17 research outputs found

    How does entrepreneurship education affect employability? Insights from UK higher education

    Get PDF
    Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine the underexplored link between entrepreneurship education (EE) and graduate employability in the higher education (HE) sector in the United Kingdom (UK).Design/methodology/approach: The study draws on a thematic content analysis of semi-structured interviews with 45 professionals in UK HE, representing the “supply” side of EE.Findings: The findings demonstrate a unidirectional link between EE and employability outcomes. This link is affected by societal, stakeholder-related, and teaching and learning-related factors.Research limitations/implications: Although the value of universities’ initiatives connecting EE and employability for economic development is emphasized, the study does not provide direct empirical evidence for this effect. Macroeconomic research is needed.Practical implications: EE and employability would benefit from knowledge exchange between universities’ stakeholders and a broader understanding of what constitutes a valuable graduate outcome.Social implications: The study reveals the benefits of EE on a micro level. Participation in EE supports the connection between individual investments in HE and employability.Originality/value: Based on human capital theory, many policymakers regard EE as a vehicle through which the relationship between investments in HE and career success on a micro level and economic growth on a macro level can be nurtured. Challenging this logic, the study highlights the potential of institutional theory to explain a contextualization of the link between EE and employability on a national level

    The global field of multi-family offices: An institutionalist perspective

    Get PDF
    We apply the notion of the organisational field to internationally operating multi-family offices. These organisations specialise on the preservation of enterprising and geographically dispersed families’ fortunes. They provide their services across generations and countries. Based on secondary data of Bloomberg’s Top 50 Family Offices, we show that they constitute a global organisational field that comprises two clusters of homogeneity. Clients may decide between two different configurations of activities, depending on their preferences regarding asset management, resource management, family management, and service architecture. The findings also reveal that multi-family offices make relatively similar value propositions all over the world. The distinctiveness of the clusters within the field is not driven by the embeddedness of the multi-family offices in different national environments or their various degrees of international experience. Rather, it is weakly affected by two out of four possible value propositions, namely the exclusiveness and the transparency of services

    The Global Field of Multi-Family Offices: Business Models as Communication Devices

    No full text
    The concept of the organizational field has hardly been applied to international phenomena. The empirical analysis of Bloomberg’s Top 50 Family Offices shows that this global organizational field is characterized by a significant level of homogeneity in the way that the differences between the design themes of the analyzed business models are marginal. However, the field is also characterized by heterogeneity which is not driven by the regional embeddedness of the multi-family offices. The findings are relevant for the new institutionalism for which the organizational field is the dominant unit of analysis, because they indicate that the notion of organizational fields is also applicable if researchers studies phenomena that transcend national border

    Exploring a secretive organization: What can we learn about family offices from the public sphere?

    No full text
    When Bloomberg published its 2010 ranking of the “Top 50 Family Offices”, it showed that they had nearly 500 billion dollars under management. A broad, global audience became aware of this specific type of organization, which is growing in importance. Family offices usually remain unnoticed because they tend to avoid publicity. Since the financial crisis, family offices have become strong competitors for institutions dedicated to private and investment banking. Their economic power may further increase in the coming years: first, Capgemini and Merrill Lynch assert that the number of wealthy individuals with investable assets exceeding 30 million dollars is steadily growing. Second, family offices benefit from the erosion of trust in established financial institutions on the part of wealth owners. Consider the example of SandAire, which was founded in London in 1996 by Alexander Scott. His family had generated a huge fortune by selling its fourth-generation family business, Provincial Insurance, in 1994. Scott had a strong motivation: protecting and preserving his family’s wealth. After some years, he opened SandAire to other families. They were attracted by Scott’s first-hand experience and neutral advice in managing family issues and preserving wealth. We explore the business press from three countries over the period from 2000 to 2010 to provide a deeper understanding of family offices
    corecore