Who pays attention to sustainability reports and why? Evidence from Google search activity

We introduce country-level Google search activity as a direct measure of the level of stakeholder attention directed towards sustainability reports. We validate this measure by establishing that search activity for sustainability reports is correlated with temporal patterns in firms' supply of these reports. To frame the economic magnitude of this search behaviour, we then show that the level of attention directed towards sustainability reports is very low compared to the level of attention directed towards financial and accounting information. Next, we examine two related research questions. First, we identify who pays attention to sustainability reports. We find, consistent with the environmental Kuznets curve, that attention towards sustainability reports is strongly associated with economic development. Consistent with findings in prior research that suggest citizens in stakeholder-oriented countries have stronger preferences for firms to act prosocially, we also find that search activity for sustainability reports relative to search activity for financial performance metrics is greater in civil law countries than in common law countries. Finally, we then explore the question of why individuals pay attention to sustainability reports and find evidence that suggests sustainability reports are used for two primary purposes: evaluating the societal impacts of firms' actions; and, firm valuation.     

An options-pricing approach to election prediction

Election forecasting errors appear chiefly due to the mode of extracting outcomes from the polled share of the vote     

Training as a social purpose: are economic and social benefits delivered?

This paper reports original research which measures the social and economic impact of training and skills development on individuals who participated in training provided by social purpose, nonprofit organizations. An implicit policy assumption is that such organizations contribute to social and economic regeneration. Examining the costs and benefits of training to trainees, an adapted Return on Investment methodology measures any economic benefit, while an Index of Social Benefit measures changes in individual well‐being. The results demonstrate that while changes to both the economic and social well‐being of trainees occur, it does not necessarily relate solely to the training they received. Instead, changes reflect other, often complex, aspects of trainees’ lives, although training may facilitate change. Furthermore, social purpose, nonprofit organizations need to evince the socioeconomic benefits of their training programmes to secure future funding, public or private, but proving their successful delivery may be difficult to determine.     

The Power of One: Dissent and Organizational Life

Over the last 20 years, organizations have attempted numerous innovations to create more openness and to increase ethical practice. However, adult students in business classes report that managers are generally bureaucratically oriented and averse to constructive criticism or principled dissent. When organizations oppose dissent, they suffer the consequences of mistakes that could be prevented and they create an unethical and toxic environment for individual employees. By distinguishing principled dissent from other forms of criticism and opposition, managers and leaders can perceive the dissenter as an important organizational voice and a valued employee. The dissenter, like the whistleblower, is often highly ethically motivated and desires to contribute to the organization’s wellbeing. Recognizing and protecting principled dissent provides the means of transforming organizations. By restoring dignity to the individual, organizations gain more productive and loyal employees, and they create an environment that promotes critical thinking, learning, and a commitment to ethics. Dr. Nasrin Shahinpoor is an Associate Professor of Economics at Hanover College in Hanover, IN. Dr. Bernard F. Matt is Professor of Religion and Philosophy at Wilmington College—Cincinnati Branch in Cincinnati, OH.     

What a Difference a Year Makes: Time Lag Effect of Information Technology Investment on Firm Performance

How long does it take for a firm to realize the performance benefits of its IT investment? This article explores the time lag effects of IT investment on firm performance. Using longitudinal data of 1421 firm-time observations over a period of six years (1991–1996) as the initial time point of IT investment, we examined time lag effect on firm performance in a five-year time window. The performance data for the sample spans 12 years, from 1989 to 2000. The results demonstrate a strong support for time lag effects on the relationship between IT investment and firm performance. Specifically, our study found that it took an average of approximately three to four years after the year of investment for the firms in our sample to realize the greatest performance benefits. The findings offer useful implications for researchers and managers to better understand the link between IT and firm performance so that they can make wiser decisions to maximize the business value of their investments.     

Towards a signature pedagogy for design and technology education: a literature review

International Journal of Technology and Design Education - Drawing on the work of Lee Shulman, this article reviews literature exploring the concept of signature pedagogies, which are described as...     

沃尔夫冈·卡佩拉里

"真实的东西是20世纪,它会在21世纪消失吗?"杰拉德·马特:马塞尔·普鲁斯特在《斯万家那边》中写道:"往昔时光不复存在。"面对消逝和记忆,你如何抉择?沃尔夫冈·卡佩拉里:现在的艺术家为了不被人遗忘,需要夜以继日、马不停蹄的发电子邮件、到处推介自己的项目,以此来告诉人们你还存在:这就像     

Competition to Save Lives: Political competition and health outcomes in India

Governance indicators have come under fire in recent years, especially the World Governance Indicators. Critics present these indicators as atheoretical and biased. Critics of the critics counter that no better alternatives exist. The authors suggest otherwise, arguing that more appropriate “governance” indicators will: have theoretical grounding; focus on specific fields of engagement; emphasize outcomes; and control for key contextual differences in comparing countries. Such constructs can help indicate where countries seem to have governance problems, allowing second-stage analyses of where and what these problems are; they do not directly point to the presence or nature of problems or provide a measure of the governance concept. Under-5 mortality rates adjusted for country income groups are shown as an example of such a measure, and data presented for contextually compared outcomes in this specific field to show where governance seems better and worse. The USA is shown up as relatively weak, whereas a country such as Pakistan seems to have better governance in this sector than other low-income countries. The indicator has its weaknesses and is partly presented as an illustrative example of a new approach, but also allows questions about why governance of this sector might be problematic in certain contexts and easier in others.