State takeover legislation and share values: The wealth effects of Pennsylvania's Act 36

Proponents of state antitakeover legislation argue that previous empirical tests by financial economists of the wealth effects of Pennsylvania's 1990 antitakeover law are biased. We show that the proponents are correct. In particular, firm size, event-time clustering, and non-synchronous trading effects account for the wealth decreases reported in earlier studies. We also show, however, that both proponents and critics of the Pennsylvania legislation have ignored the earliest press release about it. The wealth effect associated with this announcement is negative, large, and statistically significant. These results therefore are consistent with the hypothesis that the Pennsylvania law decreased company values and with the hypothesis that the initial market reaction is an unbiased estimate of the law's effect on firm values.     

In search of the meaning of entrepreneurship

This paper is an attempt to build a bridge between the popular and the academic usage of the terms entrepreneur and entrepreneurship, and to identify the raw materials needed to construct an interpretive framework capable of illuminating the nature of entrepreneurship and its role in economic theory. We review briefly the contributions made to this topic by Cantillon, Schumpeter, Schultz and Kirzner. We advance a synthetic definition of the entrepreneur as someone who specializes in taking responsibility for and making judgemental decisions that affect the location, the form, and the use of goods, resources, or institutions. We then conclude with some observations on the basic choice confronting economics regarding the place of entrepreneurship in economic analysis.     

Professionals and social responsibility: Some patterns

Modern professionals are engaged in making things better, but the specific advances on the micro-level are increasingly undercut by problems on the macro-level. The content of this better is typically guided by values such as efficiency, productivity or cost-effectiveness, which are essentially output over input ratios unable to account for how a specific improvement will fit into the broader human, social and ecological contexts. Hence, micro-level advances lead to fragmentation and a loss of harmony, compatibility and conviviality. The situation is further complicated by the fact that, culturally speaking, science and technology have become good in themselves, making reasonable discourse difficult. This paper concludes with an analogy from an earlier epoch suggesting how the situation may be resolved. After completing a doctorate in Mechanical Engineering, Willem Vanderburg continued his studies of technology via the social sciences and humanities. He is currently the Director of the Centre for Technology and Social Development in the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering at the University of Toronto. His publications include Technique and Culture, Vol. I, The Growth of Minds and Cultures (1985) and Perspectives on our Age (1981).     

Are you a strategist or just a manager?

Perhaps the greatest strategist of all time was not a business executive but a general. Helmuth von Moltke, chief of the Prussian and German general staffs from 1858 to 1888, issued "directives" to his officers rather than specific commands. These guidelines for autonomous decision making encouraged Moltke's subordinates to show individual initiative. In this article, Hans Hinterhuber and Wolfgang Popp translate Moltke's example into business terms. According to Moltke, strategy is applied common sense and cannot be taught. The authors suggest that good entrepreneurs and managers--along with generals--are born with the qualities that make them successful. But even if managers have the potential to be good strategists, they must develop and hone their natural talents. And CEOs and top management can help by identifying and promoting such talents in their employees. Hinterhuber and Popp have created a questionnaire that helps measure strategic management competence. Managers and entrepreneurs take this test themselves, answering ten questions such as, "Do I have an entrepreneurial vision?", "Do I have a corporate philosophy?", and "Do I have competitive advantages?" Using the questionnaire, company management can evaluate managers being considered for a promotion. At the same time, those who take the test can use it to determine their own performance as strategists. Strategic managers provide subordinates with general guidelines, just as Helmuth von Moltke issued directives to his officers. And outstanding entrepreneurs create a corporate culture in which their vision, philosophy, and business strategies are implemented by employees who think independently.