Estimating elasticities with frontier and other regressions in evaluating two advertising strategies for US Army recruiting

To help resolve a long-standing debate in the US Government on advertising strategies for military recruitment, this study applies ordinary least squares (OLS), which here includes (1) stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) and (2) frontierized least squares (FLS), to evaluate two distinct advertising strategies: Service Specific vs. Joint. Thus, in contrast to the customary use of a single central tendency method, such as OLS, on different models, we here use multiple methods on a single model to cross check and validate results. In addition to serving as cross checks, the methods can be used to identify classic problems, including biases in the data and shortcomings in one or more of the methodologies employed. To avoid dealing with problems on identifying motives underlying various patterns in advertising expenditure, data are drawn from a statistically designed experiment where the expenditures were controlled as part of the experiment to resolve the issue of a choice between the two advertising strategies of interest. In contrast to earlier studies, the current paper finds that all methods used lead to the same conclusion: Service Specific is more efficient than Joint, at least for the US Army—which is, by far, the largest military advertiser. Finally, the paper introduces a new method for reallocating advertising budgets between the Uniformed Services which (a) is simpler than the customary use of cross partial derivatives, (b) avoids the need for the ceteris paribus assumptions for each such allocation, as in customary reallocation methods and (c) simplifies matters so that, for instance, it is not necessary to introduce an entirely new organization to administer the desired coordinating activities.     

Research findings in strategic management with implications for R&D management

Abstract
The author has reviewed the literature, predominantly North American, on the relationships between corporate strategy and corporate performance.
The general context is the question of where and how a firm should diversify. The author considers three areas of decision: corporate strategy, (where to compete), business strategy, (how to compete), and corporate organization (receptiveness to diversification). It appears that the most advantageous corporate strategy is to diversify into a high-profit area but to maintain a substantial relatedness to existing businesses; the best business strategy is to have a market-related perspective, to use R&D to develop new products with a marked competitive advantage rather than new processes, to minimise investment but to enter the market on a sufficiently large scale. This last condition presupposes a high degree of top-management commitment to the venture. Furthermore, consideration has to be given to whether the organizational culture is such as to nurture rather than stifle the venture by insisting on administrative controls appropriate to the firm's traditional base.
The author points to three areas deserving of further investigation: How a firm in a mature industry can find a related area that is sufficiently attractive; how to fix on the correct scale of an entry taking into account the long lead times before the venture shows a net return; and how to ensure that the corporate culture will be able to accommodate novel interests and procedures.
All the above matters pose questions for the management of technology and the direction of R&D.     

A new contract for welfare: partnership in pensions

The government's Green Paper proposes reducing state pension costs whilst encouraging private sector provision. The success of the proposed ‘stakeholder pension schemes’ depends on regulation. However, regulation can penalise those it is intended to protect. This is a sensitive issue, since stakeholder pension schemes are expected to attract financially vulnerable, lower paid, employees. Whilst the flat rate accrual of the state second pension confers some benefit, certain groups are put in a difficult position by the retention of means-tested benefits.     

危机:危险与机遇——哈佛大学理查德·库珀教授访谈

编者按:理查德·库珀(Richard N.cooper)是哈佛大学经济系教授,世界著名的国际经济问题专家.曾任美国副国务卿、国家情报委员会主席、波士顿联邦储备银行主席、耶鲁大学教务长等职.他的主要著作包括:<经济的相互依存>、<相互依存世界中的经济政策>、<国际货币体系>、<发展中国家的经济稳定和债务>、<世界经济的环境与资源政策>、<转型经济体的贸易增长>等.近日,本刊邀请哈佛大学经济系中国社会科学院访问学者赵瑾教授对他进行了专访,内容主要涉及美国次贷危机、美国经济"双赤字"、中国通货膨胀、中国对世界经济的影响和资本市场开放等.     

A Rose.com by Any Other Name

We document a striking positive stock price reaction to the announcement of corporate name changes to Internet-related dotcom names. This "dotcom" effect produces cumulative abnormal returns on the order of 74 percent for the 10 days surrounding the announcement day. The effect does not appear to be transitory; there is no evidence of a postannouncement negative drift. The announcement day effect is also similar across all firms, regardless of the firm's level of involvement with the Internet. A mere association with the Internet seems enough to provide a firm with a large and permanent value increase.