Individualism and collectivism

What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

Consumer behaviour i

Although the literature on university–industry links has begun to uncover the reasons for, and types of, collaboration between universities and businesses, it offers relatively little explanation of ways to reduce the barriers in these collaborations. This paper seeks to unpack the nature of the obstacles to collaborations between universities and industry, exploring influence of different mechanisms in lowering barriers related to the orientation of universities and to the transactions involved in working with university partners. Drawing on a large-scale survey and public records, this paper explores the effects of collaboration experience, breadth of interaction, and inter-organizational trust on lowering different types of barriers. The analysis shows that prior experience of collaborative research lowers orientation-related barriers and that greater levels of trust reduce both types of barriers studied. It also indicates that breadth of interaction diminishes the orientation-related, but increases transaction-related barriers. The paper explores the implications of these findings for policies aimed at facilitating university–industry collaboration.

Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university-industry collaboration

This paper surveys the existing fragmentary data on the growth of university-owned patents and university-invented patents in Europe. We find evidence that university patenting is growing, but this phenomenon remains heterogeneous across countries and disciplines. We found some evidence that university licensing is not profitable for most universities, although some do succeed in attracting substantial additional revenues. This might be due to the fact that patents and publications tend to go hand in hand. In a dynamic setting however, we fear that the increase in university patenting exacerbates differences across universities in terms of financial resources and research outcome.

University Patenting and its Effects on Academic Research: the Emerging European Evidence

This paper investigates the relationship between related party transactions, corporate governance and firm performance. Specifically, this paper examines the moderating effect of corporate governance on the related party transactions-performance relationship. Based on 448 firm-year sample for 2005-2007, we find evidence that related transactions are detrimental to shareholders and thus reducing firm performance. However, the negative effect is mitigated with the presence of good governance namely level of board independence and executive remuneration. Further, we find auditor size as an external governance mechanism could also reduce the negative impact of related party transactions.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1949801_code366087.pdf?abstractid=1949801&mirid=1&type=2

Does Corporate Governance Matter? Evidence from Related Party Transactions in Malaysia

Previous studies in the literature review that dealt with corporate governance have recently witnessed significant growth that led to some new trends. The purpose of the current paper is to significantly contribute to such trends through investigating and analyzing the effect of corporate governance mechanisms on firm’s financial performance for a sample consisting of industrial and service companies in Jordan. The current study examined cross sectional data through 109 companies (industrial and service companies). The study uses the annual reports for the fiscal year 2011 of the most active Jordanian companies in order to examine the predictions of corporate governance effects on financial performance. This cross sectional study tested all hypotheses of the study and used statistical software, SPSS 20, to analyze data. The findings indicated that board size has a negative association with firm financial performance. Furthermore, the empirical investigations for the current study revealed that the presence of independent directors in the board is not associated with financial performance. Likewise, the result showed that CEO duality has no impact on firm financial performance. From developed and developing countries’ perspective, the current paper uniquely contributes to the literature that dealt with corporate governance and firm performance throughout introducing a market share variable as a measurement to represent firm’s financial performance. In doing so, the paper is the first of its kind to provide new insights on the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance. It therefore provides a new indicator considered as extending for prior research in this discipline as, to the best of researcher’s knowledge; no prior work has been done in both developed and developing economies including Jordan. The study provides empirical evidence to the academic, policy makers and all beneficiary parties of stakeholders in the Middle East, specifically Jordan.

/pdf/corporate-governance-mechanisms-and-jordanian-companies-4cczun2wlx.pdf

Corporate Governance Mechanisms and Jordanian Companies' Financial Performance

Internal oriented resources and social enterprises’ performance: How can social enterprises help themselves before helping others?

The determination of firm performance in emerging nations: Do board size and firm size matter?

The research examines the level of corporate social disclosure among Bursa Malaysia listed companies during the period of recession of financial crisis and also during the pre and post financial crisis periods. The level of disclosure is measured using content analysis. The sample of 135 companies analysed included companies that existed from 1996 and remained going concerns until the year 2000. The disclosures on corporate social responsibility were found primarily in chairman’s’ reports. Our results show that the highest level of disclosure was in 1998 that is the period just after the economic crisis period. The human resource theme was the most disclosed item. Disclosures were mainly qualitative and favourable in nature.

Sofri Yahya

Papers

Does Corporate Governance Matter? Evidence from Related Party Transactions in Malaysia

Corporate Governance Mechanisms and Jordanian Companies' Financial Performance

Internal oriented resources and social enterprises’ performance: How can social enterprises help themselves before helping others?

The determination of firm performance in emerging nations: Do board size and firm size matter?

Level Of Corporate Social Disclosure In Malaysia