Search results

This chapter introduces a model for school libraries in Scotland, based on best practices as identified in the literature, and on five case studies undertaken in schools, two in the United States and three in Scotland. The research design was qualitative, and used grounded theory and multiple case study methods. The model represents an ideal set of circumstances for school libraries in Scotland, highlighting the interconnected web of influences that affect the success of a school library in meeting professional standards. These influences primarily fall in three areas: the school librarian, the school environment, and the professional support available to the librarian. The school librarian is the primary leader of the school library program, but factors in these other two areas can provide opportunities and barriers that can help or hinder the success of the library service. For instance, the findings suggest that school-based factors such as curriculum, scheduling, technology facilities, and staffing can have significant influence over the access the librarian has to teachers and students. Our model includes all three areas in describing a set of circumstances that would allow a school library program to thrive and meet the highest professional standards.

This chapter investigates the presence of a difference in the systemic risk level between Islamic and conventional banks in Bangladesh. The authors compare systemic resilience of three types of banks: fully fledged Islamic banks, purely conventional banks (CB), and CB with Islamic windows. The authors use the market-based systemic risk measures of marginal expected shortfall and systemic risk to identify which type is more vulnerable to a systemic event. The authors also use ΔCoVaR to identify which type contributes more to a systemic event. Using a sample of observations on 27 publicly traded banks operating over the 2005–2014 period, the authors find that CB is the least resilient sector to a systemic event, and is the one that has the highest contribution to systemic risk during crisis times.

This study tends to investigate how the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected banks' contribution to systemic risk. In addition, the authors examine whether the impact of the pandemic may vary across advanced/emerging economies, and with banks with differed characteristics.

The authors construct the bank-specific conditional value at risk (CoVaR) and marginal expected shortfall (MES) to measure their contribution to systemic risk and define the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic by the timing when countries report more than 100 confirmed cases. The authors use the approach of difference-in-differences to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on banks' contribution to systemic risk. This sample comprises monthly panel data of around 900 listed commercial banks in 39 advanced and emerging economies.

The authors find that, firstly, the COVID-19 pandemic increased banks' contribution to systemic risk significantly around the world. Secondly, the impact of the COVID-19 virus was more pronounced in developed countries than in emerging economies. Finally, banks with a larger size and higher loan-to-deposit ratio are more greatly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, while a higher capitalization for banks is insufficient to shelter them from the adverse impact of such pandemic.

The authors assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on banks' contribution to systemic risk. Using the conditional value at risk (marginal expected shortfall) of banks as the measure, this study’s results suggest that banks' contribution to systemic risk increases by around 25% (48%) amid the COVID-19 pandemic. This study’s findings may shed some light on the potential policies that financial regulators may employ to ameliorate the adverse outcomes of the ongoing pandemic.

The technological innovation of Software as a Service-Enterprise Resource Planning (SaaS-ERP) opens several relative advantages, which may be realized by choosing the proper operation mode. Thus a company looking for a new ERP system faces the question: When and under what conditions does it make sense to choose a SaaS-ERP system? The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The relative advantage criterion of the diffusion of innovation theory, derived as operation mode differences, determine the conditions under which SaaS- or On-Premise-ERP is preferable: a classification of all main systemic operation mode differences between SaaS and On-Premise for the more complex ERP systems is presented. The systemic differences were identified by analytic generalization using triangulation between a literature review and a multiple case study with four ERP producers.

The most significant decision factors between ERP operation modes are flexibility, customization, cost, and operation and maintenance. General strategies have been derived by bringing the theoretical reasons together with the operation mode difference criteria. Typical criteria for selecting SaaS-ERP are a lack of IT-capacity or capabilities, as well as high need for flexibility, due to business development, seasonality, growth, collaboration and/or expansion. On-Premise-ERPs should be selected if specific or strategic resources would be outsourced or when major customization is a need.

Case research is limited in that it reveals only ERP producers’ view and omits outlying cases.

The findings implicate that ERP selecting customers should consider and expand their criteria for ERP selection by operation mode criteria.

The classification of the most essential operation mode differences allows, for the first time, ERP selecting customers to design selection strategies. ERP selecting companies should strategically favor the operation mode that best suits their respective organizational characteristics so as to obtain the best possible support from the ERP operation modes.

This study investigates the risk-taking behavior of financial institutions in the USA. Specifically, differences between taking risks that affect primarily the shareholders of the institution and risks contributing to the overall systemic risk of the financial sector are examined. Additionally, differences between risk-taking before, during and after the financial crisis of 2007/2008 are examined.

To analyze the determinants of stand-alone and systemic risk, a generalized linear model including size, governance, charter value, business cycle, competition and control variables is estimated. Furthermore, Granger causality tests are conducted.

The results show that systemic risk has a positive effect on valuation and that corporate governance has no significant effect on risk-taking. The influence of competition is conditional on the state of the economy and the risk measure used. Systemic risk Granger-causes idiosyncratic risk but not vice versa.

The major limitations of this study are related to the analyzed subset of large financial institutions and important risk-culture variables being omitted.

The broad policy implication of this paper is that systemic risk cannot be lowered by market discipline due to the moral hazard problem. Therefore, regulatory measures are necessary to ensure that individual financial institutions are not endangering the financial system.

This study contributes to the empirical literature on bank risk-taking in several ways. First, the characteristics of systemic risk and idiosyncratic risk are jointly analyzed. Second, the direction of causality of these two risk measures is examined. Moreover, this paper contributes to the discussion of the effect of competition on risk-taking.

Due to limited resources available for leadership development programming at colleges and universities, there is a need to better understand the leadership attitudes and beliefs of incoming first-year students in order to most efficiently develop effective leadership. The purpose of this study was to examine the leadership attitudes and beliefs of incoming first-year college students within the context of ecological leadership in order to determine if gender or ethnic differences in the leadership attitudes and beliefs exist. Implications for leadership development programs are discussed.

Students enrolled in a Corps of Cadets program at Texas A&M University [N = 336] were surveyed to examine their leadership mindsets and whether their participation in a formal academic leadership program simultaneously influenced their hierarchical and systemic-thinking preferences. No significant differences were found between students involved in the Corpsof Cadets program only and those enrolled in a formal academic leadership program. Significant differences did exist for gender and classification of students; women scored higher in systemic- thinking and juniors and seniors not enrolled in a formal academic leadership program scored lower in hierarchical-thinking than freshman and sophomore not enrolled in a formal academic leadership program. Students within the formal academic leadership programs have lower hierarchical scores and higher systemic scores than those who are not in a formal academic leadership program.

First-year college students in a leadership-themed living-learning community (N= 60) at Texas A&M University were surveyed to examine if participation in the learning community influenced their leadership mindset using hierarchical and systemic thinking preferences. Utilizing a pre-test and post-test methodology, significant differences for hierarchical thinking were not found; however, significant differences for systemic thinking were found. At the end of the program year, students had larger systemic scores than when they started the program, but their hierarchical thinking scores remain fairly steady. Findings indicated that participation in a leadership-themed living-learning community influenced students’ leadership mindsets.

The purpose of this paper is to test empirically the impact of asset securitization and sale activities as well as the holdings of sub-prime related securitized products on the US bank holding companies’ (BHC) exposure to systemic risk.

This paper adopts a robust econometric method to estimate the conditional value-at-risk as a measure of BHCs' institutional sensitivity to market crushes. Using the data over the period of 2004-2016, the study also uses OLS with robust standard errors and panel estimation with random effects as two alternative estimation techniques to assess the impact of securitization activities on the sensitivity of BHCs to systemic risk.

Residential mortgage and other forms of securitization activities are positively related to an increase in the US BHCs' sensitivity to systemic distress. The significant cross effects of both securitized loans and holdings of securitized products play a crucial role in determining risks in financial sector.

This study contributes to the empirical literature on the effects of securitization on BHCs' risk exposures in several ways. First, the paper considers the complexity of the bank's risk profile; it focuses on BHCs' individual sensitivity to systemic distress and its dependence on the size of securitization and assets sold activities considering both supply and demand sides of securitization. Second, the time horizon under investigation sheds a light on the relationship between securitization and banks' risk exposures including the pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis periods.

Incoming first-year college students completed a leadership survey prior to any formal leadership education. These students were reassessed during the spring of their senior year; 386 students completed both surveys. The differential effect of 33 leadership and demographic variables on change in hierarchical and systemic leadership beliefs were examined with stepwise regression analyses. Completion of a leadership certificate intended for students in supervisory student employment positions and racial/ethnic background were the only variables predicting changes in leadership beliefs. Results are discussed relative to Leadership Identity Development theory (Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, Mainella, & Osteen, 2005) and ecological leadership theory (Wielkiewicz & Stelzner, 2005).