Category Archives: Research

It’s good to talk

Posted on by
Reply

Woman whispers to the girlfriend secrets

Dr Stefanie Reissner, a lecturer in organisational studies from Newcastle University Business School, has revealed that what is widely considered gossip in the workplace can actually help boost work performance.

My research, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), found that a company is a community that is maintained by sharing personal stories, which I call peer storytelling. Organisations that use peer storytelling well, establish constructive working relationships that are vital for effective operations, leading to improved business outcomes.

From childhood, individuals are conditioned to respond to and understand problems and issues, through storytelling. This translates into the world of work.

The research shows that sharing personal stories, from the funny to the emotional, can allow individuals to connect with others at work. Such a ‘connection’ enables them to understand colleagues and their actions in the workplace. This leads to improved judgement about behaviour, with benefits such as employees feeling more comfortable challenging one another. The result is more robust decision making and, arguably, better work performance.

Informal work conversations often get a bad press because they allegedly distract from the task at hand. But I ask: does being professional mean to be authoritative and impersonal on all occasions? My study shows that peer storytelling can alleviate pressure at work. If people are more at ease at work, they can be more focussed and productive in their daily routines.

I would encourage firms to appreciate the importance of peer storytelling as employees can convey everything from what makes them ‘tick’ to their ethics at work. In fact, far from distracting, peer storytelling can be good for an organisation.

This is pertinent nowadays when we are seeing rises in new business models like ‘hot-desking’ and limited personal interaction with colleagues and managers. Appreciating the human side of an organisation is vital in building a cohesive workforce in today’s network economy.

But, despite the potential benefits of peer storytelling, there can be negative effects on individuals and the organization. For example, the communication grapevine – an informal network by which unofficial information is transmitted within a place of work – can be harmful when rumour or inaccurate detail leads to misunderstanding and destroys relationships, trust and reputation.

I hope that the findings from this research can challenge the way employers think about how they build staff relationships and HR policies to foster meaningful interaction in the workplace.

The findings come from data collected from interviews with 75 individuals, between 2010 and 2012, and are now available in print. The book Storytelling in Management Practice, authored by Stefanie Reissner and Victoria Pagan, explores how managers use storytelling in practice, as well as its functions at different levels within an organisation.

Shifting perspectives on management

Posted on by
Reply

Professor John Wilson, the Director of Newcastle University Business School (UK), introduces a blog which will offer new perspectives on topical issues in management, economics, and innovation.

What does the term management mean to you?

We live in a world of uncertainty and with this we have witnessed some huge failures of management, namely, failure of those in charge to make sense of a business issue and make the right decision.

Management is a term that has become imbued with tales of disaster, from Enron and the current financial recession to the BP Gulf oil spill of 2010.

In many scenarios top management have set targets – often financial – related to sales and returns to shareholders; meaning that the focus of the organisation has become the achievement of these targets at the expense of customer service and, in extreme cases, legality.

Here, at Newcastle University Business School, we want to make management a career of choice for people who want to make a difference. Our mission is to build excellence in our teaching while providing new, global business perspectives that contribute to the responsible and ethical shaping of society.

So how do we start to solve this issue and make sure our future leaders can manage safely, efficiently and sustainably; not focused on the bottom line, but on the holistic picture? How can we start to shift this current perspective on management?

Quite simply, we must go back to the basics: the education of management practice and how we teach this craft.

At school and university there is a risk that management (business studies) is seen as either a second-rate subject or studied primarily as a route to employment, rather than having a passion for the subject.

Here, at Newcastle University Business School, we want to inject it with a new perspective: to give it a true meaning that has been lost and overwritten during recent crises.

The true meaning of management is centered upon some key principles:

• responsibility – changing the world for the better through ethical supervision;
• bravery – employees standing up to forces driving them to do the wrong thing;
• innovation – constantly seeking and adopting improvements to products, services and ways of working;
• collaboration – enabling individuals from different backgrounds, disciplines and cultures to work together effectively to create value and to develop their effectiveness; and
• being ambidextrous – exploring and innovating to create the ‘business for tomorrow’ and at the same time making sure that the ‘business of today’ operates effectively and continues to develop.

Good management practice is vital for new enterprises, growing successful organisations, tackling complex issues including societal challenges, research commercialisation and the successful development and operation of the public sector and not-for-profit and social enterprises.

The Business School draws on its research strengths, learning community and business engagement to engage students in active, learning activities that help develop higher level managerial competences.

We are working hard to ensure that management graduates are ready to share their knowledge with colleagues, teams and organisations, in a bid to develop their ability to make a difference, and start to develop a new perspective on management.

Professor John Wilson, Director of Newcastle University Business School.

Think family

Posted on by
Reply

It would seem that even the big television networks are creating programmes around the concept of ‘the family’.   From The Simpsons, Shameless, Rome, to the Tudors some very popular series have been made.  But why are they getting such great ratings?

Perhaps it’s because everyone can relate to the idea of a family.  But are families the bedrock of society that politicians believe?

One of my research themes that I work on with colleagues – James Cornford and Susan Baines – revolves around the family, and in particular how the government uses information system to ‘think’ family.

As we all know from our own personal lives: the idea of a ‘family’ – never mind the reality – can be very complicated.

Historically, under previous administration public bodies were asked to ‘Think Family’.

This has led to a number of government programmes that have encouraged services to integrate their facilities around families in order to co-ordinate support and intervention. This has led to a range of interests attempting to make sense of what to do about families.

Our research has shown that only when the government starts to grapple with the complexities of the ‘family’ will we really make progress with all sorts of families, including those who need the most support from our society. 

However, this is not a jigsaw where the problem has a boundary and is solved by integrating pieces together.

Different bits of the state see different versions of the family – and different things entirely for one department a jigsaw for another a crossword puzzle.

For instance: schools think family in terms of parenting; social services in terms of potential risk; child support agency in terms of fatherhood; and parts of the NHS in terms of genetics, the police in terms of crime and so on.

Rather like our own families it is the stories (often supported by artefacts such as family albums) and the changes that happen that potentially brings these strands together.

So when we come back to examining what the government is doing with its troubled family agenda, we might ask the questions: what interventions are being delivered, using which version of the family, to which of the family members benefit, and with what accounts?

It is clear that rather than families being the static structures we think about in terms the way a family trees represents them, they are lived projects (rather similar to real trees and their ecologies) which evolve over time. 

So in terms of family policy and practice those thinking about families need to have a more elastic idea of what families are to help those working with them and the families themselves to cultivate the best conversations they can have.

If you have a chance, you can read our recent research paper on the topic by clicking here

Dr Rob Wilson
Director of the KITE Research Centre and Senior Lecturer, Newcastle University Business School

If you cannot build a business around it, it doesn’t matter

Posted on by
Reply

A recent event held at Newcastle University Business School saw guest speaker, Todd Brinton, discuss needs-based innovation in the medical field.

Medical devices innovation that is patient-needs driven rather than being the result of a technology push, can be built into a sustainable business that benefits patients and makes money for the innovator.

How does one find real medical problems that need to be solved? Why do we call them needs?

Todd Brinton, MD, fellowship director of Stanford University’s Biodesign Program, cardiologist and bioengineer, presented a bootcamp and a master class in innovation to a mixed university and industry audience.

At Stanford University the Biodesign program teaches the needs-based innovation methodology to their fellows in a year-long program with the purpose of creating entrepreneurs – people with the skills needed to take inventions to market. In the 13 years of Biodesign, 29 companies have come out of the program, and over 100 fellows have graduated.

Teams aim to find a strategic focus, look for problems, and then turn those problems into more generalised needs.

Teams are key – they must include a partnership between people with clinical, scientific, engineering and business development skills; these teams are found to innovate the best.

The team must take a strategic focus on an area that it cares about, and then immerse themselves in the clinical field of interest.  Once they are there they need to observe; get dirty; get in to see actual clinical practise and take notice of frustrated people; use fresh eyes and ask naïve questions because there are many, many problems.

Each observed problem represents a need. Some of these needs affect many patients and, when this need, this opportunity, is thoroughly evidenced, the opportunity is ripe for innovation, invention and business development.

Written by Lucille Valentine

Dr Fiona Whitehurst reflects on the importance of being ‘civic’

Posted on by
Reply

Newcastle University aspires to be a world-class civic university delivering benefits to individuals, organisations and to society as a whole, so it was a delight for the Business School to host Professor John Goddard OBE, Emeritus Professor of Regional Development Studies and former Deputy Vice Chancellor of Newcastle University to speak about his recently published book The University and the City  co-authored with Paul Vallance.

John is a leading proponent of the civic university concept, arguing in a 2009 NESTA Provocation that all publicly funded universities in the UK have a civic duty to engage with wider society on the local, national and global scales, and to do so in a manner which links the social to the economic spheres.

John revealed three tensioned themes emerging from his research – passive local physical, social and economic impacts of universities (campus footprint, student purchasing power, employment generation) vis a vis their active engagement in the development of the city; economic vis a vis more holistic views of engagement with civil society and the ‘external’ civic role of the university vis a vis ‘internal’ processes within the university and state higher education policies that shape these external relations.

John’s distinguishing attributes of a ‘civic university’ are:

  1. It is actively engaged with the wider world as well as the local community of the place in which it is located.  This engagement is achieved through dialogue and collaborations with individuals, institutions and groups locally, nationally and globally.
  2. It takes a holistic approach to engagement, seeing it as institution wide activity and not confined to specific individuals or teams.
  3. It has a strong sense of place.  While it may operate on a national and international scale, it recognises the extent to which is location helps to form its unique identity as an institution.
  4. It has a sense of purpose – an understanding of not just what it is good at, but what it is good for.
  5. It is willing to invest in order to have impact beyond the academy.  This includes releasing financial resources to support certain projects or activities, or to ‘unlock’ external sources of funding.
  6. It is transparent and accountable to its stakeholders and the wider public.
  7. It uses innovative methodologies such as social media and team building in its engagement activities with the world at large.

Plenty of food for thought, especially for a Business School. What does a ‘civic’ business school look like and how well does Newcastle University Business School fit that description?

Those are questions for a later post, but as I was pondering them I came across an article in the Financial Times (15 April 2013) by Della Bradshaw on German Business Schools. She notes that while Germany is the fourth-largest economy in the world, the country has no world-renowned business schools or top-ranked MBA programmes. In the article Robert Wardrop, research fellow in sociology and finance at the Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, ascribes this to the stakeholder value model of German business, which is incompatible with the methodologies that drive most Business School rankings. The MBA rankings tend to have an emphasis on salary maximisation, the traditional US individualist justification for undertaking an MBA. So, another question, does the third of John Goddard’s tensioned themes – the external role of a civic institution vis a vis internal processes and state policies have an added dimension for Business Schools?

Do Business School rankings take sufficient regard of an institution’s ‘civic’ role? In a time of unprecedented societal challenges globally I would like to suggest they should.

Dr Fiona Whitehurst, Director of Accreditation

 

Failure of strategy

Posted on by
Reply

The failure of strategy has led to an era of fiscal, institutional, and legitimacy crisis with major moral tensions.

Five years after the financial crisis hit, almost destroying the UK banking system, we continue to try to understand the factors that contributed to the disaster. This was a disaster that, as the world knows, overwhelmed the Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS to the extent that UK taxpayers are still majority owners of these banks (HBOS having been taken over by Lloyds).

The UK public may well be puzzled as to how the disaster happened and who, apart from the publically scapegoated and dishonoured ‘Sir’ Fred Goodwin, is responsible for its occurrence. 

This month (April 2013) has seen the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards produce a report in a bid to continue to try and unravel what happened when private loss was made a public debt, and we slipped into a recession. 

The Commission has been set up to consider and report on:
• professional standards and culture of the UK banking sector, taking account of regulatory and competition investigations into the LIBOR rate-setting process
• lessons to be learned about corporate governance, transparency and conflicts of interest, and their implications for regulation and Government policy
The report on HBOS is refreshingly willing to name names, and allocate blame to the leaders of HBOS at the time of the crash, naming in particular Sir James Crosby, Andy Hornby, and Lord Stephenson.

The (formerly) highly paid senior bankers quoted in the report continue to claim that the crisis was a sort of unforeseeable natural disaster (‘tsunami’ is a term used on a number of occasions). This report and the written and oral testimony collected by The Commission provides invaluable evidence of individual, group, and institutional dysfunction.

In particular, the main issues that emerge from the report are (1) that HBOS was doomed irrespective of the financial crisis; (2) the bank’s ‘retail culture’ played a role in perverting the aims of the bank as a customer service organisation, (3) that the HBOS board lacked banking, rather than retail, experience, and was (4)  unwilling or unable to address issues of existential risk that were undermining the bank, even when brought to the board’s attention by a whistleblower.

The report raises questions for practising managers and for business school academics concerning how managers can manage large and complex organisations.

Hopefully this report will contribute to another lesson: how we teach future business leaders to sufficiently analyse corporate issues with responsibility and ethical practice. 

Dr Ron Kerr,  lecturer in Organisation Studies at Newcastle University Business School. 

 

Response to media coverage of early-stage research into cannabis use

Posted on by
4

Responding to articles in today’s Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph, Dr Nils Braakmann of Newcastle University Business School, clarifies his provisional research findings, which are part of a working paper ‘Cannabis consumption, crime, anti-social behaviour and victimization – Evidence from the 2004 cannabis declassification in the UK’.

The research, which was recently presented at the annual conference of the Royal Economic Society, is still in the early stages and does not demonstrate an absolute increase in real-terms in cannabis consumption since declassification.

In fact, the increase presented is a relative increase between previous consumers and previous non-consumers, pre and post declassification, of between 18-26% depending on a number of social and demographic variables.  This does not therefore represent an absolute increase in consumption and it is misleading to represent this research in this way.

This situation does, however, raise some interesting questions for educators. The difference between absolute and relative difference is significant in this case, and shows how important it is to understand these terms before we interpret them in any meaningful way.

I look forward to sharing the findings when the research is complete, at which point it would be appropriate to interpret the research in a social context.

Dr Nils Braakmann

Budget reaction from Professor John Wilson

Posted on by
Reply

Penny for your thoughts 

As with any budget, the devil is in the detail.

And after watching today’s Budget for an ‘aspirational nation’, I feel that while the political analysis takes up the margins of our newspapers, as a region and nation we must stick together to make this work for us.

I am a business historian and have analysed many fiscal policies and Budget announcements over the last sixty years; I’ve seen the good, the bad and the ugly.

What is clear from Osborne’s budget today is the need to ‘fix’ our state through monetary activism, supply-side reform and fiscal policy.

From curing the ethics within our banks to attracting new businesses to our shores, as a nation we need to be ensuring that confidence in investment is the foundation on which we build our reformed state.  And how do we get this confidence? Through innovation stimuli, is how. Innovation acts as a bedrock for demand, job creation and, ultimately, assurance in the system that generates real wealth.

Many commentators will be discussing the implications of Osborne’s policies, but I want to talk about what we can control.  And that is our networks and knowledge economy.

As part of a civic university, the Business School needs to work with business and regional policy makers to build an industrial and business strategy that can work for us.  From cutting edge research, leadership and management training to harnessing innovation, the Business School’s doors are open to support the needs of the region to help us grow again.

In this spirit, open collaboration between higher education and businesses can lead to some of the most disruptive and ingenious work: bringing with it vital market share and wealth creation.

The importance of academia, industry and commerce working together as a triple helix for success can also be seen in Heseltine’s review ‘No stone unturned in pursuit of growth’.  And with Osborne’s nod to Heseltine’s suggestion of creating a single funding pot for skills, housing and transport, I am looking forward to further details being released.  Regions need to know how much and when to expect this to be implemented.

Moreover, with emerging business models like employee ownership and cooperatives operating in a rapidly changing business world, universities and businesses need to work together to decide how we can best do things differently.

As Osborne said today ‘Britain is open for business’, but what I would like to stress is that, yes the economic and fiscal policies outlined today will have some impact in the coming months and years, but we are the people who can add value through being ‘truly’ open for business through collaborative networks leading to innovation.

The wonder of Professor Brian Cox and female role models

Posted on by
Reply

Comment by Professor Pooran Wynarczyk:

 I am sure there are few people who don’t know who Professor Brian Cox is but how many have heard of Dr Maggie Aderin-Pocock?

Since 2011 there has been a surge in the take up of science and maths A- Levels, and this has been attributed to the popularity of the physics professor and TV presenter, Brian Cox, a prime example of the effect exposure to positive role models can have. 

And as International Women’s Day approaches I have one message: we must stop focussing on the under representation of women in business, and celebrate the great role models we have to get more women into science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) subjects.

When people asked to name a female scientist, most come up with ‘Marie Curie’. This is not to  deny the fact  that she was truly a  remarkable  woman  but there are many other  women around the world whose  accomplishments  should be made more visible.

I have picked five inspirational women to highlight the great work and impact women are making to our scientific world:

1. Pamela Ann Melroy (Former NASA Astronaut)
2. Maggie Aderin-Pocock (TV Presenter, Do We Need the Moon?)
3. Dr Helen Czerski  (Physicist,    TV Presenter, Orbit: Earth’s Extraordinary Journey)
4. Professor Alice Roberts (Anatomist, Author and  TV Presenter,  Incredible Human Journey) 
5. Dr Aarathi Prasad (Former research scientist in cancer genetics who now works in science policy and journalism)

A key area of my research interest – or rather a ‘wonder’ – is the reasons behind the gender divide in the take up of STEM subjects.  And from my and many others’ research one key reason is clear: a severe lack of visible female role models. 

An issue at the heart of the debate over the gender divide in STEM subjects is the portrayal of female role models: they are largely invisible, and have been for a long time. 

We need to open our eyes and see the adverse effect negative labelling of women in scientific and technological fields, and in turn the lack of female role models, is having on the current labour market. A lack of exposure, as well as a lack of genuine representation, risks a very dangerous self-fulfilling prophecy. That is to say, if we focus too much on under-representation, we miss the opportunity to inspire the next generation through shining examples of women in science and technology.

Existing research claims that exposure to positive  role models during the critical junctures, i.e. earlier years of education, has a positive influence on self efficacy and, hence, inspiring future career choices. 
Female role models are incredibly important as they allow individuals to showcase their achievements and could encourage more girls to get involved in business – especially in areas such as science and technology which have traditionally been associated with men.
 
More often than not, the news that is hitting the headlines focuses on gender imbalance, stereotype beliefs and the under-representation of women in business. This in itself can mask advancements that are being made, which in turn discourages women from reaching high positions beyond the glass ceiling.  

If existing women scientists continue to remain largely ‘invisible’ and not seen to be enjoying a rewarding and progressive career, combined with being unrecognised for their contribution to scientific and technological advancement, they are unlikely to be able to act as role models and serve the purpose of further recruitment and retention.

Some may argue that by highlighting the under-representation and barriers to participation for women entering STEM subjects and careers, aids awareness and policy making. 

I would say that this provides little support to those employed, or planning to enter STEM   professions. On the contrary, it can have an adverse effect, and may actually discourage girls and women from pursuing education and careers in these fields.

My research has revealed the ambitious, invisible, female role models that can be engaged to promote a greater uptake of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

And with International Woman’s Day in mind, I want to call out for more inspirational woman to seize the spot light like Brian Cox. 

Who would make your top five?

 

Gateshead students take the chequered flag at F1 in Schools North East England Regional Finals 2013

Posted on by
Reply

Newcastle University Business School hosted this year’s regional finals, which saw a team of students from Emmanuel College, Gateshead, celebrate a win.  The winning team are through to the F1 in Schools™ UK National Finals after an intense and hard-fought North East England Regional Finals. This Formula One™ inspired educational challenge has captured the imagination of students up and down the country and with a place on the grid at the F1 in Schools World Finals 2013 to be held in Austin, Texas for the UK National Champions, every team put in hundreds of hours of work in their pursuit of the prize.
 
Red Kite Racing, a team from Emmanuel College with team members: Emily Miller, Team Manager, Elliott Johnson, Design Engineer; Jack Collier, Design Engineer and Rhys Rogers, Manufacturing Engineer, proved that hard work pays off as they collected the 1st Place F1Class trophy, as well as the Best Engineered Car Award and Fastest F1 Car Award, with the team’s car racing down the track in a time of 1.166 seconds.
 
Elliott Johnson said of the team’s success, “I think we took the top award because there was a lot of teamwork, working to our strengths, many hours of hard work put into our design, our presentation and sponsorship. Now we’re looking to the National Finals and hoping to improve our design for it. It’s a once in a lifetime opportunity to be going there, so we’re really looking forward to it.”
 
Red Kite Racing were one of three teams who raced to victory at the Regional Final and will be representing their school at the F1 in Schools UK National Finals which takes place at the Big Bang Fair, ExCel, London on 15 and 16 March.
 
F1 in Schools challenges students to create their own Formula One team which is commissioned to design, construct and race the fastest miniature Formula One Car of the Future; a 21cm long scale model built from a block of balsa wood and powered by a compressed air cylinder. Each team of between three and six students creates a ‘pit’ display at the Regional Final and showcases their work in developing their race car, with a verbal and written presentation for the judges. The teams then race their model cars on a specially designed 20 metre test track, with the cars covering the distance in just over one second.
 
The competition links closely to the research of Professor Pooran Wynarczyk, of Newcastle University Business School, who studies gender within innovation, and the uptake of STEM subjects. 
 
Professor Pooran Wynarczyk, director of the Small Enterprise Research Unit at Newcastle University Business School, commented:
 
“Working with the F1 in Schools UK team to host the regional finals at the Business School is a highly valuable exercise, as it brings together research and practical learning to enhance a young person’s education.
 
“My research is all about encouraging, and increasing the uptake of, young people into the areas of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM), and allowing them to realise the potential careers, and paths to such careers, that sit within these subject areas.
 
“It’s always an enjoyable and exciting atmosphere at the event for everyone, and we hope the activities of the day translate into a buzz of new ideas and enthusiasm, from the pupils, towards STEM subjects and activities.”

In addition to representing their country at the World Finals, the F1 in Schools UK Champions and runners up will receive tickets to the 2013 FORMULA 1 BRITISH GRAND PRIX at Silverstone. The National Champions will also win a Red Bull Racing F1 team factory tour and a TW STEEL Watch for each team member.
 
Andrew Denford, Founder and Chairman, F1 in Schools, said of this week’s North East England Regional Finals, “We’re experiencing significant growth in the schools entering the challenge this season and the standards are extremely high. The students had to cope with the nerves of presenting to a panel of judges and the pressures of putting their models to the test against the best of the region and all the teams put up a great fight, with only a few points separating the top contenders for a place at the National Finals”.
 
Denford adds, “The challenge not only tests the students in many key areas of educational study such as the STEM subjects, but gives them an opportunity to gain experience of many life skills which will be invaluable in their future careers.”
 
The North East England regional finals took place with the assistance of a host of sponsors and supporters. Amongst these are the IET, Denford, and City University London all of whom are continuing their support of F1 in Schools for the coming year.

Photos from the day can be found by clicking here >