It’s good to talk

Posted on 22 May, 2014 by Rachael

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.

Prince Charles calls for pensions industry ‘fit for 21st century’

Posted on 21 October, 2013 by Rachael

By Anna Tilba, Newcastle University Business School

Speaking to a conference of National Association of Pension Funds, Prince Charles voiced his concerns over whether Britain’s’ pension system is built to cope with its ageing population. He emphasised that it is pension funds’ duty to manage environmental, social and economic risks and to change the culture of ‘quarterly capitalism,’ which is unfit for purpose. Prince Charles left it up to pension funds to ‘help shape a system designed for the 21st century and not 19th century’.

Having spent over seven years researching pension fund governance and investment, I would say that yes, change is needed but it is unrealistic that this change will happen, due to issues around pension fund liabilities, complexity of pension fund investment, demographic changes and the current economic climate.
‘Quarterly capitalism’ whereby businesses pursue short term aims for short term gains at the end of each financial quarter, is the sign of our challenging economic times.

Firstly, there are issues around how trustees interpret their duty. The UK legal trust tradition, which gives pension fund trustees the power and the fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of pension fund members, means that trustees -on the most part- interpret that duty as acting in the best financial interests. My recent research into UK pension fund investment practices suggests that trustees’ interpretation of their fiduciary duty of care is a core guiding principal, which informs pension fund investment strategies and actually discourages share-owner and stewardship activities.

Increasing complexity with pension fund investment chain means that in practice, pension funds are far removed from the corporations in which they hold shares. Many delegate all to do with pension fund investments to financial intermediaries who themselves are focused on share trading, rather than responsible shared ownership. The complexity of pension fund investment and an increasing regulatory burden also means that trustees are too busy dealing with pension fund governance and compliance, rather than with monitoring investee corporations and accounting for environmental, social and governance risks.

Furthermore, pension funds are currently operating in an environment characterised by economic recession and unstable, and complex, financial markets. Sadly, pension fund finances are now suffering a double financial blow: one from falls in stock markets and another dealt by the economic recession, impacting on cash flows and pension contributions of the sponsoring companies and local authority councils.

According to the latest figures, pension fund funding deteriorated significantly between March 2011 and March 2012 – the funding ratio (assets divided by liabilities) also fell from 100 per cent to 83 per cent (The Purple Book, 2012), putting more pressure on schemes to look for short-term investment returns to improve funding.

Pension funds are also operating in a world of increased human longevity and progressing pension fund maturity. Scientific data shows that life expectancy rose both in men and women: a 65-year-old man retiring today will, on average, live to 89. As a result of increased life expectancy, pension fund liabilities have soared to £1.702.6 billion with pensions deficits rising to £677.3 billion in 2012, from £470.7 billion a year earlier (The Purple Book, 2012).

Pension fund deficits have created a need for pension funds to match assets with liabilities, the so-called Liability Driven Investment (LDI) is putting more pressure on pension funds to rely on the market, volatile as it may be, to address the funding problem. Pension funds are forced to seek more short-term investment solutions, capable of ensuring the continuous flow of investment income into the fund and secure the payment of pensions.

If we are to start tackling this pension issue, we need to account firstly for the complexity associated with current financial markets. Secondly, we need to focus more attention to the responsibilities and accountability of financial intermediaries such as investment consultants advising the trustees and the investment fund managers who manage pension fund assets on their behalf.

With these two actions, we could make some steps towards the much needed change Prince Charles has called for.

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

Posted on 7 May, 2013 by Rachael

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 19 April, 2013 by Laura

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:

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.
It takes a holistic approach to engagement, seeing it as institution wide activity and not confined to specific individuals or teams.
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.
It has a sense of purpose – an understanding of not just what it is good at, but what it is good for.
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.
It is transparent and accountable to its stakeholders and the wider public.
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

Budget reaction from Professor John Wilson

Posted on 20 March, 2013 by Laura

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 7 March, 2013 by Rachael

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?

NUBiz School Bites

Category Archives: Work and employment