Do Some Business Models Perform Better than Others?

This paper defines four basic business models based on what asset rights are sold (Creators, Distributors, Landlords and Brokers) and four variations of each based on what type of assets are involved (Financial, Physical, Intangible, and Human). Using this framework, we classified the business models of all 10,970 publicly traded firms in the US economy from 1998 through 2002. Some of these classifications were done manually, based on the firms' descriptions of sources of revenue in their financial reports; the rest were done automatically by a rule-based system using the same data. Based on this analysis, we first document important stylized facts about the distribution of business models in the U.S. economy. Then we analyze the firms' financial performance in three categories: market value, profitability, and operating efficiency. We find that no model outperforms others on all dimensions. Surprisingly, however, we find that some models do, indeed, have better financial performance than others. For instance, Physical Creators (which we call Manufacturers) and Physical Landlords have greater cash flow on assets, and Intellectual Landlords have poorer q's, than Physical Distributors (Wholesaler/Retailers). These findings are robust to a large number of robustness checks and alternative interpretations. We conclude with some hypotheses to explain our findings.business models; performance

Do Some Business Models Perform Better than Others?

This paper defines four basic business models based on what asset rights are sold (Creators, Distributors, Landlords and Brokers) and four variations of each based on what type of assets are involved (Financial, Physical, Intangible, and Human). Using this framework, we classified the business models of all 10,970 publicly traded firms in the US economy from 1998 through 2002. Some of these classifications were done manually, based on the firms' descriptions of sources of revenue in their financial reports; the rest were done automatically by a rule-based system using the same data. Based on this analysis, we first document important stylized facts about the distribution of business models in the U.S. economy. Then we analyze the firms' financial performance in three categories: market value, profitability, and operating efficiency. We find that no model outperforms others on all dimensions. Surprisingly, however, we find that some models do, indeed, have better financial performance than others. For instance, Physical Creators (which we call Manufacturers) and Physical Landlords have greater cash flow on assets, and Intellectual Landlords have poorer q's, than Physical Distributors (Wholesaler/Retailers). These findings are robust to a large number of robustness checks and alternative interpretations. We conclude with some hypotheses to explain our findings.business models; performance

Religion and 100 Years of Australian Films

It is becoming better known that the Salvation Army took a lead in producing films in Australia. From 1899, with Soldiers of the Cross, the Army made religious films and was available to do what now would be news and archival material. Religion and religious issues were, perhaps surprisingly, prominent at the beginning of the Australian film industry

Proficiency benchmarking in Spanish

The Language Flagship programs were established at the turn of the century with the goal of creating programs that would move language learners to advanced levels of proficiency in a select number of critical languages (Winke & Gass, 2019). Later, the Flagships called for institutions of higher education to create a viable process to assess proficiency learning in high quality, well-established academic language programs. To answer that call, the present study examines outcomes via end of year proficiency testing in Spanish at the first and second levels of Spanish instruction at the United States Air Force Academy using the Adaptive Listening Tests and the Adaptive Reading Tests developed at Brigham Young University. Results indicate differences in gender, years of study of Spanish, and the number of years of Spanish study prior to attending the Academy. Additionally, the results from the present study are compared to Tschirner’s (2016) comprehensive analysis of student outcomes in higher education on ACTFL reading and listening tests. The findings have implications for programs in higher education as well as those in K-12 education

Intra-unit reliability and movement variability of submission grappling external load as measured by torso mounted accelerometery

Submission grappling consists of skills and movements used in combat sports to physically control opponents whilst trying to apply choke holds and joint locks. There is currently no accepted method of monitoring external load in grappling-based sports due to the absence of key variables such as distance, velocity or time. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether PlayerLoad is a reliable variable for measuring external load of submission grappling movements, with a secondary aim of determining the between repetition variance of submission grappling movements. 7 experienced submission grapplers were recruited. Each wore a torso mounted Catapult® Optimeye S5 microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) device and completed 5 repetitions of each of the following: 4 submission techniques; 5 transition techniques; 2 guard pass techniques; 2 takedown techniques. Accumulated PlayerLoad (PLdACC) was recorded as a marker of absolute load, with accumulated PlayerLoad per minute (PLdACC∙min-1) representing relative load. Reliability of each was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC(3,1)) (≥ 0.70). Between repetition movement variation was assessed via coefficient of variation with 95% confidence intervals (CV, 95%CI) (acceptable ≤ 15%, good ≤ 10%). PLdACC ICC(3,1) range = 0.78–0.98, with CV range = 9–22%. PLdACC∙min-1 ICC(3,1) range = 0.83–0.98, with CV range = 11–19%. Though several variables displayed CV > 15%, all had 95%CI lower boundaries ≤ 15%. Whilst PlayerLoad was found to be a reliable measure for submission grappling, relatively high CVs across most techniques examined suggest PlayerLoad may not be appropriate for measuring changes in external load for individual movements in submission grappling. However, it may prove a useful tool for monitoring the external load of full, grappling-based, training sessions within an individual

Application of systems dynamics and group model building to identify barriers and facilitators to acute care delivery in a resource limited setting

BACKGROUND: Group model building (GMB) is a method to facilitate shared understanding of structures and relationships that determine system behaviors. This project aimed to determine the feasibility of GMB in a resource-limited setting and to use GMB to describe key barriers and facilitators to effective acute care delivery at a tertiary care hospital in Malawi. METHODS: Over 1 week, trained facilitators led three GMB sessions with two groups of healthcare providers to facilitate shared understanding of structures and relationships that determine system behaviors. One group aimed to identify factors that impact patient flow in the paediatric special care ward. The other aimed to identify factors impacting delivery of high-quality care in the paediatric accident and emergency room. Synthesized causal maps of factors influencing patient care were generated, revised, and qualitatively analyzed. RESULTS: Causal maps identified patient condition as the central modifier of acute care delivery. Severe illness and high volume of patients were identified as creating system strain in several domains: (1) physical space, (2) resource needs and utilization, (3) staff capabilities and (4) quality improvement. Stress in these domains results in worsening patient condition and perpetuating negative reinforcing feedback loops. Balancing factors inherent to the current system included (1) parental engagement, (2) provider resilience, (3) ease of communication and (4) patient death. Perceived strengths of the GMB process were representation of diverse stakeholder viewpoints and complex system synthesis in a visual causal pathway, the process inclusivity, development of shared understanding, new idea generation and momentum building. Challenges identified included time required for completion and potential for participant selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: GMB facilitated creation of a shared mental model, as a first step in optimizing acute care delivery in a paediatric facility in this resource-limited setting

Inventory for the assessment of representational competence of vector fields

Representational competence is essential for the acquisition of conceptual understanding in physics. It enables the interpretation of diagrams, graphs, and mathematical equations, and relating these to one another as well as to observations and experimental outcomes. In this study, we present the initial validation of a newly developed cross-contextual assessment of students’ competence in representing vector-field plots and field lines, the most common visualization of the concept of vector fields. The Representational Competence of Fields Inventory (RCFI) consists of ten single choice items and two items that each contain three true or false questions. The tool can be easily implemented within an online assessment. It assesses the understanding of the conventions of interpreting field lines and vector-field plots, as well as the translation between these. The intended use of the tool is both to scale students’ representational competences in respect to representations of vector fields and to reveal related misconceptions (areas of difficulty). The tool was administered at three German-speaking universities in Switzerland and Germany to a total of 515 first- and third-semester students from science, technology, engineering, and mathematics subjects. In these first steps of the validation of the RCFI, we evaluated its psychometric quality via classical test theory in combination with Rasch scaling and examined its construct validity by conducting student interviews. The RCFI exhibits a good internal consistency of ω ¼ 0.86, and the results of the Rasch analysis revealed that the items discriminate well among students from lower to medium-high competence levels. The RCFI revealed several misunderstandings and shortcomings, such as the confusion of the conventions for representing field lines and vector-field plots. Moreover, it showed that many students believed that field lines must not exhibit a curvature, that the lengths of field lines matter, and that field lines may have sharp corners. In its current version, the RCFI allows assessing students’ competence to interpret field representations, a necessary prerequisite for learning the widespread concept of vector fields. We report on planned future adaptations of the tool, such as optimizing some of the current distractors

Intra-unit reliability and movement variability of submission grappling external load as measured by torso mounted accelerometery

Submission grappling consists of skills and movements used in combat sports to physically control opponents whilst trying to apply choke holds and joint locks. There is currently no accepted method of monitoring external load in grappling-based sports due to the absence of key variables such as distance, velocity or time. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether PlayerLoad is a reliable variable for measuring external load of submission grappling movements, with a secondary aim of determining the between repetition variance of submission grappling movements. 7 experienced submission grapplers were recruited. Each wore a torso mounted Catapult® Optimeye S5 microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) device and completed 5 repetitions of each of the following: 4 submission techniques; 6 transition techniques; 2 guard pass techniques; 2 takedown techniques. Accumulated PlayerLoad (PLdACC) was recorded as a marker of absolute load, with accumulated PlayerLoad per minute (PLdACC∙min-1) representing relative load. Reliability of each was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC(3,1)) (≥ .70). Between repetition movement variation was assessed via coefficient of variation with 95% confidence intervals (CV, 95%CI) (acceptable ≤ 15%, good ≤ 10%). PLdACC ICC(3,1) range = .78–.98, with CV range = 9–22%. PLdACC∙min-1 ICC(3,1) range = .83–98, with CV range = 11–19%. Though several variables displayed CV > 15%, all had 95%CI lower boundaries ≤ 15%. Whilst PlayerLoad was found to be a reliable measure for submission grappling, relatively high CVs across most techniques examined suggest PlayerLoad may not be appropriate for measuring changes in external load for individual movements in submission grappling. However, it may prove a useful tool for monitoring the external load of full, grappling-based, training sessions within an individual