gue – -Translation – Keybot Dictionary

Spacer TTN Translation Network TTN TTN Login Deutsch Français Spacer Help
Source Languages Target Languages
Keybot 11 Results  www.wu.ac.at
  Speaker Series at the D...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Con­trary to the prior re­search on the pre­dom­in­antly neg­at­ive ef­fects of cor­rup­tion, we ar­gue that in emer­ging coun­tries cor­rup­tion can also act as an in­formal in­sti­tu­tion that can of­fer sta­bil­ity and pre­dict­ab­il­ity when firms have to cope with formal in­sti­tu­tional voids.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine wu.ac.at as primary domain
This paper aims at cont­ri­bu­ting to an improved under­stan­ding of the effects of corrup­tion on local firms’ acqui­si­tion beha­vior in the context of an emer­ging economy. Contrary to the prior rese­arch on the predo­mi­nantly nega­tive effects of corrup­tion, we argue that in emer­ging coun­tries corrup­tion can also act as an informal insti­tu­tion that can offer stabi­lity and predic­ta­bi­lity when firms have to cope with formal insti­tu­tional voids. Based on an analysis of the acqui­si­tion beha­vior of 2,981 Russian firms in 40 regions in Russia during 2001-2008, we find strong support for our predic­tion that corrup­tion is posi­tively related to the propen­sity of local firms to engage in acqui­si­tions. Further­more, we find that this effect is stronger in regions that are more auto­no­mous and among weaker perfor­ming firms.
  Collaborative Communiti...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Fjeld­stad, Snow, Miles & Lettl (2012, p. 739) ar­gue that col­lab­or­at­ive com­munit­ies fol­low a fun­da­mental dif­fer­ent scheme com­pared to tra­di­tional, more hi­er­arch­ical ways of or­gan­iz­ing and refer to it as the act­or-ori­ented ar­chi­tec­tural scheme: „Our pro­posed act­or-ori­ented scheme has three ele­ments: (1) act­ors who have the cap­ab­il­it­ies and val­ues to self-or­gan­ize; (2) com­mons where the act­ors ac­cu­mu­late and share re­sources; and (3) pro­to­cols, pro­cesses, and in­fra­struc­tures that en­able mul­ti-actor col­lab­or­a­tion.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine wu.ac.at as primary domain
Fjeld­stad, Snow, Miles & Lettl (2012, p. 739) argue that colla­bo­ra­tive commu­nities follow a funda­mental diffe­rent scheme compared to tradi­tional, more hier­archical ways of orga­ni­zing and refer to it as the actor-ori­ented archi­tec­tural scheme: „Our proposed actor-ori­ented scheme has three elements: (1) actors who have the capa­bi­li­ties and values to self-or­ga­nize; (2) commons where the actors accu­mu­late and share resources; and (3) proto­cols, processes, and infra­struc­tures that enable multi-actor colla­bo­ra­tion. Control and coor­di­na­tion are accom­plished prima­rily via direct inter­ac­tion among the actors them­selves rather than by hier­archical subord­i­na­tion. Promi­nent exam­ples of such emer­gent forms are Wiki­pedia or Open Source Soft­ware commu­nities like Linux or Apache.
  Speaker Series at the D...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
We ar­gue that once an in­di­vidual has ac­cu­mu­lated ex­per­i­ence with a task, the be­ne­fit of ac­cu­mu­lat­ing ad­di­tional ex­per­i­ence is in­ferior to the be­ne­fit of delib­er­ately ar­tic­u­lat­ing and co­di­fy­ing the pre­vi­ously ac­cu­mu­lated ex­per­i­ence.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine wu.ac.at as primary domain
How do orga­niza­t­ions learn? In this paper, we build on rese­arch on the micro­foun­da­tions of stra­tegy and learning to study the indi­vi­dual under­pin­nings of orga­niza­t­ional learning. We argue that once an indi­vi­dual has accu­mu­lated expe­ri­ence with a task, the benefit of accu­mu­la­ting addi­tional expe­ri­ence is infe­rior to the benefit of deli­be­ra­tely arti­cu­la­ting and codi­fying the previously accu­mu­lated expe­ri­ence. We explain the perfor­mance outcomes asso­ciated with such deli­be­rate learning efforts using both a cogni­tive (task under­stan­ding) and an emotional (self-­ef­fi­cacy) mecha­nism. We study the proposed frame­work by means of a mixe­d-­me­thod approach that combines the reach and rele­vance of a field expe­ri­ment with the preci­sion of labo­ra­tory expe­ri­ments. Our results support the proposed theo­re­tical frame­work and bear important impli­ca­tions from both a theo­re­tical and prac­tical view­point.
  Speaker Series at the D...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Build­ing on evid­ence from cog­nit­ive science and lin­guist­ics, we ar­gue that the time-­mov­ing frame makes fu­ture events ap­pear prox­im­ate, whereas con­ceiv­ing of the self as mov­ing through time makes fu­ture events ap­pear dis­tant.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine wu.ac.at as primary domain
When descri­bing the future, corpo­rate execu­tives routi­nely draw analo­gies between time and space. They perceive the future as moving towards them (time-­mo­ving frame: “the dead­line is approa­ching”) or, alter­na­tively, they perceive them­selves as moving towards the future (ego-­mo­ving frame: “we’re heading towards the dead­line”). The physical reali­ties of space and motion help execu­tives to make sense of time, an abstract construct that cannot be expe­ri­enced concre­tely. Buil­ding on evidence from cogni­tive science and lingu­is­tics, we argue that the time-­mo­ving frame makes future events appear proxi­mate, whereas concei­ving of the self as moving through time makes future events appear distant. In three studies, we show that ego-­mo­ving frames prompt a focus on the present and on stra­tegic deci­sions that privi­lege shor­t-­term returns over long-­term returns.
  Research Program: Open ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Fjeld­stad, Snow, Miles & Lettl (2012, p. 739) ar­gue that col­lab­or­at­ive com­munit­ies fol­low a fun­da­mental dif­fer­ent scheme com­pared to tra­di­tional, more hi­er­arch­ical ways of or­gan­iz­ing and refer to it as the act­or-ori­ented ar­chi­tec­tural scheme: „Our pro­posed act­or-ori­ented scheme has three ele­ments: (1) act­ors who have the cap­ab­il­it­ies and val­ues to self-or­gan­ize; (2) com­mons where the act­ors ac­cu­mu­late and share re­sources; and (3) pro­to­cols, pro­cesses, and in­fra­struc­tures that en­able mul­ti-actor col­lab­or­a­tion.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine wu.ac.at as primary domain
Fjeld­stad, Snow, Miles & Lettl (2012, p. 739) argue that colla­bo­ra­tive commu­nities follow a funda­mental diffe­rent scheme compared to tradi­tional, more hier­archical ways of orga­ni­zing and refer to it as the actor-ori­ented archi­tec­tural scheme: „Our proposed actor-ori­ented scheme has three elements: (1) actors who have the capa­bi­li­ties and values to self-or­ga­nize; (2) commons where the actors accu­mu­late and share resources; and (3) proto­cols, processes, and infra­struc­tures that enable multi-actor colla­bo­ra­tion. Control and coor­di­na­tion are accom­plished prima­rily via direct inter­ac­tion among the actors them­selves rather than by hier­archical subord­i­na­tion.
  Brown Bag Seminar - Mar...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Ab­stract: We ar­gue that mu­tual funds hold li­quid as­sets at least par­tially to col­lect rents, a motive dif­fer­ent from li­quid­ity trans­form­a­tion. We pro­pose a parsi­mo­ni­ous model that in­cor­por­ates the ef­fects of trad­ing costs and li­quid­ity man­age­ment on fund flows.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine wu.ac.at as primary domain
Abstract: We argue that mutual funds hold liquid assets at least parti­ally to collect rents, a motive diffe­rent from liqui­dity trans­for­ma­tion. We propose a parsi­mo­nious model that incor­po­rates the effects of trading costs and liqui­dity manage­ment on fund flows. Follo­wing bad perfor­mance, mana­gers compen­sated on fund size opti­mally reduce illi­quid invest­ment to maxi­mize future expected returns, preser­ving some liq- uid assets. Mana­gers compen­sated on past perfor­mance, on the other hand, meet redemp­tions by deple­ting liquid assets first. However, because of lower expected returns this only inten­si­fies the outflow and desta­bi­lizes the fund. More­over, the use of cash for rent collec­tion is preferred to higher manage­ment fees, as it makes mutual funds less prone to liqui­di­ty­-d­riven with­dra­wals. Overall, we caution not to inter­pret the observed balances of liquid assets in mutual funds as conclu­sive evidence of the magni­tude for liqui­dity trans­for­ma­tion these funds provide.
  Research Talk by John G...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
As an ex­plan­a­tion, Lynch and his col­league Ad­rian Ward of UT-Austin ar­gue that people only develop ex­pert­ise on a “need to know” basis; they pay at­ten­tion to what they think they need to know, when they think they need to know it.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine wu.ac.at as primary domain
John G. Lynch from the Univer­sity of Colo­rado at Boulder held a talk at our depart­ment on the temporal deve­lop­ment of finan­cial exper­tise in couples as part of our Depart­ment’s Rese­arch Seminar Series. The presented rese­arch speaks to the issue that finan­cial literacy is pain­f­ully low in many coun­tries, inclu­ding Austria and the US, and that current efforts to remedy low finan­cial literacy via finan­cial educa­tion have deli­vered minis­cule bene­fits in improved finan­cial beha­vior. As an expla­na­tion, Lynch and his colle­ague Adrian Ward of UT-Austin argue that people only develop exper­tise on a “need to know” basis; they pay atten­tion to what they think they need to know, when they think they need to know it. In a series of studies, they show how couples use each other as experts, often entrus­ting just one partner (the “house­hold CFO”) with the bulk of the respon­si­bi­lity for finan­cial matters, and how this distri­bu­tion of respon­si­bi­lity affects their inde­pen­dent moti­va­tion to learn about finan­cial matters and ability to make good finan­cial deci­sions.