Just Measures: A Methodology for Assessing the Global Value Added of Corporate Activities

This article accepts the premise of stakeholder theory, which asserts that corporations, like other human-run entities, have obligations to all parties affected by their actions. As such, corporations should be given suitable credit for projects that add value for these stakeholders, as well as held accountable for any damage done. To provide this credit and accountability, measurement is necessary. The methodology of measurement for corporate social value creation is in its infancy. Models are incomplete, measures are not validated, and methods used to estimate net value accumulated from different domains need improvement. This article builds on one model of global value added (GVA), examining what methods are necessary to identify relevant domains, provide valid measures, and combine findings for the wide range of domains encompassed by a corporations’ projects. Once this methodology is successfully established, creation of valid measurement scales will warrant emergence of a subdiscipline in business and economics. To use these scales will be a challenge on yet another level, but the potential for an industry index based not on economic but global measures will exist, allowing for fair and transparent accountability of commercial sector activities to other sectors of society. This has particular implications for the health sector, with its complex web of numerous stakeholders. The measurement modality presented here provides the possibility of evaluating all these health sector entities’ contributions to society

Just Measures: A Methodology for Assessing the Global Value Added of Corporate Activities

This article accepts the premise of stakeholder theory, which asserts that corporations, like other human-run entities, have obligations to all parties affected by their actions. As such, corporations should be given suitable credit for projects that add value for these stakeholders, as well as held accountable for any damage done. To provide this credit and accountability, measurement is necessary. The methodology of measurement for corporate social value creation is in its infancy. Models are incomplete, measures are not validated, and methods used to estimate net value accumulated from different domains need improvement. This article builds on one model of global value added (GVA), examining what methods are necessary to identify relevant domains, provide valid measures, and combine findings for the wide range of domains encompassed by a corporations’ projects. Once this methodology is successfully established, creation of valid measurement scales will warrant emergence of a subdiscipline in business and economics. To use these scales will be a challenge on yet another level, but the potential for an industry index based not on economic but global measures will exist, allowing for fair and transparent accountability of commercial sector activities to other sectors of society. This has particular implications for the health sector, with its complex web of numerous stakeholders. The measurement modality presented here provides the possibility of evaluating all these health sector entities’ contributions to society

Can testosterone therapy be offered to men on active surveillance for prostate cancer? Preliminary results

This report presents our experience with T therapy in a cohort of T-deficient men on active surveillance (AS) for Gleason 3 + 3 and Gleason 3 + 4 prostate cancer (PCa). A retrospective chart review identified 28 men with T deficiency who underwent T therapy (T group) for at least 6 months while on AS for PCa. A comparison group of 96 men on AS for PCa with untreated T deficiency (no-T group) was identified at the same institution. The AS protocol followed a modified Epstein criteria and allowed inclusion of men with a single core of low-volume Gleason 3 + 4 PCa. Mean age was 59.5 and 61.3 years, and mean follow-up was 38.9 and 42.4 months for the T and no-T groups, respectively. Of all 28 men in the T group, 3 (10.7%) men developed an increase in Gleason score while on AS. Of 22 men in the T group with Gleason 3 + 3 disease, 7 (31.8%) men developed biopsy progression including 3 men (13.6%) who developed Gleason 3 + 4 PCa. Of 6 men with Gleason 3 + 4 disease at baseline, 2 (33.3%) men developed an increase in tumor volume, and none developed upgrading beyond Gleason 3 + 4. All 96 men in the no-T group had Gleason 3 + 3 disease at baseline and, 43 (44.7%) developed biopsy progression, including 9 men (9.38%) with upgrading to Gleason 7 (3 + 4). Biopsy progression rates were similar for both groups and historical controls. Biopsy progression in men on AS appears unaffected by T therapy over 3 years. Prospective placebo-controlled trials of T therapy in T-deficient men on AS should be considered given the symptomatic benefits experienced by treated men