Diffusing Best Practices:A Design Science Study Using the Theory of Planed Behavior

Part 1: Creating ValueInternational audienceBoth the practice and the research literature on information systems attach great value to the identification and dissemination of information on “best practices”. In the philosophy of science, this type of knowledge is regarded as technological knowledge because it becomes manifest in the successful techniques in one context. While the value for other contexts is unproven, knowledge of best practices circulates under an assumption that the practices will usefully self-diffuse through innovation and adoption in other contexts. We study diffusion of best practices using a design science approach. The study context is a design case in which an organization desires to diffuse its best practices across different groups. The design goal is embodied in organizational mechanisms to achieve this diffusion. The study used Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) as a kernel theory. The artifacts resulting from the design were two-day training workshops conceptually anchored to TBP. The design theory was evaluated through execution of eight diffusion workshops involving three different groups in the same company. The findings indicate that the match between the practice and the context materialized in the presence of two concordant factors. On the context side, the qualities of the selected opinion leader were necessary to provide the subjective norm described in TPB. On the best practice side, the technological qualities of the best practice itself were necessary to instill the ideal attitude (belief that the behavior will be effective). These two factors were especially critical if the source context of the best practice is qualitatively different from the target context into which the organization is seeking to diffuse the best practice

What Keeps Science Spiralling? Unravelling the Critical Success Factors of Knowledge Creation in Academic Research

Contains fulltext : 86736.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)17 p

Mergers and acquisitions : the impact of hiring financial advisors on acquirer shareholder wealth in the US and UK financial services sector

We document the impact of financial advisors in the announcement returns of M&A deals for the UK and the US financial services sectors. Our sample includes 1438 M&A deals announced during the period January 1999 to January 2010. The acquirer in these deals is a UK or US public listed firm in the financial sector, but there are no restrictions for the country of origin, the sector, or the listing status for the target firms.We provide some contrary evidence to prior studies that documented a positive relationship between various measures of financial advisor quality and M&A returns. Our results show that acquiring firms performing in-house M&As, rather than hiring financial advisors, have consistently achieved higher abnormal returns. Furthermore, acquiring firms hiring top-tier advisors within our sample achieve lower abnormal returns than the acquirers hiring lower-tier advisors. In addition, acquiring firms hiring top-tier advisors achieve low (negative) returns in M&As where targets are publicly listed. However, consistent with prior research, our findings suggest that top-tier advisors are able to achieve the highest deal completion rates amongst any other tier of advisors and commanded the highest fees. The question thus also revolves around not only whether financial advisors add value but rather whether their added value and knowledge also seem to be compensated by the huge sums of money they get paid. Achieving higher returns will be a justification of financial advisory excellence and higher premiumfees.Overall, returns around theM&Aannouncement in this sector are perceived pessimistically. Our results also imply that financial advisors are not equally important across all deal types. Top-tier advisors perform much more complex deals which are on average at least ten times larger in size than any other M&A deal