When is cash good or bad for firm performance?

Research summary: Cash can create shareholder value when used for adaptation to unfolding contingencies, but can also reduce value when appropriated by other stakeholders. We synthesize arguments from the behavioral theory of the firm, economic perspectives like agency theory, and the value‐creation versus value‐appropriation literatures to argue that the implications of cash for firm performance are context‐specific. Cash is more beneficial for firms operating in highly competitive, research‐intensive, or growth‐focused industries that are typical of contexts requiring adaptation in the face of uncertainties. Conversely, cash is more detrimental to performance in firms that are poorly governed, diversified, or opaque, as are typical of contexts where stakeholder conflicts, information asymmetries, or power imbalances can encourage value appropriation by other stakeholders. Managerial summary: Cash can create shareholder value when used for adaptation to unfolding contingencies, but can also reduce value when appropriated by other stakeholders. While cash‐rich firms have higher performance on average, with those in the 75th percentile having a market‐to‐book value 15 percent higher than those in the 25th percentile, we find that the performance benefits of cash depend on the context. Cash is more beneficial for firms operating in highly competitive, research‐intensive, or growth‐focused industries that are typical of contexts requiring adaptation in the face of uncertainties. Conversely, cash is more detrimental to performance in firms that are poorly governed, diversified, or opaque, as are typical of contexts where stakeholder conflicts, information asymmetries, or power imbalances can encourage value appropriation by other stakeholders. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Interoperability of interpersonal communications services – A consumer perspective

The European Electronic Communications Code (EECC) enables competent authorities to introduce interoperability obligations also for number-independent interpersonal communications services (NI-ICS) such as Facebook Messenger, LINE, Skype, WeChat and WhatsApp. Under such an obligation, consumers could interact not just with users of the NI-ICS where they have a user account themselves, but also with users of all then interoperable NI-ICS. While with traditional electronic communications services (ECS) economic theory and consumer interests align as regards interoperability since multi-homing across various operators is the exemption, it is not yet clear whether that is also true for NI-ICS for which multi-homing is the norm. Our paper draws on an online survey of n = 2044 consumers in Germany covering traditional ECS, email and 22 other NI-ICS to address this issue from a consumer point of view. We find that people proactively use the boundaries between communications services to compartmentalize their social contacts according to relationship closeness. Our finding echoes indications provided in a rich stream of computer-mediated communication (CMC) research and in particular psychological theories of relationship development. Specifically, people appear to follow a finely tuned cultural code implying a hierarchical order of communications services used depending on the closeness of the contacts. Consequently, our results provide a complementary explanation of how and why certain groups of social ties converge to a specific (set of) communications service(s) beyond network effects and shed a critical light on current policy debates around an interoperability obligation for interpersonal communications applications. They highlight that an interoperability obligation for NI-ICS would likely not be in line with consumer interests.     

The (future) role of China in ICT standardisation – A European perspective

The paper argues that the Chinese standardisation system should not be perceived as a threat to international ICT standardisation and that the rather more relaxed attitude adopted by the EU is an adequate way forward. It claims that a co-operation based approach to the increasingly powerful relative newcomer is much more appropriate than one based on competition. These arguments are based on a discussion of the European and Chinese standardisation systems and on a subsequent SWOT analysis.     

Why are you really losing sales opportunities? A buyers' perspective on the determinants of key account sales failures

Key account sales are important for business organizations. Understanding why some of these sales proposals fail from the buyer's perspective has organization-wide implications for improving firm performance. Extant literature lacks a clear understanding of the process-based determinants of sales failure within a key account context. Another problem with this research stream is its reliance on data from the salesperson, sales manager, and/or selling firm, which can introduce attribution biases. Our research overcomes sales failure attribution biases by collecting data from the industrial buying center's perspective. Thirty-five semi-structured interview cases were conducted with buying decision makers following failed key account sales proposals. The result of this inquiry is a model which outlines the determinants of sales failures. We identify three common drivers of sales failure: adaptability, relationship-potential, and cost considerations. Results indicate that these established constructs are more complex than previously specified, each having multiple attributes as defined by key account buyers.     

This is what you came for? University–industry collaborations and follow-on inventions by the firm

The positive impact of university–industry collaborations on firms' innovative performance is well recognized. However, to date, the existing heterogeneity within university–industry collaboration processes and the sources of value creation underlying the resulting inventions are left underexplored. As a result, our understanding as to why some of the joint inventions resulting from such collaborations turn out to present a more fertile source of follow-on developments and value for the collaborating firm than others is limited. The present paper sheds light on this question through the application of a knowledge recombination perspective. Hence, we open the black box of innovation and put a spotlight on the knowledge components that make up the joint inventions resulting from university–industry collaborations. We evaluate how the nature—scientific versus technological—and origins—internal versus external to the collaborating partners—of these knowledge components relate to the inventive impact of the partners' joint invention. Examining a sample of 9102 USPTO co-patents, joint inventions created through university–industry collaborations are shown to be most fertile as a source of firm follow-on inventions when they are the result of a recombination process that includes technological knowledge components stemming from both collaborating partners. This effect is most pronounced when the partners' technological knowledge contributions are moderately similar. In contrast, when the joint technology development takes place in a technology domain that is novel to the firm, the resulting joint inventions are most fertile as a source of firm follow-on inventions when the university contributes through the input of technological knowledge components situated in exactly this technology domain that is novel to the firm. Remarkably, no evidence for such direct effects is found regarding the partners' scientific contributions. Together, these findings provide important insights for firms who intend to spur their internal technology development through collaboration with a university partner.     

What is the irrigation potential for Africa? A combined biophysical and socioeconomic approach

Although irrigation in Africa has the potential to boost agricultural productivities by at least 50%, food production on the continent is almost entirely rainfed. The area equipped for irrigation, currently slightly more than 13 million hectares, makes up just 6% of the total cultivated area. More than 70% of Africa’s poor live in rural areas and mostly depend on agriculture for their livelihoods. As a result, agricultural development is key to ending poverty on the continent. Many development organizations have recently proposed to significantly increase investments in irrigation in the region. However, the potential for irrigation investments in Africa is highly dependent upon geographic, hydrologic, agronomic, and economic factors that need to be taken into account when assessing the long-term viability and sustainability of planned projects. This paper analyzes the large, dam-based and small-scale irrigation investment potential in Africa based on agronomic, hydrologic, and economic factors. We find significant profitable irrigation potential for both small-scale and large-scale systems. This type of regional analysis can guide distribution of investment funds across countries and should be a first step prior to in-depth country- and local-level assessment of irrigation potential, which will be important to agricultural and economic development in Africa.