Patents in a Model of Endogenous Growth

This paper examines patent protection in an endogenous-growth model. Our aim is twofold. First, we show how the patent policies discussed by the recent patent-design literature can influence R&D in the endogenous-growth framework, where the role of patents has been largely ignored. Second, we explore how the general-equilibrium framework contributes to the results of the patent-design literature. In a general-equilibrium model, both incentives to innovate and monopoly distortions depend on the proportion of industries that conduct R&D. Furthermore, patents affect the allocation of R&D resources across industries, and patents can distort resources away from industries where they are most productive.     

Human due diligence

Most companies do a thorough job of financial due diligence when they acquire other companies. But all too often, deal makers simply ignore or underestimate the significance of people issues in mergers and acquisitions. The consequences are severe. Most obviously, there's a high degree of talent loss after a deal's announcement. To make matters worse, differences in decision-making styles lead to infighting; integration stalls; and productivity declines. The good news is that human due diligence can help companies avoid these problems. Done early enough, it helps acquirers decide whether to embrace or kill a deal and determine the price they are willing to pay. It also lays the groundwork for smooth integration. When acquirers have done their homework, they can uncover capability gaps, points of friction, and differences in decision making. Even more important, they can make the critical "people" decisions-who stays, who goes, who runs the combined business, what to do with the rank and file-at the time the deal is announced or shortly thereafter. Making such decisions within the first 30 days is critical to the success of a deal. Hostile situations clearly make things more difficult, but companies can and must still do a certain amount of human due diligence to reduce the inevitable fallout from the acquisition process and smooth the integration. This article details the steps involved in conducting human due diligence. The approach is structured around answering five basic questions: Who is the cultural acquirer? What kind of organization do you want? Will the two cultures mesh? Who are the people you most want to retain? And how will rank-and-file employees react to the deal? Unless an acquiring company has answered these questions to its satisfaction, the acquisition it is making will be very likely to end badly.     

Social and Symbolic Capital and Responsible Entrepreneurship: An Empirical Investigation of SME Narratives

This paper investigates links between social capital and symbolic capital and responsible entrepreneurship in the context of small and medium enterprises (SMEs). The source of the primary data was 144 ‘Business Profiles’, written by the owner-managers of small businesses in application for a Small Business Awards competition in 2005. Included in each of these narratives were claims relating to the firms’ contributions to wider society, relationships with customers, employees and stakeholders. These narratives were coded and classified in a framework drawn from Nahapiet and Ghoshal’s (1998, Academy of Management Review 23(2), 242–266) categorisation of social capital. The analysis revealed a range of strategic orientations towards the development of social and symbolic capital, along a conceptual continuum ranging from being responsible for oneself to being responsible for others. Overall, the evidence demonstrates the significance of the power inherent in the social relations of SMEs as a force for ethical behaviour, and suggests that normative theories of the development of social capital may provide ‘competitive advantage’ through responsible behaviour for small business in the global economy.Ted Fuller is a Professor of Entrepreneurship and Strategic Foresight, and Head of the Centre for Entrepreneurship and SME Development, Teesside Business School, University of Teesside.Yumiao Tian is a postgraduate research student in the Centre for Entrepreneurship and SME Development, Teesside Business School, University of Teesside.     

What Is Toxic Followership?

There has been some discussion on the subject of toxic followership, but it is as yet ill‐defined and deserves further evaluation and study. The current paper examines toxic followership using Kelley's typology of followers and provides potential methods of mitigating toxic followership. Just as toxic leaders harm organizations, so too can toxic followers. They both can cause good people to leave an organization, and put the organization's survival at risk.