo nivel en el año 2013

Introducción: Los factores de riesgo psicosocial surgen a partir de una interacción dinámica de las cualidades humanas con el medio ambiente de trabajo, es decir, todas aquellas habilidades, necesidades, expectativas y costumbres de los trabajadores. En efecto, estas interacciones entre las condiciones del medio ambiente laboral y los factores humanos del trabajador, cuando son manejadas de manera negativa, conducen a alteraciones emocionales, problemas de comportamiento y cambios bioquímicos y neurohormonales, que a su vez pueden producir riesgos adicionales de enfermedades mentales y físicas. Objetivo: Determinar las prevalencias de los factores de riesgo psicosocial presentes en la población trabajadora de una entidad de salud de segundo nivel en el año 2013. Metodología: Se llevó a cabo un estudio de corte transversal, utilizando fuentes de datos secundarios de una Empresa de Salud del Estado de nivel II, donde se aplicó el instrumento de la batería de riesgo psicosocial, diseñada por el Ministerio de la Protección Social en asocio con la Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Durante este período el hospital contaba con la gestión de 155 empleados, de los cuales 54 desempeñaban labores administrativas y 101 prestaban servicios asistenciales. La participación por género se distribuyó así: 104 mujeres y 51 hombres. La prevalencia de los factores de riesgo psicosocial se estimó por medio de los baremos establecidos por el Ministerio de la Protección Social para identificar el nivel de riesgo, los resultados fueron analizados desde estadísticas descriptivas y la aplicación de pruebas estadísticas en la comparación de los puntajes transformados de los dominios y dimensiones de los cuestionarios intra y extralaboral, según las características sociodemográficas y ocupacionales. Resultados: Se identificó una mayor proporción de personas con riesgo psicosocial intralaboral (45,8% riesgo muy alto), mientras que en la evaluación de los factores de riesgo extralaboral el comportamiento fue totalmente opuesto (78.1% sin riesgo), se pudo establecer que una mayor proporción de mujeres ejerce la profesión de la enfermería (71,3% asistencial) y la modalidad de contratación prevalente reportada fue a través de una cooperativa de trabajo asociado (82,2% asistenciales). Se determinó que existen diferencias en la percepción de los factores psicosociales tanto intra como extralaborales en los grupos con diferentes características sociodemográficas y ocupacionales. Conclusión: La investigación evidenció el impacto negativo de los factores de riesgo intralaboral sobre los trabajadores de la E.S.E, condición que afectó la percepción de la vida laboral, la productividad y el nivel de satisfacción de los trabajadores, por lo que se destaca la pertinencia de implementar actividades de intervención y prevención a corto plazo en el marco de un programa de vigilancia epidemiológica.

Regulatory governance in the latinamerican telecommunications sector

Empezando con Chile a comienzos de 1980, los países de América Latina han profundizado la reforma a las telecomunicaciones para crear un entorno regulatorio que incentive la inversión privada, en particular la inversión extranjera. En este artículo, trabajo las tendencias regulatorias en el sector telecomunicaciones de 24 países latinoamericanos y del caribe durante el período 1980-1997 y construyo un índice basado en : autonomía, rendición de cuentas, claridad de las funciones y objetivos, transparencia y participación, y el tipo de mandato legal que crea el ente regulador. El índice muestra que, en promedio, la mayoría de los países llevaron a cabo fuertes reformas regulatorias en la dirección sugerida por expertos e investigadores. El índice también se correlación bien con varias variables políticas, de riesgo, económicas y de telecomunicaciones.

CGIAR research program on grain legumes

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background and context The Grain Legumes CRP was established to bring all research and development work on grain legumes within the CGIAR system under one umbrella. It was set up to provide public goods outcomes to serve the needs of the sustainable production and consumption of grain legumes in the developing world, capitalising upon their properties that enhance the natural resource base upon which production so unequivocally depends. The choice of species and research foci were finalised following extensive consultation with all stakeholders (though perhaps fewer end users), and cover all disciplines that contribute to long-lasting solutions to the issues of developing country production and consumption. ICRISAT leads Grain Legumes and is partnered by the CGIAR centers ICARDA, IITA and CIAT and a number of other important partners, both public and private, and of course farmers in the developed and developing world. Originally in mid-2012 Grain Legumes was structured around eight Product Lines (PL) (i.e. technological innovations) intersecting five Strategic Components (SC) (i.e. arranged as components along the value chain). However, in 2015, it was restructured along a more R4D output model leading to Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs). Thus five Flagship Projects (FP) more closely reflecting a systematic pipeline of progression from fundamental science, implementation of interventions and the development of capacity and partnerships to promote and adopt impactful outcomes: FP1) Managing Productivity through crop interactions with biotic and abiotic constraints; FP2) Determination of traits that address production constraints and opportunities; FP3) Trait Deployment of those traits through breeding; FP4) Seed Systems, post-harvest processing and nutrition; FP5) Capacity-Building and Partnerships. Another three cross-cutting FPs analyse the broader environment surrounding the adoption of outputs, the capitalising of investments in genomics research, and a focus on the Management and Governance of Grain Legumes: FP6) Knowledge, impacts, priorities and gender organisation; FP7) Tools and platforms for high throughput genotyping and bioinformatics; and FP8) Management and Governance. Five FPs focus on R4D; FPs 5 and 6 are considered cross-cutting; FP 7 has a technical focus and FP 8 has an overarching objective. Over the three year period since its inception in July 1012, Grain Legumes has had a total budget of $140 million, with $62M originally to come from W1/W2 and the remaining $78M to come from W3/bilateral. In actuality only $45M came from W1/W2 but $106M from W3/bilateral corresponding to 106% of expectation. Purpose, scope and objectives of the external evaluation Principally, the evaluation of Grain Legumes is to ensure that the program is progressing in an effective manner towards addressing the system-level outcomes of the CGIAR as they relate to grain legumes. In essence, the evaluation aims to provide essential evaluative information for decision-making by Program Management and its funders on issues such as extension, expansion and structuring of the program and adjustments in relevant parts of the program. Subsequent to the formal signing of the agreed terms of reference, the evaluation team was also invited to comment upon the mooted options for merging and/or disaggregating of Grain Legumes. The audiences are therefore manifold, from the CGIAR Fund Council and Consortium, the Boards of Trustees of the four component CGIAR centres, the Grain Legumes Steering, Management and Independent Advisory Committees, to the researchers and others involved in the delivery of R4D outcomes and their partner organisations. The evaluation was not only summative in measuring results from Grain Legumes at arm’s length; it was also formative in promoting learning and improvements, and developmental in nurturing adaption to transformational change with time. The evaluation report was written in a manner that allows for engagement of key partners and funders in a dialogue as to how to increase ownership and a common understanding of how the goals are to be achieved. We reviewed research undertaken before the CRPs but leading to impacts during Grain Legumes, and research commenced over the past 2.5 years. For related activities pre- and post-commencement of Grain Legumes, we reviewed the relevance of activities and their relation to CGIAR and the Grain Legumes goals, whether they were likely to lead to the outcomes and impacts as documented in the Grain Legumes proposal, and the quality of the science underpinning the likelihood to deliver outcomes. Throughout, we were cognisant of the extent of the reach of CGIAR centres’ activities, and those of stakeholders upon which the impact of CGIAR R4D depends. Within our remit we evaluated the original and modified management and governance structures, and all the processes/responsibilities managed within those structures. Besides the evaluation of the technical and managerial issues of Grain Legumes, we addressed cross-cutting issues of gender sensitivity, capacity building and the creation and nurturing of partnerships. The evaluation also has the objective to provide information relating to the development of full proposals for the new CRP funding cycle. The evaluation addressed six overarching questions developed from the TOR questions (listed in the Inception Report, 2015 [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh] and others including cross-cutting issues, phrasing them within the context of traditional evaluation criteria: 1. Relevance: Global development, urbanisation and technological innovation are progressing rapidly, are the aims and focus of Grain Legumes coherent, robust, fit for purpose and relevant to the global community? 2. Efficiency: Is the structure and effectiveness of leadership across Grain Legumes developing efficient partnership management and project management across PLs? 3. Quality of science: Is Grain Legumes utilising a wide range of technologies in a way that will increase our fundamental understanding of the biology that underpins several PLs; and are collected data used in the most effective way? 4. Effectiveness: Are Product Lines strategic contributors to the overarching aims and vision for Grain Legumes? 5. Impact: Are the impact pathways that underlie each PL well defined, measureable and achievable; and are they sufficiently defined in terms of beneficiaries? Does progress towards achieving outputs and outcomes from the major research areas indicate a lasting benefit for CGIAR and the communities it serves? 6. Sustainability: Is Grain Legumes managing the increasing level of restricted funding in terms of program quality and effectiveness, including attracting and retaining quality staff? Questions for the evaluation of governance and management focused on accountability, transparency, the effectiveness and success of program execution, change management processes and communication methods, taking account of the effects of CGIAR reform. The three crosscutting issues were considered as follows: i) gender balance in program delivery, e.g. whether each PL is able to contribute to the increased income, food security, nutrition, environmental and resource conservation for resource-poor women and men existing in rural livelihoods; ii) are internal and external capacity gaps identified/met, is capacity effectively developed within each product line, and are staff at all levels engaged in contributing ideas towards capacity building; and iii) is there effective involvement of partners in research and activity programming, what are the criteria for developing partnerships, how they are formalised and how is communication between partners and within Grain Legumes managed? It was not in remit to search for output, outcomes or impact, however as highlighted later, much of our time was spent on searching for information to support claims of impact, since Grain Legumes had no effective dedicated M&E in place at the time of undertaking the review. Approach and methodology The evaluation was conducted when Grain Legumes had been operational for approximately 3 years. The approach and methodology followed that outlined in the Inception Report [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh]. The CCEE Team based its findings, conclusions and recommendations on data collection from several sources:  review of program documents, communications with the CO, minutes and presentations from all management and governance committee meetings  review of previous assessments and evaluations  sampling of Grain Legume projects in 7 countries1  more than 66 face to face interviews, a further 133 persons in groups and 4 phone/Skype conversations: ICRISAT, ICARDA, CIAT and IITA staff, partners and stakeholders. Meetings with one Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) member.  meetings with over 100 people in 16 external groups, such as farmers’ groups  online survey completed by 126 (33.4%) scientists who contribute to Grain Legumes and a number of non-CGIAR partners and Management representatives  bibliometric review of 10 publications within each PL to qualitatively assess the design, conduct, analysis and presentation of results  quantitative and qualitative self-assessment of the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above completed by PLCs (see below). We reviewed the Logical Framework that underpins the desired Goals, or Impacts of Grain Legumes, and the links between the outputs and inputs as they related to the organisational units of Grain Legumes. The logical framework approach to planning and management of Grain Legumes activities implies a linear process, leading from activities, outputs, outcomes, to impacts, but within such an approach there may be room for a more systems dynamics approach allowing for feedback at every step and within every step, in order to refine and improve upon the respective activities as new results, ideas, and directions come to light. We then developed a matrix that summarised quantitatively and qualitatively the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above. Main findings and conclusions Grain legume production and consumption remain of great importance to the food security of not inconsiderable populations in the developing world, and merit sustained research investment. We conclude that Grain Legumes continues to contribute significant returns to research investments by the CGIAR, and such investment should continue. The global research community looks to the CGIAR for leadership in Grain legumes, but needs to be assured of value adding when bringing CGIAR centres under the expected umbrella of synergy. However, there is considerable scope for improving the efficiency with which outcomes are achieved. We note that an absence of an effective M&E has hampered the assessment of the effectiveness of proposed impact pathways. Likewise progress has been hampered by the limited numbers of research partnerships with Advanced Institutes and by budgetary constraints (lamented for their stifling effects on continuation of ongoing exciting research). The unworkable management structure constrains the CRP Director’s leadership role; responsibility without authority will never lead to effective outcomes. Good fortune is responsible for many of the successes of Grain Legumes, underpinned by a devoted work force across the participating CGIAR centres and partners. The quality of the science is not uniformly high, and we believe that mentoring of scientists should be given priority where quality is poor. Simplified yet informative reporting is an imperative to this. World class science underpins the identification of, and molecular basis for, traits important for yield improvement and this expertise should be extended to all grain legume species, capitalising upon the germplasm collections. The linking of Grain Legumes with regional research and development consortia has been very successful, with outcomes aligning with those of Grain Legumes. We see that with declining funding consolidation of research effort based on likely successes will be necessary, and welcome the move afoot to incorporate grain legumes into an agri-food system focused on successful value chains that deliver sustainable outcomes. Relevance and Strategy Grain Legumes has geographic and disciplinary relevance, addressing the major supply chain issues of variety development seed system and agronomy, with some attention to quality and postharvest marketing systems. The CRP has provided the opportunity to cut ongoing and to initiate new research. Research funded by the Gates Foundation (Anon, 2014) suggests that the need for improvement is greatest in Africa and advocates reducing the number of crop by country combinations when resources are sparse. The lesser research investment in Latin America, however, is not in line with the regions’ dependency on legumes. In spite of the fact that there is no evidence of strong inter-partner CGIAR centre or internal synergy, the program is still moving ahead on most fronts in line with the overall project logframe. This is in spite of continual pushing and pulling by in particular donors and the CO. However, to quantify real impact, we believe Grain Legumes must have access to reliable baseline data on production and consumption, and this is missing. Similarly, there is little evidence of the proposed ‘Inclusive Market Oriented Development’ (IMOD) framework being used to assist with priority setting. The product lines, eight of which cover most of the historical programmes in place in the partner CGIAR centres at the commencement of the Grain Legumes, do not cover all the constraints for formal constraints analysis was not undertaken at the inception of the Grain Legumes, and some of this additionally identified research is undertaken under the umbrella of the FPs; this needs to be rationalised. We found the PLs to be isolated in activity, even with minimally-integrated activities within each PL, with little evidence of synergy between PLs. Even though the SCs should ensure a systems approach, as with the new FPs, we did not get a feel that this is so. The underplaying of agronomy, and production practices may be one reason for this. We believe that treating legume crops as if they were horticultural crops will increase farmer returns from investment. The choice of Flagship Projects makes sense, with the flow of activity firstly around crop management and agronomy followed by the logical sequence of trait discovery, incorporation into improved varieties, dissemination of those varieties through appropriate seed chains leading to market impacts, and the capacity building required at all steps. One obvious omission, however, is the lack of a central and strategic policy on the role of transgenics in Grain Legumes. We found four notable comparative advantages for Grain Legumes: the access to germplasm of component species, the use of the phenotyping facility at ICRISAT, the approach for village level industry for IPM, and the emphasis on hybrid pigeonpea. Efficiency Each centre has strong control of, and emphasis on, their ‘species’ domains, and ownership of the same detracts from possible synergy. Without synergy or value add, the Grain Legumes brings with it no comparative advantage over each centre continuing their own pre-CRP research agendas. We found little evidence of integration of programmes between centres and almost no cross-centre authorship of publications, such as could have occurred with the integrated cross-centre approaches to stress tolerance including crop modelling: the one publication (Gaur et al., 2015) on heat tolerance by ICRISAT, CIAT and ICARDA does not provide any keys to inter-centre collaboration. The integration of each centre with NARS and university research programmes is good, but the cross-centre links with NARS are poor. A better coordinated integration with Grain Legumes, , rather than through the individual centres, may reduce transactions costs for NARS, Monitoring and evaluation is, as noted throughout our report, one area of Grain Legumes research management that has not been given the attention it should have received. If it had have received proper attention, some of the issues of poor efficiency might have been nipped in the bud. A strong monitoring and evaluation system would have provided the baseline data and set the milestones that would have allowed both efficiency and effectiveness to be better appraised. We found no attempt to define comparative advantages of the CGIAR centres and their R4D activities, although practice showed the better grasp of CIAT in developing innovative seed distribution systems. During field visits and interviews, the CCEE Team observed shortcomings in the communication processes within Grain Legumes and with the broader scientific community and the public. For example, the public face of the program on the internet is out of date. Survey findings, however, suggest that information is shared freely and routinely within the PL within which scientists work. Some external issues, such as those with funding, low W1/W2 and poor sustainability of funding (especially if funding is top heavy with a few agencies), undermine research investment and confidence of partners in the system (e.g. as voiced by researchers working on crops and countries not included in TL III and the cessation of ongoing competitively-funded projects especially in India), but other issues attributable to the governance and management of the Grain Legumes, such as opaque integration of W3/bilaterals with W1/W2 funding require attention. Offsetting this, the existence of the Grain Legumes did mobilise additional funding [that it would not have if Grain Legumes did not exist]. We were concerned that Grain Legumes is simply not recognised outside of the CRP, with a limited www presence and centres promote themselves, rather than Grain Legumes (with exception in IITA). This is not a good move if one wishes to increase investment in the Grain Legumes. Although funding agencies require cost:benefit ratios, for example for each PL we faced difficulty in determining comparative value for money between investment in different types of research, and in being able to clearly attribute research and development outcomes to financial investment. There was also a time CCEE frame issue too. There is poor interaction with the private sector, notably in areas where they have a comparative financial advantage. We questioned in particular the apparent lack of interaction with the major agro-chemical companies, with respect to the development of herbicide tolerant (HT) grain legumes and the lack of evidence that the regulatory and trade aspects related to herbicide tolerant crops had been considered. Quality of science The quality of the science is highly variable across Grain Legumes, with pockets of real excellence that are linked to good levels of productivity, whereas other PLs are struggling to deliver quality publications, and outputs and outcomes that are based on these. There is much evidence of gradualism in terms of research output and outcomes, i.e. essentially the same activities that were ongoing at the time of the launch of Grain Legumes are still in place. However, there are examples of game changers including those from valuable investments in genomics, phenotyping, and bio-control. We were pleased to see large proportions of collaboration on publications with non-CGIAR centres, reflecting cooperation with partners in developed and developing countries. The value of collaboration when ensuring quality of science cannot be stressed highly enough both within the CRP, and with other global and national partners. PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. There is little cohesion between PLs and with other CRPs as evidenced by publications, although there are some exceptions. We suspect the reasons for this are driven by funding. Productivity from the different PLs is also highly variable and it is not clear what other activities staff are engaged in since, in some PLs, they do not appear to lead to quality publications. Effectiveness Grain Legumes has been very effective in addressing component issues of research, but not the continuum from variety development to legumes on someone’s dinner plate. Our overall assessment of the effectiveness of Grain Legumes in stimulating synergy, innovation and impact indicate that gradualism is more prevalent than innovation. It also shows, as do publications, that there is little integration of disciplines or a focus on ‘systems’. The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. However, research on genomics, plant breeding and seed systems have made great strides forward, on the brink of delivering impact. Agronomy has been a poor sister, but some of the competitive grants within Grain Legumes have unearthed some potential game changers, such as objective use of transplanting as an agronomic practice. As mentioned earlier, the lack of effective M&E (however, this was part of some major projects such as TL II/TL III), and therefore the ability to monitor impact pathways and achievement of impact, implies no systematic management of data. This creates difficulty when attempting to evaluate the achievement of the Grain Legumes objectives. One might have expected at least one attempt to try to develop publications between centres arguing for similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella, but we did not find any evidence for this. It is most unfortunate that, due to budgetary cuts, the new ‘schemes’, e.g. competitive grants and scholarships, were cut off before gaining a foothold. With 8 species addressed by Grain Legumes, it is not unexpected that there will be little evidence of shared protocols across centres/species. One rare example was that hosted by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) on shared methods for phenotyping of legume germplasm. Researchers from CIAT, IITA, ICRISAT and three USDA stations attended, focusing in simple canopy temperature and root morphology measurements. It is our belief that as a set of research centres, the CGIAR centres should be focusing on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral), it is less so for a research institute, and the structure should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres as in a CRP). Impact It is well known that research does not always lead to scientific breakthroughs. Also, activities such as plant breeding are long term; making impacts difficult to assess. We believe that sufficient progress with genomics and associated research has been made to warrant impact, but we are unable to quantify the levels of impact, or the timeframe for the same. Work in Grain Legumes has enormous potential for real impact in scientific research, commercial, farming, smallholder and household communities, much of which is being realised. However, the PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases that are strongly evidenced for these impacts, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding. Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment. Interviews conducted by the CCEE during site visits showed that PLs are quantifying the area of adoption of varieties, but in most cases they are not measuring the impact on environment, health/nutrition. Since the health and nutritional benefits and the environmental gains from growing legumes are major arguments for supporting grain legume research, the community is currently missing substantial opportunities to strengthen its own case for continued support. Whilst there are some impressive examples of considering the whole value chain, e.g. white beans from production through to export; in the main, the pipeline to end user is somewhat piece-meal, with no clear definition of the end user nor differential responsibility of Grain Legumes and of partners. The lack of robust time-defined impact pathways is highlighted in Section 7.4, and even though developed for PL5, timeframes are essential for measuring progress against prediction. Sustainability In summary, there is general acknowledgement that future funding is likely to become more limited, specifically in W1&2 and there is understandable concern over the support for the staff and basic infrastructure that underpin the Grain Legumes programme. For example, it is reported that staffing in parts of CIAT has been dependent on W1&2 and that this is too unstable to re-establish a critical mass. The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2. This position is not sustainable in the long term as there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. The only obvious options to prevent this outcome include a severe reduction in the fixed costs of the centres and/or a refusal to accept W3 and bilateral funding with an inadequate overhead component. In the latter case, there is an obvious danger that funders will move their resources away from the CGIAR system towards other, perhaps less expensive, suppliers of research, and possibly more relevant development expertise. This issue must be addressed. As the Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Gender is not mainstreamed, but there is some evidence that this is improving, especially with dedicated gender specialists and the slow integration of gender across CRPs. There is a need to approach gender through the vision of agriculture as a social practice, with recognition of what changes will be acceptable culturally and what not, and capitalising upon the perceived and actual features of production and processing that grain legumes are primarily women-based crops. Gender awareness may be high among Scientists, but it appears to be a predominantly passive attribute with few proactively seeking opportunities for gender equity. It is, however, a sound sensitivity base on which to build. Nevertheless, examples of notable gender initiatives were identified during field visits. For example, in Benin, the development of biocontrol technologies has enthusiastically integrated diversity, engaging with women farmers’ and youths while maintaining cultural norms. Women are gathering and processing, youths are taking the product to market. The implication is that several groups benefit, rather than domination by the majority group. In Malawi, innovative approaches have been developed to improving nutrition for children, such as incorporating nutrient enriched bean flour products into snacks. In India, scientists collaborating with gender scientists and socio-economists are identifying the impact of mechanical harvesting on agricultural labour and the potential displacement of female labourers. In Kenya, a novel initiative is improving the accessibility of certified seed for new varieties. Seed suppliers have introduced small packs of grain legume seed at low unit cost, which are being purchased by young people and women. Capacity building efforts for external partners are not clearly aligned with the research mandate and delivery of Grain Legumes. However, there are a number of training activities that are being undertaken by Grain Legumes, largely through the W3/bilateral project. Gender balance never reaches parity, but it appears that efforts are made to include female participants. Within the evaluation timeframe it was not possible to conduct external surveys to further validate or review external capacity building efforts in Grain Legumes. Training of scientists is significant, with >40 benefiting. Postgraduate training is varied across PLs, and there is some opportunity to increase the numbers being supervised. We consider that support for postgraduates at ICRISAT could be better coordinated, satisfying more of the students’ needs. It is important, however, to follow up investments in capacity building by monitoring effectiveness, career progressions and so on. Training activities appear to be rather centre-specific, not following a coordinated programme managed by, nor at the level of, the Grain Legumes. Numbers of persons trained and their gender are important, but a measure of the effectiveness of the training is more important. Although optimism is expressed by the great majority of Research Managers that partnerships were working well to leverage knowledge and research capacities, scientists have a less favourable view, particularly in terms of their incentives to participate. It seems likely that the activities taking place within Grain Legumes were, in the most part, continuations of previous collaborations. This is not surprising in light of the reduction in the emphasis on partnerships as Grain Legumes evolved to a funded project, and the consequent lack of opportunity and ambition for establishing novel partnerships. Where they exist, partnerships are good on the whole, especially with US. They could be expanded where comparative advantages exist (for example with Canada and Australia for machine harvestable legumes), but some earlier identified partnerships, e.g. with Turkey, have not been capitalised upon. Others experience problems of variety access (the embargo on exports of some sources of materials from India), yet others do have relevance e.g. imported Brazilian varieties in pre-release in Ethiopia (even though two of the three are from CIAT materials). Governance and Management The standard format of committee structure and responsibilities is common to other CRPs, as are the attendant problems. One of the major problems is that the Grain Legumes Director has responsibility but no authority; hence, even with the support of the RMC, the Director is unable to ‘direct’ in the literal sense of the work the activities of Grain Legumes. We also see the same sense of helplessness with the role of the PLCs. They have responsibility but no authority in managing the affairs of their PL, and they have no access to funds with which to promote intellectual collaboration and cooperation. Minutes from governance and management meetings do not reflect the compromised weak position of the Director and the associated difficulties in the management of Grain Legumes. Nor do the minutes reflect concerns about the amount of time spent by scientists in meetings for planning, integration, evaluation and reporting. Many scientists reported significant opportunity costs in participating in the ongoing imposed [by the CO] evolution of Grain Legumes and CRPs in general. The changes brought in by the CO have not helped promote any greater authority and capacity of the Grain Legumes Director to direct. Likewise, they do not address any of the issues with the conflict of interest in having the Lead Centre chair the Steering Committee. Indeed, we believe that the combining of the Steering Committee with the Independent Advisory Committee, besides becoming unwieldy in number, annuls any sense of independence in advice offered to the Grain Legumes management. We have concerns with the declining proportion of W1/W2 funds (as expressed in the section on Sustainability), and believe that when basic financial planning takes place, integration of W1/W2 and W3/bilateral sources must occur, and be linked to anticipated outcomes and impacts. This will ensure a close alignment of collaborators’ and partners’ objectives and contributions to that of the Grain Legumes. We also queried the process for, and the formality, or lack of, surrounding, the approval of annual budgets, and the level of priority setting when budgets are cut. Recommendations for Grain Legumes The CCEE Team makes the following recommendations, critical issues are highlighted in bold, and those that require action by an entity other than the Grain Legumes Research Management Committee or Project Management united are identified in a footnote. Relevance and Strategy Recommendation 1: A period of consistency is necessary to raise confidence, morale and trust across scientists, managers and partners to foster the assembly of enduring Grain Legumes outcomes2.  There needs to be a concerted effort to undertake baseline studies and to implement a robust M&E activity during this period. Without these data the foundation for integrated research in grain legumes is jeopardised.  There is a strong need to link more closely with the private sector, especially where there are financial and other comparative advantages to do so. Recommendation 2: The agronomic and physiological trait targets of Grain Legumes (tolerance to changing climate patterns, to the pests and diseases of today and of the future, incorporation of quality traits and adaptations to intensive production systems [machine-harvestability and herbicide tolerance], and short season high yielding characters) are all worthy of continued investment when selecting for improved varieties.  There needs to be a common strategy, implemented across centres and species, as to how to address these trait targets through conventional and modern breeding approaches, but only if adequate funding is assured and secured and if a consistency and unity of purpose can be achieved across a large-scale. This should take the form of cross-species coordinated research programmes to address these breeding targets that cooperate across centres and make efficient use of facilities and other resources.  The CRP should undertake a detailed strategic review of the role of transgenics across the range of targets in the mandate crops. Efficiency Recommendation 3: The lack of an effective M&E process is a significant omission, not least in terms of more efficient use of resources and the lack of baseline data with which to measure impact, and must be rectified.  Reinforcing Recommendation 1, an effective M&E system initially directed towards baseline studies must be implemented.  Transaction costs may be reduced through bilateral projects, which are seen as more cost effective than W1/W2 where transaction costs are disproportionately higher. Recommendation 4: To improve communication and coordination within the CRP, and with a broader audience:  There is a priority need for a central database containing, names of staff associated with Grain Legumes and their time commitments, their responsibilities, and involvement in CRP activities, their progress and achievements, their publications, plans of training, travel, and other opportunities for interaction.  Regular global meetings of staff involved in managing PLs, the entire CRP management staff and the IAC are essential for effective coordination of all activity within Grain Legumes.  The website must be given a complete overhaul and improvement and then regular maintenance must be provided to keep it current. Quality of Science Recommendation 5: It is essential to continue investment in good science and to institute a change from gradualism in research output and outcomes to an expectation of innovative and concrete achievements that can be attributed clearly to people, centres and core facilities.  A cost:benefit analysis and subsequent strategic planning must be undertaken to justify further investment in the genomics and phenotyping facilities at ICRISAT especially as such technologies advance rapidly. Strategic planning and coordination must also be implemented for capitalising on the investment in crop simulation modelling. (The phenotyping facility of ICRISAT needs to focus on delivering some outcomes, not only outputs.)  PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. The CCEE recommends special recognition of high quality collaborative papers, thereby encouraging increased quality of the research programmes and widening the penetration of research impacts.  More importance should be placed on the quality of publication, rather than quantity of outputs and there should be recognition of other types of outputs from Grain Legumes. The CRP Director must be party to this.  If staff are engaged in activities that relate more to impact than publication then this needs to be monitored and recorded and a clearer understanding developed of what constitutes a pathway to impact and how success of such activities can be evaluated. A system must be devised and incorporated into the M&E to enable recognition of other types of outputs (non- publication based) from Grain Legumes, e.g. varieties for breeders. Effectiveness Recommendation 6: To develop greater synergy, Grain Legumes should review management processes and the direction of research activities. In particular, far more extensive integration of research and knowledge exchange should take place across both African and Asian continents so that the best aspects of both can be shared. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended that considers processing solutions, as well as breeding solutions, to capitalise upon the nutritional benefits of the grain legume crops. We recommend:  A better collaboration with social scientists at the design stage of experiments in order to improve the utility of the work carried out and to understand its reach.  Supporting3 the adoption of best practice electronic data collection, central storage and open access, particularly of genomic data, for public use.  Given the focus on the link between phenotyping and genotyping, we note that there is a lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped, and therefore these could be better aligned within each species.  Concentrating investment external to Grain Legumes on scaling up production of varieties with the most promising trait profiles to meet the basic seed requirement.  Developing a more holistic approach that coordinates an understanding of the disease pathology and epidemiology, and of new chemicals before they become commercially available, together with agronomic practice such that recommendations can be made for growers. Continuing work to establish whether agronomic factors hold true in different environments and to assess GxE effects within breeding programmes. Such rigorous trial practices should be used to inform the evaluation of breeding lines and to provide phenotype data to associate with markers for traits such as heat, drought and herbicide tolerance.  Considering grain legumes as if they were vegetable crops in terms of the strategy for intensification of production, both from the management perspective and for seed systems, will be a useful development objective into the future. This will bring about more rapid intensification and is likely to increase farmer returns from investment. Recommendation 7: The CGIAR centres should focus in on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral) it is less so for a research institute, and should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres in a CRP).  Collaborative approaches should be explored within Grain Legumes, e.g. similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella. Similarly better alignment is needed to address the lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped.  Despite positive impacts from research in genomics, plant breeding and seed systems, the lack of an effective M&E, already mentioned elsewhere, has reduced the ability to monitor impact pathways. This must be addressed.  The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. Responsibilities of the different actors in the whole value chain must be considered and identified when developing impact targets, and the pathway leading to them, for individual projects. People with socio-economist skills must be part of the team from project inception so that appropriate frameworks are incorporated for measuring and influencing sociological and economic changes brought about by Grain Legumes research. Impact Recommendation 8: PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases in which impact is strongly evidenced, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding.  Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment.  It is essential that Grain Legumes provides training to staff on what constitutes impact and how it can be recorded.  Specific, rather than generalised, potential impacts arising from activity within Grain Legumes should be defined at the time of justifying the programme of work and a pathway to impact should form part of the documentation prepared ahead of a piece of research commencing. . In other words, centres should submit work plans to Grain Legumes before they are undertaken using W1/W2 funds Recommendation 9: The reporting activity must be streamlined to a single (brief) format that can be used to report to Grain Legumes, Centres and to donors for special project activities4. Sustainability Recommendation 10: As Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Zeigler (Director General of IRRI) states “…time and effort would be better spent … making tough decisions about which programs deserve the precious support.”  The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2 and there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. To prevent this outcome it is necessary to significantly reduce the fixed costs of the centres and/or refuse to accept W3 and bilateral funding without an adequate overhead component.  In the absence of long term certainty, the scale of the budget allocated to each of the new CRPs should be very conservative, a feature that can only be achieved by restricting/reducing the scope, probably quite significantly. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Recommendation 11: The challenge for Grain Legumes is to achieve pro-active gender mainstreaming, which facilitates opportunities for gender diversity within all activities, from employment processes through research to end users.  Strategic measurable gender indicators need to be embedded in research design, for instance, through specific IDOs for each of the flagships projects. Accurate baseline data are also required to facilitate M&E reviews of progress.  Implementation of the Gender Strategy is the responsibility of everyone, not solely the Gender Team. Thus, ownership could be encouraged by setting personal development for key personnel objectives with specific outcomes, e.g. employment practices or research outcomes.  Recognising the positive gender initiatives in progress or planned, feedback must be communicated and integrated into broader research planning to share opportunities, methods and outcomes.  In addition to promoting gender equity in research, Grain Legumes also needs to ensure that working environments are gender sensitive and that recruitment processes, including promotion opportunities are equitable. Gender imbalance in management should be actively examined to identify further opportunities for developing female leadership. Recommendation 12: It is recommended that a training plan be devised to ensure that capacity building efforts are more clearly aligned with the research mandate, delivery and timeframe of Grain Legumes. Moreover, we recommend that ICRISAT develop a strategy to treat their new cohort of researchers more equitably in the future. Recommendation 13: To develop a more coherent strategic programme designed to eliminate overlap and promote synergy between programmes with common aims, Grain Legumes should hold a meeting with a range of partners. Governance Recommendation 14: Governance processes should be re-assessed and the structure altered to ensure that the Grain Legumes Director has the authority and budget control to drive the execution of strategy.  The ISC should be truly independent and given the power to influence strategic decisions before they become final. We also recommend that PLCs are provided with the authority to manage the direction and finances of their PL; and that ring-fenced funds are provided for the promotion of collaboration, coordination and staff training5. The way ahead In our view, having seen the ineffectiveness of much of the attempts [or lack of attempts] to harness synergies between multiple centres, and of the strength in few or sole centre partnerships, we believe that there is little to justify a full retention of the 8 legume species and 4 CGIAR centres in a CRP. TL I and II and PABRA have shown to be reasonably good cross-centre and single centre integrated programmes, but even they suffer from incomplete value chain approaches to increasing rural incomes while increasing food and nutritional security; they both need multi-faceted solutions which are not immediately forthcoming from Grain Legumes. It is important to embed Grain Legumes research within the agri-food systems these crops serve. Figure ES1 broadly shows the perceived current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and species, and is discussed more in the text. It is clear that the value chains for individual species from trait determination to nutritional impact have more cohesion than do the individual activities (e.g. trait deployment) across species. For this reason we believe that the future for research in Grain Legumes is best addressed by focusing on each of the species separately, and within an ecosystem framework; any synergy for research across species can be effected through communication and not necessarily through obligatory cooperative research. The ecosystem framework will allow for strengthening of agronomy type systems research, the arguments for benefits of inclusion of grain legumes in cropping systems, which is notable by its absence in much of what Grain Legumes currently undertakes. Figure ES1. Current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and crop species We therefore agree with the innovation in agri-food systems approach of the CG, and believe that Grain Legumes rightly belongs in the Dryland Cereals and Legumes Agri-food Systems. We believe that the option of combining the crops of dryland cereals and legumes in the cereal-legume-livestock systems of subsistence farming communities for whole-farm productivity is closest to the best way forward. Indeed the inclusion of grain legumes may not warrant even a CRP alone, rather the legume components should fit in with the major crops that determine the production systems. Legumes will always be subservient to the major cereals, as necessary adjuncts to the whole production system, providing both nutritional diversity and environmental services, neither achievable from cereals alone. Figure ES2. Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP, which  Incorporates ex-Dryland Systems, Dryland Cereals, Grain Legumes, some HumidTropics, some ex-Livestock &Fisheries into a new CRP  Will cover full agri-food system VC for all 8 legumes in all ecologies, but must interact (dock) with the relevant AFS-CRPs for the dominant cereal in the relevant ecology  Hence, will need to negotiate with other Agrifood Systems-CRPs on who does what for legumes  In addition, responsible for sorghum and millet in the mixed dryland crop-livestock agro-ecologies For major game changers to be effected, we believe that the game has to change, and there is little evidence of this. The direction of CRPs is the correct route, but the journey has not yet come to its destination. A major change of game [such as the adoption of a Flagship Project approach as exemplified by the Australian CSIRO – where flagships contract services from centres of research excellence] would be painful to implant. The CGIAR system is going down the right pathway but it has not gone far enough.

Exploring the role the brand plays in the choice of charity by UK volunteers

Charities need to understand why volunteers choose one brand rather than another in order to attract more volunteers to their organisation. There has been considerable academic interest in understanding why people volunteer generally. However, this research explores the more specific question of why a volunteer chooses one charity brand rather than another. It builds on previous conceptualisations of volunteering as a consumption decision. Seen through the lens of the individual volunteer, it considers the under-researched area of the decision-making process. The research adopts an interpretivist epistemology and subjectivist ontology. Qualitative data was collected through depth interviews and analysed using both Means-End Chain (MEC) and Framework Analysis methodology. The primary contribution of the research is to theory: understanding the role of brand in the volunteer decision-making process. It identifies two roles for brand. The first is as a specific reason for choice, an ‘attribute’ of the decision. Through MEC, volunteering for a well-known brand connects directly through to a sense of self, both self-respect but also social recognition by others. All four components of the symbolic consumption construct are found in the data: volunteers choose a well-known brand to say something about themselves. The brand brings credibility and reassurance, it reduces the risk and enables the volunteer to meet their need to make a difference and achieve a sense of accomplishment. The second closely related role for brand is within the process of making the volunteering decision. Volunteers built up knowledge about the charity brands from a variety of brand touchpoints, over time. At the point of decision-making that brand knowledge and engagement becomes relevant, enabling some to make an automatic choice despite the significant level of commitment being made. The research identifies four types of decision-making behaviour. The research also makes secondary contributions to MEC methodology and to the non-profit context. It concludes within practical implications for management practice and a rich agenda for future research.

Att prata ihop sig i rätten

Negotiating experience in the court How do judges assess witness credibility, and how do they proceed to reach sustainable conclusions in a criminal court? This article is based on discussions in four focus groups with lay judges in Swedish district courts. In criminal court trials, a version of an event is generally reinforced if it is confirmed by witnesses. However, if their narratives are too similar, none of them is found trustworthy. The focus group participants agreed that if witnesses were suspected of having discussed their individual experiences of an event and accommodated them into a common story, their testimonies were not considered credible. While testimonies should ideally be untainted by other people’s impressions and opinions, other rules govern the truth of the court. The lay judges appreciated their deliberations, including negotiations on impressions and memories of the trial, and they sometimes adjusted their perceptions in the light of information provided by other members of the court. However, if the lay judges are viewed as witnesses of what takes place in the trial, this gives rise to a paradox: While witness negotiations on experiences are regarded as a means to construct a false or biased story, the same kind of interaction between the judges is considered necessary to establish a consensual truth of what actually happened.

Lanseringen och etableringen av ett socialt problem : En analys av debatten om ledarkulturen inom svensk landslagsgymnastik i Dagens Nyheter 2012–2013

The launching and establishment of a social problem: An analysis of the debate on Swedish national level gymnastics in Dagens Nyheter 2012-2013 In 2012 Sweden’s largest daily newspaper, Dagens Nyheter, published a number of articles on the state of affairs in Swedish national level gymnastics. In these articles, ex-gymnasts, coaches, parents and physicians stepped forward and testified about recurrent wrongdoings and abuse against young (particularly) female gymnasts. In response to the criticism, the accused coaches and representatives of the Swedish Gymnastics Federation downsized or dismissed the criticism as inaccurate. This being said, and using discursive psychology and a qualitative design, this article sheds light upon this debate – by viewing it as a struggle between a hegemonic discourse of ”the goodness” of sports, on the one hand, a number of unfavorable and negative testimonies of the state of affairs in Swedish national level gymnastics on the other. More concretely, this struggle has been analyzed with regard to the discursive and rhetoric resources the involved parties’ used to pursue their claims about the state of affairs in Swedish national level gymnastics and the impact these resources had for their credibility and legitimacy. Questions were: Who is entitled ”to spell out” their view on the state of affairs within Swedish national level gymnastics? What is mediated and how? How are descriptions and accounts about reality constructed as credible and factual? It is concluded that social problems are launched via co-production; in this process, the gymnastics community, the research community, single individuals, and the media – were co-actors. 

O gerenciamento de riscos na prevenção de perdas trabalhistas : um estudo de caso no Grupo Eberle Mundial

Este trabalho tem como objetivo geral verificar como uma empresa gerencia seus riscos trabalhistas com vistas a preveni-los. É um estudo de caso único, de natureza descritiva e qualitativa. Foi desenvolvido junto ao Grupo Eberle Mundial, através de entrevista do Gerente de Recursos Humanos, questionário auto-aplicado por sete membros do corpo executivo da organização, exame de documentos e análise de artigos de revistas e de jornais. Paralelamente, buscou experiências e opiniões de quatro especialistas da área trabalhista, também mediante questionário auto-aplicado. Em face dos resultados obtidos, o trabalho descreve a forma de gerenciamento de riscos trabalhistas adotada pelo Grupo Eberle Mundial e atende os objetivos específicos nos termos adiante sintetizados. Demonstra que o Grupo mantém rotinas para identificação de riscos trabalhistas, porém, não pratica a definição prévia do que sejam riscos relevantes e não relevantes. Identifica uma diversidade de riscos trabalhistas percebidos pelo Grupo e verifica que esses não abrangem riscos operacionais. Mostra que o Grupo criou métodos e instrumentos de trabalho próprios para o gerenciamento de seus riscos trabalhistas, atua de forma permanente na prevenção desses e faz a revisão anual de seus processos, buscando chegar à incorporação dessa filosofia à cultura da empresa, contudo, não mantém um sistema que integre seus procedimentos, na forma proposta pela literatura. Confirma que, através do projeto implantado pela nova administração, o Grupo que, em 1998, estava com sua sobrevivência comprometida, até 2003 já reduziu em mais de 50% as perdas financeiras que vinha sofrendo e restabeleceu sua credibilidade e imagem internas e externas. Constata que existe comprometimento da alta direção do Grupo com o gerenciamento de riscos trabalhistas, todavia, esse comprometimento não é do conhecimento de todos membros do corpo executivo da organização. Aponta que o Grupo não mantém área específica para gerenciamento de seus riscos trabalhistas, nem tem claro quem são os profissionais responsáveis por esses procedimentos.

Estabilidade institucional, credibilidade e poupança privada: uma análise de economia política

O objetivo desta pesquisa é mostrar que há uma relação positiva entre a estabilidade política-institucional, a credibilidade e a taxa de poupança privada. Parte da literatura recente sobre disparidades entre taxas de poupança usa um argumento de economia política para explicar como a instabilidade política-institucional pode afetar as decisões públicas que determinam a poupança pública, mas não sugere da mesma forma que tal instabilidade pode atingir negativamente a poupança privada. Analisar-se-á esta lacuna da teoria partindo-se do referencial teórico da Nova Economia Institucional (NEI), onde salienta-se, nos processos de decisão privada de acumulação de ativos, o papel do governo gartantindo (i) a estabilidade das regras de mercado e (ii) os direitos de propriedade. A pesquisa envolverá uma análise teórica microeconômica da determinação da poupança privada usando a visão da NEI. O interesse prático fundamental da pesquisa é tentar justificar, em parte, os baixos níveis de poupança na América Latina usando um argumento institucionalista e, desta forma, propor ações de governo e reformas.