Tag Archives: research

What good is a university education?

What good is a university? Economists think a lot about goods, and the classifications of them can shed some light on the present state of Irish higher education.

We can think about goods in several ways.  All are useful.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Can we really measure research supervisory quality?

Research metrics are fraught with danger. Usually they are dangerous when they are abused. We can measure the citation history of a paper but that tells us little beyond its citation history. We can measure raw output but that tells us simply how busy someone is. We can measure lots of things but they are all limited in some way. Measurement limitation does not prevent university administration from seizing on metrics and using them appallingly. I recently was informed of an Irish academic unit where papers published in journals that are not in the ISI Web of Science are not allowed to be used as part of any promotion or other college activity. They are un-papers. This is stark raving lunacy, but it shows how dangerous a simple metric can be in the hands of the ignorant.

Continue reading

Universities, Business and the Public Good

This is a version of an opinion piece published in the Irish Independent 19 December, co-authored with Ronaldo Munck

“Clearly, the education system fulfils a vital role in society that extends well beyond the utilitarian one of satisfying enterprise’s needs for skills or research. Universities are obviously a vital public good, making a crucial contribution to the intellectual, cultural, social and economic well-being of the country…we should not view the requirement for workplace skills and the cultivation of the intellect as some zero sum game”.

This statement comes not from any starry-eyed academic in an ivory tower, nor even from the recently formed campaign to defend the Irish University from ‘commercialisation’ (http://defendtheuniversity.ie). Rather, this stirring call comes from IBEC, specifically Tony Donoghue IBEC’S Head of Education and Innovation Policy at a conference held at DCU a couple of years ago.  Yet the dominant discourse in the media, business circles and most university administrations is for the need for universities to orient more or less exclusively to ‘business needs’. This elides into the need for a more ‘enterprising’ university. Both demonstrate an (wilful?) ignorance of what it is a university does and can do. It is reductionist in the extreme, seeing the sector as having only one role – to provide training for the de jure demands of the business sector that shouts loudest.

What lies behind this new orthodoxy which no longer sees the university as a public good?  In what ways can and should universities be responsive to business needs? We must first distinguish between diverse domains; such as applied research in advanced technologies, upskilling, student placements and so on as they are all very different.

Universities and businesses occupy particular spaces within society. Both, we suggest, would be seen in a positive light were they to be seen as working for the betterment of society at large. Few working at universities would have a problem with a whole range of interactions with business.  It is a well-established practice to have placements in ‘industry’ whether for business studies students, or those in engineering or computing. Research collaboration with industry, for example, in the biomedical area might make sense so long as full economic costing was applied. Engagement in these direct senses with industry in the arts and humanities may be more distant, but that does not make these areas of study are less valuable to society. Recent UK research suggests that three years out more Social Science and Humanities graduates are in paid employment than their STEM compatriots.

Most people at universities would like to be seen as ‘enterprising’ but that does not mean we are all budding entrepreneurs.  Innovation and entrepreneurship is something we are, or are supposed to be, all in favour of fostering.  But there is a lamentable lack of clarity on what this means in practice. Universities are expected to foster and support innovation and enterprise with time, money and materials, diverting these from existing teaching activities already under funding and staffing pressure.  It is as though through a sleight of hand research became innovation, then innovation became entrepreneurship, and now entrepreneurship becomes working for the private sector.

Universities are complex organizations. Aiming them at the demands of the market alone suggests a misconception that they are, in essence, aimed at private gains by individual graduates and companies. But the reality is that university education creates both a public and a private good. University education is complex. It has boundaries on how many can be admitted at any given time and thus the provision of education services is excludable. Within these boundaries, however, it is mostly non-rivalrous, in that each student can obtain their education without detriment to others gaining theirs. However, the outcomes of a university education, such as a more skilled workforce, and a more literate and critically engaged population are closer to public goods. Until we have a public debate on how to deal with these two elements at the same time we will continue to flail around. One thing we know from decades of economics is that it is not possible to regulate, manage and evaluate goods which are of different types as though they were the same. That is what some are trying to do in higher education and it is bound to fail if it does recognise the complexity of the business we are in.

There are, thus, clear limits to what universities can, or should, offer the business world.  Educators not entrepreneurs have to write the syllabus. Business persons have a role, via their membership of society, but no more and no less than artists or the socially excluded.  Universities cannot offer cheap intellectual labour paid by public funding to build private profit margins.  They cannot just create entrepreneurs even though they might, of course, provide skills and techniques for successfully driving a business. Indeed the skills needed to manage businesses are those that a well-funded, well- managed, well- structured university would provide to all students – perseverance, analytical capacity, resilience and inquisitiveness. Students in modern universities develop these and more, such as skills on knowledge acquisition, in information processing and interpersonal skills.  It is up to business to provide the specialist training it requires after that.  In the public or voluntary sectors other specific skills will be learnt on the job as well as building on some basics gained in education.

Universities must serve society as a whole and not a particular sector.  Chasing what may be myopic sector specific skill shortages in private enterprise with public money is not education  Nor is engaging in what may be a Faustian pact whereby universities, producing public goods, become dominated by private interests through funding lines emergent from private enterprise due to a fall-off in public investment. A long term view would lead us to more structured engagement between universities and the business world which also acknowledges, celebrates and respects the different purposes of both.

Universities are not business incubators and they are not beacons of innovation.  They simply do not have the capacity to deliver an either front.  But then we need to ask what it is that universities provide if they do not simply exist to fulfil business needs.  Put simply, for a business the much talked about bottom-line is profit.  Yet today it is widely accepted that there is a triple bottom line: economic, social and environmental.  Universities necessarily take the long view (they have been around for quite a while) and need to think in terms of social sustainability and not just the annual balance sheet.  Business needs are part of that calculation but there are other interests at play.  Civil society embraces not just business but also a whole range of community, cultural and social interest groups.  For example universities could engage in a debate around Ireland’s national development prospects in which business would play a key role but other social interests would also need to be involved.  Universities best serve their purpose- and also business needs- if they have a strong sense of independent thinking and promote healthy debate on key issues of the day.

Ah REF! Come on, this is Ireland….not Swansea

webquest-soccer-red-cardSo, the Research Excellence Framework of the UK is coming closer, with end December 2013 as the cutoff date. There are many many flaws with the REF but my perspective is that some measurement of research activity is better than none. And none is what we have here in Ireland.

For those unfamiliar, the REF is at base a counting exercise, where the number and (defined in oh so many contentious ways) quality of papers published by an academic over the 2008-2013 period. It asks, in a byzantine and flawed manner admittedly, for proof of impact, at least nodding towards the notion that academic papers might have audiences beyond the academy. So, its flawed but earnest. One of the features that has now begun to emerge is that the REF might be used to move people who are not research active to more teaching orientated roles. This comes as a surprise only to those who live in a deep cave, or who have never heard the management dictat “What gets measured gets managed”

Leicester has suggested this and now Swansea management school is doing the same. They suggest that people who do not achieve a certain standard over the period will be required to teach up to 18h per week. Recall – an academic in a university is tasked with teaching and research. It seems to me very reasonable that if you are not doing one you should do the other. An 18h class contact is a full weeks work when class prep and student feedback is taken into account.

The hurdle proposed is that over the 5 years people should have published 4 papers or more in journals ranked as 3* or 4* in the Association of Business Schools’  International Guide to Academic Journal Quality. Thats 3/4 of a paper per year. This is not exactly an academic matterhorn. And yes, there are of course rebates and so forth to take into account maternity and parental leave, illness, personal circumstances etc. Bear also in mind that this comes after two previous measurement exercises, so academics in the UK are well aware of the need to produce.

We could do with something similar here. Flawed as it might be, the paper by Richard Tol shone a light. There are a tail of academics in Irish business schools across all schools who are almost or completely research inactive. The situation in other schools and disciplines in social sciences and humanities is unlikely to be any different. In the sciences it is harder but still possible to exist even within a research intensive university and not publish while not carrying a larger than normal teaching load. We might well consider some form of REF-like activity for Ireland. Excellence in teaching should be rewarded ; but activity in teaching is expected of all. Why should research be any different? Why should some people in effect free ride on the research of others? Why should some people not do any publishable research at all? Why, in effect, are some allowed to skate over an integral part of their job? These are questions the implications of whose answers would be to cause severe discomfort to some. But that does not make them invalid. Lets start by looking at business schools and disciplines (including economics). Lets start gently and define as research active only those that have published 4 papers in ANY ABS ranked journal over the last 5 years.  What would we find?

__________________________________________________________

For those interested, since 2008, excluding replies and editorials, I have published 38 papers. Three more are in the accepted but not in print stage. I am very active in research, but am self admittedly more quantity than quality (although I hope that the academic gods are on the side of the big battalions). Of these 5 are not rated in the ABS – they are physics and mining journals. Of the remaining 14 are 3* or 4*. Full list below

My Publications

Title
Year
Source title
ABS
A random-matrix-theory-based analysis of stocks of markets from different countries
2008
Advances in Complex Systems
NA
The capital markets of the middle east and north african region: Situation and characteristics
2008
Emerging Markets Finance and Trade
NA
An ever-closer union? Examining the evolution of linkages of European equity markets via minimum spanning trees
2008
Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications
NA
Comovements in government bond markets: A minimum spanning tree analysis
2010
Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications
NA
The macroeconomic determinants of volatility in precious metals markets
2010
Resources Policy
NA
Efficiency in emerging markets-Evidence from the MENA region
2008
Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money
3
Financial integration and emerging markets capital structure
2011
Journal of Banking and Finance
4
Perspectives on international and corporate finance
2012
Journal of Banking and Finance
4
Gravity and culture in foreign portfolio investment
2012
Journal of Banking and Finance
4
Halloween or January? Yet another puzzle
2008
International Review of Financial Analysis
3
Russian equity market linkages before and after the 1998 crisis: Evidence from stochastic and regime-switching cointegration tests
2008
Journal of International Money and Finance
3
he Forward Exchange Rate Bias Puzzle Is Persistent: Evidence from Stochastic and Nonparametric Cointegration Tests’
2009
Financil Review
3
Is Gold a safe haven or a hedge
2010
Financial ReviewFinancial Review
3
Dynamics of equity market integration in Europe: Impact of political economy events
2010
Journal of Common Market Studies
3
Investigating the determinants of banking coexceedances in Europe in the summer of 2008
2010
Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money
3
Determinants of capital structure in Irish SMEs
2010
Small Business Economics
3
Robust global stock market interdependencies
2011
International Review of Financial Analysis
3
The Irish economy: Three strikes and you’re out?
2011
Panoeconomicus (formerly World Development)
3
Hedges and safe havens: An examination of stocks, bonds, gold, oil and exchange rates
2013
International Review of Financial Analysis
3
Skewness and asymmetry in futures returns and volumes
2008
Applied Financial Economics
2
Reassessing co-movements among G7 equity markets: Evidence from iShares
2008
Applied Financial Economics
2
International influences on asset markets
2008
Journal of Multinational Financial Management
2
Robust global mood influences in equity pricing
2008
Journal of Multinational Financial Management
2
The dynamics of Central European equity market comovements
2008
Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance
2
Shift-contagion vulnerability in the MENA stock markets
2009
World Economy
2
An empirical investigation of the financial growth lifecycle
2011
Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development
2
Equity market integration in the Asia Pacific region: Evidence from discount factors
2012
Research in International Business and Finance
2
An empirical study of multiple direct international listings
2013
Global Finance Journal
2
The structure of gold and silver spread returns
2013
Quantitative Finance
2
Do U.S. macroeconomic surprises influence equity returns? An exploratory analysis of developed economies
2013
Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance
2
Mood and UK equity pricing
2008
Applied Financial Economics Letters
1
Flights and contagion-An empirical analysis of stock-bond correlations
2009
Journal of Financial Stability
1
Lunar seasonality in precious metal returns?
2010
Applied Economics Letters
1
Volatility in the gold futures market
2010
Applied Economics Letters
1
Does cultural distance matter in international stock market comovement? Evidence from emerging economies around the world
2010
Emerging Markets Review
1
The effect of gender on stock price reaction to the appointment of directors: The case of the FTSE 100
2011
Applied Economics Letters
1
London or New York: Where and when does the gold price originate?
2013
Applied Economics Letters
1
An analysis of forward exchange rate biasedness across developed and developing country currencies: Do observed patterns persist out of sample?
2013
Emerging Markets Review
1

A New Journal – Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance

JBEF FINAL Cover Design Aug32012

A New Journal

Journals, for good or ill, represent the preeminent mode of scholarly communication. Publications count, in tenure, research evaluations and as a metric of research activity. Despite alternatives emerging such as post hoc refereeing, the double blind reviewed journal retains its gold standard, and will do for many many years.  Although there are  many journals, the scope, breadth and depth of finance continues to expand. So today we see a new journal.

The Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance is aimed at providing authors in these fields with a high quality outlet. There is at present no state of art high-level publication where one can go to obtain up to date examples of quality work in the areas of experimental and behavioral finance. The field is scattered. Bringing it together will, we can hope, act as a  useful resource for scholars, both those active in the field and those interested in how the area impacts.  There are many high quality existing journals that cover experimental economics or behavioral finance but none that act as a natural locus for both.

Experimental finance in particular is growing, with the Society for Experimental Finance having been established in the last number of years.  We believe that creating a journal that is open to experimental treatments of finance subjects will, we hope, generate interest in carrying out such.  At this juncture we  see behavioral and experimental approaches as lenses or methodologies through which to view issues and as such the journal will allow a broad perspective on an increasingly fragmented field. At the limit I agree wholeheartedly with Thaler.

I predict that in the not-too-distant future, the term “behavioral finance” will be correctly viewed as a redundant phrase. What other kind of finance is there? In their enlightenment, economists will routinely incorporate as much “behavior” into their models as they observe in the real world. After all, to do otherwise would be irrational.

We might add to this that finance, as a cognate discipline to economics and accounting, must adopt more scientific approaches to its investigations and must adopt a broader methodological perspective. Economics has seen major advances in adopting experimental approaches and finance is fast doing so. This can only assist in the rigor of our researchers. We are not yet at that shining city on the hill which Thaler saw in 1999, but in the interim I hope that this journal will aid in moving us towards it.

Some may well suggest that we have enough journals, and why start one especially as the top papers will always go to the top journals. A number of points need to be made. First, the existence of better (whatever that means in this context) journals does not make redundant the existence of others. That we have the Sistine Chapel does not make further paintings irrelevant. There is scope for quality product which for whatever reason does not get into or fit the top journals. Second, no journal is born ‘top’. Establishing  a journal is an act of calculated business and hope. The business is that there is a market, the hope is that the board and the authors will drive forward the reputation of the journal to everyone’s advantage. That I intend to do to the best of my ability. Third, in this case there is a clear gap in particular in the experimental area, and that gap deserves to be filled. Also, while there are excellent journals in the behavioral finance area there is none from Elsevier, who have a stable of already top-flight finance journals and the publishing, publication and editorial network to support this new venture.

The Process

The idea for this journal had been discussed amongst a number of persons, both in Elsevier and in the academic community, for about 18m. In February I was asked to put a formal proposal to Elsevier, which I did. This contained the usual things one would expect – details of existing complementary or competing journals, papers published that might perhaps fit the journal, learned societies and conferences in the area, main loci of research etc. The initial response was good therefore we proceeded to get together a draft editorial board (see below) and a more complete proposal was put to Elsevier in April. This was approved in June and we have spent the summer refining the details of the guide for authors, the peculiarities of how we want papers submitted etc. This is and will always be a work in process – as an Editor I have come to understand that there is no right way to guide a paper other than to say “highest quality possible please”. Submission minutiae are important but are secondary to that. In short, expect changes as we engage with the process of generating papers from submissions.

Journal Aims and Scope

The aim of the journal is to publish high quality research in the fields of corporate finance, asset pricing, financial econometrics, international finance, personal financial decision-making, macro-finance, banking and financial intermediation, capital markets, risk management and insurance, derivatives, quantitative finance, corporate governance and compensation, investments, market mechanisms, SME and microfinance and entrepreneurial finance, where such research is carried out with a behavioral perspective and/or is carried out via experimental methods.

The area of behavioral finance and the related area of experimental finance are now fully accepted as mainstream approaches within finance. Behavioral and experimental finance therefore represent lenses and approaches through which we can view financial decision-making. The journal aims to provide a single source for the latest research in these areas. It is open to but not limited to papers which cover investigations of biases, the role of various neurological markers in decision-making, national and organizational culture as it impacts on those organizations financial decision-making, sentiment and asset pricing, the design and implementation of experiments to investigate financial decision-making and trading, methodological experiments,  and natural experiments. Although primarily empirical, we will be more than open to theoretical and methodological papers which cast light on behavioral and experimental topics, as well as to meta analyses, surveys and overviews.

Where is it and who is involved?

The journal site is here  at and papers can be submitted here. The Editorial Board at present consists of the following, but we are actively seeking other persons.

  • Ackert, Lucy  Kennesaw State University, Coles College of Business, USA
  • Aggarwal, Raj The University of Akron, Ohio, USA
  • Asparouhova Elena N, University of Utah,  USA
  • Davies, Greg Head of Behavioral Finance and Investment Philosophy,  Barclays
  • Delaney, Liam   Stirling Management School, University of Stirling, UK
  • Dowling, Michael  Dublin City University Business School, Ireland
  • Goodell, John The University of Akron, Ohio, USA
  • Harmon, Colm  University of Sydney, School of Economics, Australia
  • Henker, Julie Bond University, Queensland, Australia
  • Holm, Håkan Jerker School of Economics and Management, Lund University, Sweden
  • Huber, Jürgen. The University of Innsbruck, Austria
  • Innocenti, Allesandro Experimental Economics Laboratory, University of Siena, Italy
  • Kim, Kenneth, Renmin University, Beijin, China.
  • Kirchler, Michael, The University of Innsbruck, Austria
  • Kramer, Lisa A. Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Canada
  • Lau, Morten, Copenhagen Business School Copenhagen Denmark
  • Leoni, Patrick L.  KEDGE, Marseille, France
  • Loncarski, Igor, Faculty of Economics Universty of Ljubjanja, Slovenia
  • Pompian, Michael Mercer Wealth Management, St Louis USA
  • Nawrocki, David, Villanova Univeristy, USA
  • Noussair, Charles, Tilburg University, Netherlands
  • Lunn, Pete  Economic and Social Research Institute Dublin, Ireland
  • Rabin, Matthew Brunel University, London UK
  • Pownall, Rachael , Maastricht University, Netherlands
  • Ricciardi, Victor.  Goucher College, Maryland, USA
  • Santoni, Alessandro, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena, Siena, Italy
  • Statman, Meir.  Santa Clara University, Santa Clara USA
  • Viole, Fred OVVO Financial Systems, Holmed, NJ USA
  • Wang, Mei. WHU – Otto Beisheim School of Management , Berlin, Germany
  • Weitzel, Utz. Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands
  •  Zhu, Ning. UC Davis and Shanghai Advanced Institute for Finance, China

Brian Lucey

Founding Editor

For : Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance

 

Longlist – not exhaustive – of possible  topics

  • Adaptive Market Hypothesis
  • Adjustment
  • Agent-Based Modeling
  • Altruism
  • Ambiguity
  • Ambiguity Aversion
  • Ambiguity Bias
  • Anchoring
  • Anchoring And Adjustment
  • Anomalies
  • Appropriation
  • Asset Market
  • Asset Market Experiments
  • Assimilation Error
  • Asymmetric Information
  • Asymmetry
  • Attachment Bias
  • Attention
  • Attribution Theory
  • Auctions
  • Availability
  • Bargaining Power
  • Behavioral Biases
  • Behavioral Corporate Finance
  • Behavioral Finance
  • Beliefs
  • Benchmarking
  • Betrayal Aversion
  • Between-Subjects Design
  • Bidding
  • Bounded Rationality
  • Break-Even Effect
  • Bubble
  • Calendar Effects
  • Certainty Effect
  • Charitable Giving
  • Circle Network
  • Classification Game
  • Cognitive Abilities
  • Cognitive Dissonance
  • Cognitive Heuristic
  • Communication
  • Compatibility
  • Competitive Behavior
  • Competitiveness
  • Conditional Cooperation
  • Confirmation Bias/Confirmatory Bias
  • Conservatism Bias
  • Context Dependence
  • Contrarian
  • Cooperation
  • Coordination
  • Coordination Game
  • Corporate Governance
  • Corporate Social Responsibility
  • Cournot Oligopoly
  • Credence Goods
  • Crowding-Out Effect
  • Culture
  • Day Of The Week Effect
  • Decision Making Under Risk
  • Dictator Game
  • Digit Ratio
  • Disjunction
  • Disposition Effect
  • Downside Risk
  • Dynamic Choice
  • Electronic Markets
  • Emotion Regulation
  • Emotions
  • Endowment Effect
  • Equity
  • Expected Utility Theory
  • Experience
  • Experimental Design
  • Experimental Design
  • Experimental Market
  • Experimental Measurement
  • Experimental Methodology
  • Experimental Methods
  • Experimentation
  • Experiments
  • False Discovery Rate
  • False-Consensus Effect
  • Familiarity
  • Field Experiment
  • Financial Decision Making
  • Financial Literacy
  • Flexibility
  • Framing
  • Free-Riding
  • Group Behavior
  • Guessing Game
  • Halloween Effect
  • Happiness
  • Health
  • Heterogeneity
  • Heuristic
  • Hidden Information
  • Hindsight Bias
  • Home Bias
  • Hormones
  • House Money Effect
  • House-Money Effect
  • Household Finance
  • Idiosyncratic Risk Premium
  • Illusion Of Control
  • Illusion Of Knowledge
  • Incentives
  • Incomplete Contracts
  • Individual Behavior
  • Individual Choice
  • Individual Investors
  • Individual Preferences
  • Inequality Aversion
  • Information Quality
  • Information Sharing
  • Information Uncertainty
  • Insurance
  • Intelligence
  • Interdependent Preferences
  • Investment Horizon
  • Investor Characteristics
  • Investor Sentiment
  • Knowledge Attitudes
  • Knowledge Of Economics And Finance
  • Laboratory Experiments
  • Learning
  • Learning From Peers
  • Leniency
  • Level K Model
  • Loss Aversion
  • Loss Aversion
  • Lottery Choice Experiment
  • Magical Thinking
  • Managerial Biases
  • Manipulation
  • Market Composition
  • Market Design
  • Market Efficiency
  • Market Efficiency
  • Matching Market
  • Matching Procedure
  • Meme
  • Mental Accounting
  • Mental Accounting
  • Mental Compartments
  • Mental Health
  • Meta-Study
  • Model Uncertainty
  • Momentum
  • Monetary Incentive
  • Monetary Punishments
  • Monitoring
  • Month-Of-The-Year Effect
  • Moral Suasion
  • Motivation
  • Multiple Equilibria
  • National Culture
  • Natural Experiment
  • Natural Language
  • Neurofinance
  • Newspaper Experiment
  • Non-Cognitive Skills
  • Non-Monetary Punishments
  • Optimism
  • Optimism
  • Over-Optimism
  • Overconfidence
  • Overconfident Behaviour
  • Overreaction
  • Parameter Uncertainty
  • Payoff Tables
  • Peer Groups
  • Persistence
  • Personality
  • Persuasion Effect
  • Plasticity
  • Political Equilibrium
  • Portfolio Choice
  • Portfolio Optimization
  • Portfolio Selection
  • Post-Earnings-Announcement Drift
  • Price Bubbles
  • Pricing Rules
  • Prisoner’s Dilemma
  • Procedural Fairness
  • Prospect Theory
  • Public Goods Experiments
  • Punishment
  • Race
  • Random Incentive System
  • Rationality
  • Real-Time Experiment
  • Real-Time Monitoring
  • Reciprocity
  • Redistribution
  • Reference Point
  • Regret Theory
  • Religion
  • Repeated Games
  • Representiveness
  • Reputation
  • Return Seasonality
  • Risk Aversion
  • Risk Awareness
  • Risk Diversification
  • Risk-Return Tradeoff
  • Salience
  • Sanctions
  • Seasonal Affective Disorder
  • Seasonality
  • Selection Into Experiments
  • Self-Interest
  • Self-Serving Bias
  • Sentiment
  • Session-Effects
  • Shorting
  • Simple And Compound Events
  • Sleep
  • Social Connections
  • Social Distance
  • Social Effects
  • Social Interaction
  • Social Networks
  • Social Networks
  • Social Norms
  • Social Preferences
  • Social Welfare Maximizing
  • Socially Responsible Investing
  • Somatic
  • Sorting
  • Stakeholder Theory
  • Status
  • Status Quo Bias
  • Strategic Behavior
  • Sunk-Cost Effect
  • Technical Trading
  • Tournament Incentives
  • Trading Behavior
  • Trading Performance
  • Trend Chasing
  • Trust Game
  • Ultimatum Game
  • Underreaction
  • Week-Of-The-Month Effect
  • Week-Of-The-Year Effect
  • Well-Being
  • Willingness To Compete
  • Willingness To Pay
  • Within-Subjects Design
  • Yes-No Game

Managing “People Risk” – A seminar series

prisk

So, along with some UK colleagues the Finance group in TCD have gotten a grant from the ESRC for a seminar series on managing people risk.  All to often we get concerned about structuring systems that cant fail to find that they do because someone somewhere messed up. The software and hardware do not matter if the wetware is deficient.  The plan is as below… more details will emerge later.

1. Existing knowledge, contested approaches and future developments Nov 2013, Nottingham (University of Nottingham) Aims to map the terrain of existing research across different disciplines, identify consensus and conceptual tensions whilst building on an academic agenda for cross disciplinary research.

2. The place of ‘Key employees’ in health and aviation: theory and practice Feb 2014, Glasgow (Glasgow Caledonian University) Aims to examine the challenges for research and practice in ‘people risk’ within the domains of aviation and the health sector.

3. Financial services, financial markets and ‘people risk’ regulation Jul 2014, Dublin (Trinity College, Republic of Ireland) Aims to critically analyse the internal and external controls frameworks in the financial services environment.

4. The role of ‘people risk’ measurement: applied behavioural economics & HRM Sept 2014, Berlin (WZB University, Germany) Aims to examine the potential for engagement from human resource management research and applied behavioural economics as controls and measures of ‘people risk’ within the firm.

5.Human factors & best practice: Cross-fertlisation in research & industry Feb 2015, Nottingham (University of Nottingham) Aims to examine the theoretical underpinnings of human factors analysis and its reserach applications to the marine and rail industries.

6.Strategies for advocacy, knowledge transfer and tangible research networking Aug 2015, Nis (University of Nis, Serbia) Aims to explore the barriers to awareness of, and mobilisation of, cross-disciplinary ‘people risk’ research

Lets ban google from colleges…

Four words that strike terror and despair into the hearts of all academics : “oh, I googled it”. 

In TCD students have access to perhaps the finest research library on the Island. Every other university has superb library facilities also, and increasingly these include deep levels of online journal histories, massive databases of knowledge paid for by the taxpayer in most. And when we give students a research topic? “oh, I googled it”. The concept of going to the library, in physical or electronic form and there doing a structured search for appropriate knowledge seems to be almost entirely absent from undergraduate students. Of course universities offer library information sessions but these are poorly attended and worse understood. Students simply want to google it…

Im serious. Lets consider for one term a ban on google search facilities from university domains.