Search results

The study aims to determine whether a relationship exists between the potential significance of corporate controversies for stakeholders and how organisations respond to them in their annual and sustainability reports.

This paper employs content analysis on annual and sustainability reports of 48 listed companies from the Refinitiv database. The logit regression was used to estimate the model.

The study revealed that the main factors increasing the probability of a controversial issue being addressed in a corporate report are the controversy’s potential significance, companies’ financial performance and lawsuits.

Our study has three major limitations. These are a relatively small sample of companies and reports, focusing on disclosures made in corporate reports and omitting other channels of communication, for example, social media, and a certain amount of subjectivity in the process of coding information.

Former studies show that corporations face a serious risk of their hypocritical strategies becoming too evident for stakeholder groups. Our findings suggest that the risk is already materialising and may undermine the idea of CSR and sustainability reporting.

Our research focuses on high-profile adverse incidents widely reported in the media, the omission of which from corporate reports seems to constitute a particular case of organised hypocrite. It also demonstrates that companies use an impression management strategy to defuse adverse publicity and that major controversies cause minor ones to be omitted from their reports.

In this article, we examine the impact of repeat interactions between VCs and underwriters. Past research has suggested that such interactions build trust and may contribute to more equitable treatment of issuing firms. We adopt an alternative perspective and suggest that these repeat interactions are characterized by reciprocal exchanges facilitated by opportunistic behavior from the VC. Our analysis demonstrates that VCs and underwriters interact in order to appropriate greater value from the IPO. This article provides a more complete understanding of repeat interactions between the VC and the underwriter by identifying characteristics of the relationship that have an impact on the value of the IPO.

It's hard to envision a system more global and more integrated than research. Many stakeholders affect and are affected by changes in the research ecosystem; the ecosystem differs in significant ways across the globe and between researchers, institutions and fields of study; and there are many questions that exclusive action can't address. There are also broad ecosystem-level questions that need answering. For these reasons alone, global approaches to reform are needed.

The first step in this exploration isn't to start looking for “solutions”, but to develop a better understanding of how our needs and interests overlap. By identifying the broad contours of common ground in this conversation, we can build the guardrails and mileposts for our collaborative efforts and then allow the finer-grained details of community-developed plans more flexibility and guidance to evolve over time.

What are these overlapping interests? First, the people in this community share a common motive – idealism – to make research better able to serve the public good. We also share a common desire to unleash the power of open to improve research and accelerate discovery; we are all willing to fix issues now instead of waiting for market forces or government intervention to do this for us; and we want to ensure that everyone everywhere has equitable access to knowledge.

There is also very broad agreement in this community about which specific problems in scholarly communication need to be fixed and why, and well as many overlapping beliefs in this community. OSI participants have concluded that four such beliefs best define our common ground: (1) research and society will benefit from open done right; (2) successful solutions will require broad collaboration; (3) connected issues need to be addressed, and (4) open isn't a single outcome, but a spectrum.

OSI has been observing and debating the activity in scholarly communication since late 2014 with regard to understanding possible global approaches and solutions for improving the future of open research. While the COVID-19 pandemic has made the importance of open science abundantly clear, the struggle to achieve this goal (not just for science but for all research) has been mired in a lack of clarity and urgency for over 20 years now, mostly stalling on the tension between wanting more openness but lacking realistic solutions for making this happen on a large scale with so many different stakeholders, needs and perspectives involved.

Underlying this tension is a fundamental difference in philosophy: whether the entire scholarly communication marketplace, driven by the needs and desires of researchers, should determine what kind of open it wants and needs; or whether this marketplace should be compelled to adopt open reform measures developed primarily by the scholarly communication system's main billpayers-funders and libraries. There is no widespread difference of opinion in the community whether open is worth pursuing. The debate is mostly over what specific open solutions are best, and at what pace open reforms should occur.

OSI has proposed a plan of action for working together to rebuild the future of scholarly communication on strong, common ground foundation. This plan – which we're referring to as Plan A – calls for joint action on studies, scholarly communication infrastructure improvement, and open outreach/education. Plan A also calls for working together with UNESCO to develop a unified global roadmap for the future of open, and for striving to ensure the community's work in this space is researcher-focused, collaborative, connected (addressing connected issues like peer review), diverse and flexible (no one-size-fits-all solutions), and beneficial to research. UNESCO's goal is to finish its roadmap proposal by early 2022.

For a full discussion of OSI's common ground recommendations, please see the Plan A website at http://plan-a.world.

All entrepreneurs interact simultaneously with multiple entrepreneurial contexts throughout their entrepreneurial journey. This conceptual paper has two central aims: (1) it synthesises the current literature on gender and entrepreneurship, and (2) it increases our understanding of how gender norms, contextual embeddedness and (in)equality mechanisms interact within contexts. Illustrative contexts that are discussed include entrepreneurship education, business networks and finance.

This conceptual paper draws upon extant literature to develop its proposed conceptual framework. It provides suggestions for systemic policy interventions as well as pointing to promising paths for future research.

A literature-generated conceptual framework is developed to explain and address the systemic barriers faced by opportunity-driven women as they engage in entrepreneurial contexts. This conceptual framework visualises the interplay between gender norms, contextual embeddedness and inequality mechanisms to explain systemic disparities. An extra dimension is integrated in the framework to account for the power of agency within women and with others, whereby agency, either individually or collectively, may disrupt and subvert the current interplay with inequality mechanisms.

This work advances understanding of the underrepresentation of women entrepreneurs. The paper offers a conceptual framework that provides policymakers with a useful tool to understand how to intervene and increase contextual embeddedness for all entrepreneurs. Additionally, this paper suggests moving beyond “fixing” women entrepreneurs and points towards disrupting systemic disparities to accomplish this contextual embeddedness for all entrepreneurs. By doing so, this research adds to academic knowledge on the construction and reconstruction of gender in the field of entrepreneurship.

The purpose of this article is the effect of doping minor Ni on the microstructure evolution of a Sn-xNi (x = 0, 0.05 and 0.1 wt.%)/Ni (Poly-crystal/Single-crystal abbreviated as PC Ni/SC Ni) solder joint during reflow and aging treatment. Results showed that the intermetallic compounds (IMCs) of the interfacial layer of Sn-xNi/PC Ni joints were Ni₃Sn₄ phase, while the IMCs of Sn-xNi/SC Ni joints were NiSn₄ phase. After the reflow process and thermal aging of different joints, the growth behavior of interfacial layer was different due to the different mechanism of element diffusion of the two substrates. The PC Ni substrate mainly provided Ni atoms through grain boundary diffusion. The Ni₃Sn₄ phase of the Sn0.05Ni/PC Ni joint was finer, and the diffusion flux of Sn and Ni elements increased, so the Ni₃Sn₄ layer of this joint was the thickest. The SC Ni substrate mainly provided Ni atoms through the lattice diffusion. The Sn0.1Ni/SC Ni joint increases the number of Ni atoms at the interface due to the doping of 0.1Ni (wt.%) elements, so the joint had the thickest NiSn₄ layer.

The effects of doping minor Ni on the microstructure evolution of an Sn-xNi (x = 0, 0.05 and 0.1 Wt.%)/Ni (Poly-crystal/Single-crystal abbreviated as PC Ni/SC Ni) solder joint during reflow and aging treatment was investigated in this study.

Results showed that the intermetallic compounds (IMCs) of the interfacial layer of Sn-xNi/PC Ni joints were Ni₃Sn₄ phase, while the IMCs of Sn-xNi/SC Ni joints were NiSn₄ phase. After the reflow process and thermal aging of different joints, the growth behavior of the interfacial layer was different due to the different mechanisms of element diffusion of the two substrates.

In this study, the effect of doping Ni on the growth and formation mechanism of IMCs of the Sn-xNi/Ni (single-crystal) solder joints (x = 0, 0.05 and 0.1 Wt.%) was investigated.