Search

Personally held values play a fundamental role in business. As such, it is critical that students understand the nature of values pertaining to the workplace. Using an innovative classroom exercise, laddering, business students interview individuals to identify values that influence choices. Objectives are to help students understand the role of personal values in decision making, develop the ability to respond effectively to workplace demands, respect diverse perspectives, and achieve a better understanding of their own values. Measures used to assess these learning objectives revealed that many students gained valuable insights. After participating in the exercise, students wrote passages in which they articulated how their values affected their decision-making behavior, described in detail how the exercise improved their improvisational skills, and helped them gain respect for others' viewpoints. Furthermore, a quantitative survey provided evidence that students may have experienced a greater understanding of their own values after participating in the exercise. (Contains 4 tables.)

To mitigate risk, should companies signal a broad range of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives or instead focus on only a few ESG issues? Drawing on signaling theory, we propose that a broad array of ESG initiatives generates not only signal consistency but also accelerating signal costs. Our empirical results support the resultant hypothesis of a curvilinear relationship between ESG scope and equity risk. In addition, this U-shaped curve seems to become steeper when firms face multiple media-reported ESG controversies. Overall, our study qualifies the conventional wisdom that firms can reduce equity risk by attending to a wide variety of stakeholders and highlights the moderating (signal-amplifying) impact of the firm's media environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Most theorizing on the relationship between corporate social/environmental performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP) assumes that the current evidence is too fractured or too variable to draw any [...]

Although much professional and managerial hiring involves experienced workers, previous recruitment research has focused almost exclusively on new college graduates. To remedy this imbalance, 251 staffing professionals were surveyed concerning experienced-versus-college hiring practices in their organizations. Results suggest that a majority of positions requiring a college degree are filled with experienced workers. Experienced hires are evaluated more highly than new graduates on most characteristics (understanding business, knowledge of competition, realistic expectations, technical skills, interpersonal skills, writing skills, work ethic, likelihood of success, personal ethics), although new graduates are evaluated more highly on openmindedness and willingness and ability to learn new things. Higher proportions of experienced hiring are associated with organizational growth, short-term staffing strategies, older workforces, and less dynamic business environments. Perceived success of experienced hiring is associated with greater use of effective recruitment sources, older workforces, and more competitive salary offers. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

A survey on the proportion of experienced hiring versus college recruiting reveals that experienced hiring has increased on average. However, changes in hiring patterns are highly indefinite. Market shifts toward highly skilled jobs and efficient workers influence experienced hiring. Despite an increase in experienced hiring, the number of employers going for college recruitment and those moving away from it remain balanced. Career centers have decided to give importance to alumni resumes. Respondents' opinions on the relative strengths and weaknesses of both freshers and experienced hires are given.