|
| ||
|
|
||
Board Meeting (board + meeting)
Kinds of Board Meeting Selected AbstractsReport of the International Journal of Urology Editorial Board Meeting 2010 in IwateINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, Issue 8 2010Haruki Kume md Managing Editor No abstract is available for this article. [source] Report of the International Journal of Urology Editorial Board Meeting 2009 in OkayamaINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, Issue 7 2009Haruki Kume md No abstract is available for this article. [source] JIPB's Editorial Board Meeting 2009: A New Face in 2010JOURNAL OF INTEGRATIVE PLANT BIOLOGY, Issue 10 2009Chun-Ming Liu Ph.D. Editor-in-Chief [source] Neuropathology Editorial Board Meeting, 2000NEUROPATHOLOGY, Issue 4 2000Article first published online: 7 JUL 200 No abstract is available for this article. [source] Behind the Scenes at the Editorial Board MeetingNURSING FOR WOMENS HEALTH, Issue 6 2004Anne Katz RN, PhD editor No abstract is available for this article. [source] Rights Issues in the Chinese Stock Market: Evidence of Earnings ManagementJOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT & ACCOUNTING, Issue 2 2008Hung-Gay Fung Using 665 rights offerings of Chinese firms, we demonstrate positive but diminishing price effects of successive announcements at the board meeting, the shareholders' meeting, the prospectus release date, and the ex-rights date, but negative abnormal returns before the ex-rights date. Public investors value the participation from shareholders of state and legal-person shares in the rights offerings, which seem to be linked to the future firm performance. The results overall supports the hypothesis that Chinese company earnings are considerably manipulated in the rights issue process. [source] Social Capital and Social Influence on the Board of DirectorsJOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, Issue 1 2009William B. Stevenson abstract It is often assumed that directors with human capital such as prior management experience or independence from the company are the most influential board members. By contrast, in a survey of all the board members in 14 companies we found that ties to others in a network of strong ties among those who meet outside of board meetings were more important predictors of social influence than human capital or ties across boards. These ties within the board represent the social capital of members in the form of prior relationships with other directors, ties to others on the board, and membership in cliques within the board's network of ties. These results support a social capital perspective on influence that emphasizes relationships with others on the board as important factors in the social dynamics of board decision-making. [source] California School Board Members' Perceptions of Factors Influencing School Nutrition PolicyJOURNAL OF SCHOOL HEALTH, Issue 2 2004Kelli McCormack Brown ABSTRACT: Enactment and enforcement of school nutrition policies represent key components in adolescent overweight and obesity prevention. This study determined: 1) California school board members' attitudes, perceptions, and motivations related to enactment of policies that support healthy eating in schools; and 2) barriers to adopting school policies that support healthy eating. To understand board members' decision-making process, key informant interviews were conducted and a survey was administered to 404 school board members. Though school board members care about the well-being of pupils, competing priorities limit the extent to which nutrition issues get addressed at board meetings. Members' decisions center primarily around academic achievement issues, yet they are interested in nutrition's overall impact on children's health and academic achievement. [source] Should senior staff be present at board meetings?BOARD LEADERSHIP: POLICY GOVERNANCE IN ACTION, Issue 84 2006John Carver [source] Environmental awakening in the Swedish pulp and paper industry: pollution resistance and firm responses in the Early 20th century,BUSINESS STRATEGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, Issue 1 2009Kristina Söderholm Abstract The purpose of this article is to analyse in what way a conflict in the early 20th century (1904,1911) over a Swedish pulp mill's emissions into air and water impacted on the technology choices and strategies of the mill. The article also analyses what characterized the company's other responses to the complaints, in the form of counter-arguments, as well as engagement of experts. The access to information about the deliberations at the mill's board meetings is very rare in historical studies of company behaviour in relation to the environment, and provides us with a unique opportunity to comprehend in what way business strategies were developed during the course of the conflict. Technology choices are often characterized by the search for knowledge that enables a company to employ existing but not yet developed technical potentials, rather than choices between known technical solutions. We emphasize that this is particularly evident in a case where a company is forced to alter its technology in order to solve previously unknown environmental problems. In spite of a persistent search, the mill did not find any ready-made technological solutions to the environmental problems faced and was therefore forced to engage scientific expertise and even initiate basic scientific research. In 1911, the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court ordered the mill to undertake a number of pollution abatement investments. Interestingly , and partly in line with the so-called Porter hypothesis , the long-run economics of these investments turned out to be more favourable than anticipated prior to the verdict. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment. [source] | |||||||||||||