The Ethics of Corporate Governance

How should corporate directors determine what is the right decision? For at least the past 30 years the debate has raged as to whether shareholder value should take precedence over corporate social responsibility when crucial decisions arise. Directors face pressure, not least from ethical investors, to do the good thing when they seek to make the right choice. Corporate governance theory has tended to look to agency theory and the need of boards to curb excessive executive power to guide directors' decisions. While useful for those purposes, agency theory provides only limited guidance. Supplementing it with the alternatives - stakeholder theory and stewardship theory - tends to put directors in conflict with their legal obligations to work in the interests of shareholders. This paper seeks to reframe the discussion about corporate governance in terms of the ethical debate between consequential, teleological approaches to ethics and idealist, deontological ones, suggesting that directors are - for good reason - more inclined toward utilitarian judgments like those underpinning shareholder value. But the problems with shareholder value have become so great that a different framework is needed: strategic value, with an emphasis on long-term value creation judged from a decidedly utilitarian standpoint

The implications of service quality gaps for strategy implementation

This article addresses the problem of service quality strategy implementation and proposes three interrelated models: a static model of the organisation; a comprehensive dynamic model of the implementation process, both synthesised from the literature; and a mixed model, which integrates static and dynamic models. The mixed model is combined with the service quality gaps (SQGs) model, drawn at a previous congress paper, to propose a map of the pattern of SQGs occurring at each implementation stage; the organisational variables that can be manipulated to eliminate SQGs; and several implications to practising managers

Universal Rights and Wrongs

This paper argues for the important role of customers as a source of competitive advantage and firm growth, an issue which has been largely neglected in the resource-based view of the firm. It conceptualizes Penrose’s (1959) notion of an ‘inside track’ and illustrates how in-depth knowledge about established customers combines with joint problem-solving activities and the rapid assimilation of new and previously unexploited skills and resources. It is suggested that the inside track represents a distinct and perhaps underestimated way of generating rents and securing long-term growth. This also implies that the sources of sustainable competitive advantage in important respects can be sought in idiosyncratic interfirm relationships rather than within the firm itself

Is complexity leadership theory complex enough? A critical appraisal, some modifications and suggestions for further research

Scholars are increasingly seeking to develop theories that explain the underlying processes whereby leadership is enacted. This shifts attention away from the actions of ‘heroic’ individuals and towards the social contexts in which people with greater or lesser power influence each other. A number of researchers have embraced complexity theory, with its emphasis on non-linearity and unpredictability. However, some complexity scholars still depict the theory and practice of leadership in relatively non-complex terms. They continue to assume that leaders can exercise rational, extensive and purposeful influence on other actors to a greater extent than is possible. In effect, they offer a theory of complex organizations led by non-complex leaders who establish themselves by relatively non-complex means. This testifies to the enduring power of ‘heroic’ images of leader agency. Without greater care, the terminology offered by complexity leadership theory could become little more than a new mask for old theories that legitimize imbalanced power relationships in the workplace. This paper explores how these problems are evident in complexity leadership theory, suggests that communication and process perspectives help to overcome them, and outlines an agenda for further research on these issues

Team-taught versus individually taught undergraduate education: A qualitative study of student experiences and preferences

Team teaching is becoming more common in undergraduate programmes of study although the relative merits to the more traditional individually taught courses have not been determined for best practice. For this study, 15 final year undergraduate students were interviewed to gain insight into their learning experiences. A thematic analysis of the interview data identified the perceived advantages and disadvantages of each mode of teaching. The advantages of individually taught courses included: Consistency of content delivery and advice, Familiarity with the lecturer’s teaching style and better Continuity of the subject content. The disadvantage of individually taught modules included Missing knowledge, compared to a team approach. Advantages of team taught modules included: Greater insight into a topic delivered by multiple team members. Disadvantages included: Content overlap, Conflicting messages relating to assessment, team members not taking Ownership of their roles and responsibilities and a belief that overall Team failure is worse than individual failure to deliver a module well. The results revealed that individually taught modules were generally preferred to team taught modules. A set of best practice recommendations are proposed to address the challenges when delivering team-taught teaching and become more student focused