864 research outputs found

    Lattice diffusion and surface segregation of B during growth of SiGe heterostructures by molecular beam epitaxy: effect of Ge concentration and biaxial stress

    Full text link
    Si1-xGex/Si1-yGey/Si(100) heterostructures grown by Molecular Beam Epitaxy (MBE) were used in order to study B surface segregation during growth and B lattice diffusion. Ge concentration and stress effects were separated. Analysis of B segregation during growth shows that: i) for layers in epitaxy on (100)Si), B segregation decreases with increasing Ge concentration, i.e. with increased compressive stress, ii) for unstressed layers, B segregation increases with Ge concentration, iii) at constant Ge concentration, B segregation increases for layers in tension and decreases for layers in compression. The contrasting behaviors observed as a function of Ge concentration in compressively stressed and unstressed layers can be explained by an increase of the equilibrium segregation driving force induced by Ge additions and an increase of near-surface diffusion in compressively stressed layers. Analysis of lattice diffusion shows that: i) in unstressed layers, B lattice diffusion coefficient decreases with increasing Ge concentration, ii) at constant Ge concentration, the diffusion coefficient of B decreases with compressive biaxial stress and increases with tensile biaxial stress, iii) the volume of activation of B diffusion () is positive for biaxial stress while it is negative in the case of hydrostatic pressure. This confirms that under a biaxial stress the activation volume is reduced to the relaxation volume

    Performance in franchising: the effects of different management styles

    Full text link
    Various theoretical approaches uphold the relevance of the relationship between the form of management and performance. Different management styles influence the relationships of agencies [Jensen, M.C. (1998). Foundations of organizational strategy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press], the cost of governing transactions [Williamson, O.E. (1985). The economics institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York, NY: Free Press], and the allocation of resources between the exploitation and exploration of activities [March, J.G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87], and this is manifested in firm performance. In light of these assumptions, this article presents an empirical verification of the relationship between the management of franchises and their performance, examining how different styles of management on the part of franchisers over their franchisees have significant effects on the growth and profits of franchiser firms.Peris-Ortiz, M.; Willoughby, MC.; Rueda Armengot, C. (2012). Performance in franchising: the effects of different management styles. Service Industries Journal. 32(16):2507-2525. doi:10.1080/02642069.2011.594876S250725253216Altinay, L., & Okumus, F. (2010). Franchise partner selection decision making. The Service Industries Journal, 30(6), 929-946. doi:10.1080/02642060802322275Child, J. (1972). Organizational Structure, Environment and Performance: The Role of Strategic Choice. Sociology, 6(1), 1-22. doi:10.1177/003803857200600101Combs, J. G., & Ketchen, D. J. (1999). CAN CAPITAL SCARCITY HELP AGENCY THEORY EXPLAIN FRANCHISING? REVISITING THE CAPITAL SCARCITY HYPOTHESIS. Academy of Management Journal, 42(2), 196-207. doi:10.2307/257092Combs, J. (2003). Why Do Firms Use Franchising as an Entrepreneurial Strategy?: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Management, 29(3), 443-465. doi:10.1016/s0149-2063(03)00019-9COMBS, J. G., KETCHEN, D. J., & IRELAND, R. D. (2006). Effectively managing service chain organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 35(4), 357-371. doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2006.08.006Combs, J. G., Michael, S. C., & Castrogiovanni, G. J. (2009). Institutional Influences on the Choice of Organizational Form: The Case of Franchising. Journal of Management, 35(5), 1268-1290. doi:10.1177/0149206309336883Crook, T. R., Shook, C. L., Madden, T. M., & Morris, M. L. (2009). A review of current construct measurement in entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(4), 387-398. doi:10.1007/s11365-009-0114-7Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Agency Problems and Residual Claims. The Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 327-349. doi:10.1086/467038Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of Ownership and Control. The Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301-325. doi:10.1086/467037Gillis, W. E., & Combs, J. G. (2009). Franchisor strategy and firm performance: Making the most of strategic resource investments. Business Horizons, 52(6), 553-561. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.07.001Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161. doi:10.2307/2092623Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The Interplay Between Exploration and Exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693-706. doi:10.5465/amj.2006.22083026Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper Echelons Theory: An Update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334-343. doi:10.5465/amr.2007.24345254Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers. The Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193. doi:10.2307/258434Hindle, K., & Moroz, P. (2009). Indigenous entrepreneurship as a research field: developing a definitional framework from the emerging canon. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(4), 357-385. doi:10.1007/s11365-009-0111-xJensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. doi:10.1016/0304-405x(76)90026-xJensen, M. C., & Heckling, W. H. (1995). SPECIFIC AND GENERAL KNOWLEDGE, AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 8(2), 4-18. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6622.1995.tb00283.xKlein, B., Crawford, R. G., & Alchian, A. A. (1978). Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process. The Journal of Law and Economics, 21(2), 297-326. doi:10.1086/466922Liu, W., Lepak, D. P., Takeuchi, R., & Sims, H. P. (2003). Matching leadership styles with employment modes: strategic human resource management perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 13(1), 127-152. doi:10.1016/s1053-4822(02)00102-xMarch, J. G. (1991). Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71Mitsuhashi, H., Shane, S., & Sine, W. D. (2008). Organization governance form in franchising: efficient contracting or organizational momentum? Strategic Management Journal, 29(10), 1127-1136. doi:10.1002/smj.702Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations. Organization Science, 3(3), 398-427. doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.398Ouchi, W. G. (1980). Markets, Bureaucracies, and Clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(1), 129. doi:10.2307/2392231Gómez, R. S., González, I. S., & Vázquez, L. (2009). Multi-unit versus single-unit franchising: assessing why franchisors use different ownership strategies. The Service Industries Journal, 30(3), 463-476. doi:10.1080/02642060802252027Gómez, R. S., González, I. S., & Suárez, L. V. (2011). Service quality control mechanisms in franchise networks. The Service Industries Journal, 31(5), 713-723. doi:10.1080/02642060902833338Sarkees, M., & Hulland, J. (2009). Innovation and efficiency: It is possible to have it all. Business Horizons, 52(1), 45-55. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2008.08.002Sebora, T. C., & Theerapatvong, T. (2009). Corporate entrepreneurship: a test of external and internal influences on managers’ idea generation, risk taking, and proactiveness. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(3), 331-350. doi:10.1007/s11365-009-0108-5Shane, S., & Foo, M.-D. (1999). New Firm Survival: Institutional Explanations for New Franchisor Mortality. Management Science, 45(2), 142-159. doi:10.1287/mnsc.45.2.142Shane, S., Shankar, V., & Aravindakshan, A. (2006). The Effects of New Franchisor Partnering Strategies on Franchise System Size. Management Science, 52(5), 773-787. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1050.0449Shane, S. A. (1996). HYBRID ORGANIZATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR FIRM GROWTH AND SURVIVAL: A STUDY OF NEW FRANCHISORS. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 216-234. doi:10.2307/256637Shane, S. (2001). Organizational Incentives and Organizational Mortality. Organization Science, 12(2), 136-160. doi:10.1287/orsc.12.2.136.10108Tihula, S., & Huovinen, J. (2009). Incidence of teams in the firms owned by serial, portfolio and first-time entrepreneurs. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(3), 249-260. doi:10.1007/s11365-008-0101-4TSUI, A. S., PEARCE, J. L., PORTER, L. W., & TRIPOLI, A. M. (1997). ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO THE EMPLOYEE-ORGANIZATION RELATIONSHIP: DOES INVESTMENT IN EMPLOYEES PAY OFF? Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 1089-1121. doi:10.2307/256928Valliere, D. (2008). Reconceptualizing entrepreneurial framework conditions. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(1), 97-112. doi:10.1007/s11365-008-0077-0Vázquez, L. (2009). How passive ownership restrictions affect the rate of franchisee failure. The Service Industries Journal, 29(6), 847-859. doi:10.1080/02642060902749419Wakkee, I., Elfring, T., & Monaghan, S. (2008). Creating entrepreneurial employees in traditional service sectors. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(1), 1-21. doi:10.1007/s11365-008-0078-zWeick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective Mind in Organizations: Heedful Interrelating on Flight Decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 357. doi:10.2307/2393372Williamson, O. E. (1993). Calculativeness, Trust, and Economic Organization. The Journal of Law and Economics, 36(1, Part 2), 453-486. doi:10.1086/467284Winter, S. G. (2000). The Satisficing Principle in Capability Learning. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 981-996. doi:10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/113.0.co;2-4Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991-995. doi:10.1002/smj.318Yin, X., & Zajac, E. J. (2004). The strategy/governance structure fit relationship: theory and evidence in franchising arrangements. Strategic Management Journal, 25(4), 365-383. doi:10.1002/smj.38

    Author Correction: Cross-ancestry genome-wide association analysis of corneal thickness strengthens link between complex and Mendelian eye diseases.

    Get PDF
    Emmanuelle Souzeau, who contributed to analysis of data, was inadvertently omitted from the author list in the originally published version of this Article. This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article

    An Intraocular Pressure Polygenic Risk Score Stratifies Multiple Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Parameters Including Treatment Intensity

    Get PDF
    Purpose: To examine the combined effects of common genetic variants associated with intraocular pressure (IOP) on primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) phenotype using a polygenic risk score (PRS) stratification. Design: Cross-sectional study. Participants: For the primary analysis, we examined the glaucoma phenotype of 2154 POAG patients enrolled in the Australian and New Zealand Registry of Advanced Glaucoma, including patients recruited from the United Kingdom. For replication, we examined an independent cohort of 624 early POAG patients. Methods Using IOP genome-wide association study summary statistics, we developed a PRS derived solely from IOP-associated variants and stratified POAG patients into 3 risk tiers. The lowest and highest quintiles of the score were set as the low- and high-risk groups, respectively, and the other quintiles were set as the intermediate risk group. Main Outcome Measures: Clinical glaucoma phenotype including maximum recorded IOP, age at diagnosis, number of family members affected by glaucoma, cup-to-disc ratio, visual field mean deviation, and treatment intensity. Results: A dose–response relationship was found between the IOP PRS and the maximum recorded IOP, with the high genetic risk group having a higher maximum IOP by 1.7 mmHg (standard deviation [SD], 0.62 mmHg) than the low genetic risk group (P = 0.006). Compared with the low genetic risk group, the high genetic risk group had a younger age of diagnosis by 3.7 years (SD, 1.0 years; P < 0.001), more family members affected by 0.46 members (SD, 0.11 members; P < 0.001), and higher rates of incisional surgery (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1–2.0; P = 0.007). No statistically significant difference was found in mean deviation. We further replicated the maximum IOP, number of family members affected by glaucoma, and treatment intensity (number of medications) results in the early POAG cohort (P ≤ 0.01). Conclusions: The IOP PRS was correlated positively with maximum IOP, disease severity, need for surgery, and number of affected family members. Genes acting via IOP-mediated pathways, when considered in aggregate, have clinically important and reproducible implications for glaucoma patients and their close family members

    Observations on some cellulosic chytridiaceous fungi

    Full text link
    Two new species of Endochytrium, E. multiguttulatum and E. cystarum , are described. Nephrochytrium buttermerense Willoughby is transferred to Diplophlyctis under the binomial Diplophlyctis buttermerense (Willoughby) comb. nov. Morphologic and developmental information on an incompletely known fungus, possibly a Solutoparies , and on other previously known cellulosic chytrid species are also given.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/46147/1/203_2004_Article_BF00412053.pd

    Correction to “Elastic wave speeds and moduli in polycrystalline ice Ih, sI methane hydrate, and sII methane-ethane hydrate”

    Get PDF
    Author Posting. © American Geophysical Union, 2009. This article is posted here by permission of American Geophysical Union for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of Geophysical Research 114 (2009): B04299, doi:10.1029/2009JB006451
    corecore