1966

Proper Watering by Earl P. Grey (page 1) Soil Structure and Plant Feeding for Trees and Shrubs on the Golf Course by William Teece (2) Power Golf Carts: A Blessing or a Curse by David Dunlavey (3) A Comparison by Paul White (3) Trees on a Golf Course by Oliver Leech (5) Turf Management Majors Want a Golf Team by Richard Rossiter (6) Class Will of \u2766 (7)Famous Last Words from 1966 (8) Turf Heating with Electric Cables by J.R. Barrett, Jr. and W.H. Daniel (A-1) Poa Annua Restriction by C. F. Kerr and W.H. Daniel (A-9) Phosphorus by Marvin H. Ferguson (A-14) Role of Potassium in Turf Grass management by R. E. Wagner (A-16) Role of Minor Elements in Turfgrass Management by Alexander Radko (A-22) Rhizoctonia Brown patch and Pythium Diseas by Malcolm C. Shurtleff (A-27) Sclerotinia Dollar Spot and Snow Mold by Noel Jackson (A-32) Fusarium Blight - Disease of Turf Grasses by George A. Bean (A-35) Observing the Weather - Old and New Techniques by Robert C. Copeland (A-39) Water Supply by Allan Grieve Jr. (A-41) Establishment and Maintenance of Campus Turf by William A. Lambert (A-51) Athletic Field Management by J. T. Williams (A-56

Agricultural Biotechnology's Complementary Intellectual Assets

We formulate and test a hypothesis to explain the dramatic restructuring experienced recently by the plant breeding and seed industry. The reorganization can be explained in part by the desire to exploit complementarities between intellectual assets needed to create genetically modified organisms. This hypothesis is tested using data on agricultural biotechnology patents, notices for field tests of genetically modified organisms, and firm characteristics. The presence of complementarities is identified with a positive covariance in the unexplained variation of asset holdings. Results indicate that coordination of complementary assets have increased under the consolidation of the industry

Ability-based view in action: a software corporation study

This research investigates antecedents, developments and consequences of dynamic capabilities in an organization. It contributes by searching theoretical and empirical answers to the questions: (a) What are the antecedents which can provide an organization with dynamic and ordinary capabilities?; (b) How do these antecedents contribute to create capabilities in an organization?; (c) How do they affect an organization's competitive advantage?; (d) Can we assess and measure the antecedents and consequences to an organization? From a first (theoretical) perspective, this paper searches answers to the first, second and third questions by reviewing concepts of an ability-based view of organizations that involves the abilities of cognition, intelligence, autonomy, learning and knowledge management, and which contributes to explain the dynamic behavior of the firm in the pursuit of competitive advantage. From a second (empirical) perspective, this paper reinforces and delivers findings to the second, third and fourth questions by presenting a case study that evidences the ability-based view in action in a software corporation, where it contributes by investigating: (a) the development of organizational capabilities; (b) the effects of the new capabilities on the organization; and (c) the assessment and measurement of the abilities and consequences

The theory of the firm and its critics: a stocktaking and assessment

Includes bibliographical references."Prepared for Jean-Michel Glachant and Eric Brousseau, eds. New Institutional Economics: A Textbook, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.""This version: August 22, 2005."Since its emergence in the 1970s the modern economic or Coasian theory of the firm has been discussed and challenged by sociologists, heterodox economists, management scholars, and other critics. This chapter reviews and assesses these critiques, focusing on behavioral issues (bounded rationality and motivation), process (including path dependence and the selection argument), entrepreneurship, and the challenge from knowledge-based theories of the firm

Innovation Practices in Emerging Economies: Do University Partnerships Matter?

Enterprises’ resources and capabilities determine their ability to achieve competitive advantage. In this regard, the key innovation challenges that enterprises face are liabilities associated with their age and size, and the entry barriers imposed on them. In this line, a growing number of enterprises are starting to implement innovation practices in which they employ both internal/external flows of knowledge in order to explore/exploit innovation in collaboration with commercial or scientific agents. Within this context, universities play a significant role providing fertile knowledge-intensive environments to support the exploration and exploitation of innovative and entrepreneurial ideas, especially in emerging economies, where governments have created subsidies to promote enterprise innovation through compulsory university partnerships. Based on these ideas, the purpose of this exploratory research is to provide a better understanding about the role of universities on enterprises’ innovation practices in emerging economies. More concretely, in the context of Mexico, we explored the enterprises’ motivations to collaborate with universities in terms of innovation purposes (exploration and exploitation) or alternatives to access to public funds (compulsory requirement of being involved in a university partnership). Using a sample of 10,167 Mexican enterprises in the 2012 Research and Technological Development Survey collected by the Mexican National Institute of Statistics and Geography, we tested a multinomial regression model. Our results provide insights about the relevant role of universities inside enterprises’ exploratory innovation practices, as well as, in the access of R&D research subsidies