Academic literature on the topic 'Lawford and Forbes (Firm)'

W niniejszym opracowaniu przeanalizowano przestrzenne rozmieszczenie największych firm światowych znajdujących się na liście magazynu „Forbes” Global 2000, posiadających siedziby zarządów na terytorium Europy. Zwrócono także uwagę na wpływ kryzysu gospodarczego na zmiany ich przychodów oraz dochodów. Przedstawiono przestrzenne zróżnicowanie liczby siedzib zarządów, przychodów i dochodów największych firm w latach 2006 i 2012 na terenie Europy. Wykazano, iż w badanym okresie zmniejszyła się ich liczba w omawianym regionie, równocześnie też zarysował się podział na Europę Wschodnią, gdzie wzrosła liczba siedzib zarządów, i Europę Zachodnią, gdzie zanotowano ich regres. Zauważono także nieznaczny wpływ kryzysu gospodarczego na przychody firm umieszczonych na liście Forbes Global 2000. Ich przychody wzrosły, jednak dynamika była wyraźnie niższa niż w krajach pozaeuropejskich. Również tutaj zanotowano wyższą dynamikę przychodów w krajach Europy Wschodniej niż na zachodzie kontynentu. Widoczne oznaki kryzysu zaobserwowano w przypadku dynamiki dochodów omawianych firm. W ponad 30% państw europejskich nastąpił spadek dochodów badanych przedsiębiorstw. Ponadto kryzys gospodarczy spowodował dekoncentrację lokalizacji siedzib zarządów, co przełożyło się na większą liczbę miast, w których znajdują się centrale największych firm.

As the world goes digital, many companies have found that their performance improves when they digitize their operations. This is especially true in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, as companies must rely more on digital tools to survive. Our paper aims to examine the connection between digital competitiveness and the financial performance of 86 digital businesses at the country level before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic over the period 2017--2021. Unlike previous findings that relied on qualitative methods, our research relies on quantitative methods. More precisely, we empirically examine the impact of digital competitiveness (i.e., an index) on financial performance (i.e., measured by return on assets) through linear regression models and panel data regressions for three specific periods (2017-2019 pre-pandemic, 2020 pandemic, and 2021 post-pandemic). We found that COVID-19 allows firms to adopt digitalization. More specifically, comparing the three periods, we discovered that digital competitiveness positively influences business financial performance in the post-Covid era. Looking ahead to the post-Covid world, it is clear that companies must prioritize digital competitiveness to ensure their long-term success. Governments can learn important lessons from this research on how to help companies digitize."

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of Good Corporate Governance (GCG), firm size, and dividend policy on firm value in 100 non-financial companies in Asia that are included in the Forbes version of The World's Biggest Public Company in 2017-2020. The independent variables used in this study are Good Corporate Governance (GCG) (number of the board of directors and audit committee), Firm Size (total assets), and dividend policy (Dividend Payout Ratio). The dependent variable used in this study is firm value (Tobins'Q). The source of data used in this study is secondary data sourced from annual reports and company financial statements for the 2017-2020 period. The sampling method used purposive sampling technique. The model used in this study is the Random Effect Model (REM). The results obtained are that the variables of the board of directors, audit committee, and firm size have no effect on firm value, while the dividend policy variable has a positive effect on firm value. This results are in line with agency theory which requires company managers to think of the best solution to increase shareholder wealth

The research and development (R&D) expenditure results in the innovation for any firm but affects the financial performance and riskiness of the firm at the same time. The relation among innovation, the riskiness of the firm and financial performance is discussed in this study. This study determined the impact of innovation on financial performance and also looked into the impact of innovation on riskiness of the firms. This study is conducted on the most innovative firms according to Forbes magazine over the period 1998–2012. Our findings show positive, significant and robust relationship between innovation and financial performance which is consistent with the existing literature. On the other hand, impact of innovation on riskiness is positive and significant which shows that more innovative firms are more riskier and ultimately profitability is increased for those firms.

This paper demonstrates that two measures of firm investment in specific human capital are significantly and positively correlated with long-term rates of return on investment. The final sample of 260 firms is a subset of the 805 firms included in the June 1984 edition of Forbes survey of executive compensation. We utilize two proxies for firm return-net income and cash flow. The return measures are scaled by both book value of total assets and market value of common stock yielding four alternative specifications of the rate of return measure. The firm investment in specific human capital measures are generally found to be significant explanatory variables in the regressions that have returns scaled by book value of assets. These measures of investment are insignificant when market value of common stock outstanding is used to scale the return measures. We interpret these findings to imply that a public or regulatory policy needs to be established to require firms to include at least some basic rudimentary information regarding their human capital investment, such as turnover rates and training cots, in their annual reports.

Disclosure plays an important role for information users. Voluntary disclosure is more meaningful for stakeholders in order to make appropriate decisions. The article researches the impact of firm characteristics on the voluntary disclosure of the top 50 listed firms in Forbes Vietnam (50 listed firms) from 2015 to 2019. It uses the ordinary least squares of time-series data to test the regression model. The signaling and agency theory is used to explain the relationship between firm characteristics on voluntary disclosure. The research results show three variables of firm characteristics that positively impact the voluntary disclosure of 50 listed firms, including firm size, growth rate of market share value to book value, and audit type, in which audit type has the strongest influence. Accordingly, the state agencies of Vietnam should encourage 50 listed firms to improve the Vietnamese listed firms’ voluntary disclosure and meet international economic integration. AcknowledgmentWe would like to thank Assoc. Prof. Ngoc Thach Nguyen (Phd), Assoc. Prof. Hoang Anh Ly (Phd) and Assoc. Prof. Thi Loan Nguyen (PhD), as well as some experts of the State Securities Commission of Vietnam and some leaders of 50 listed firms for their advice and support the project.

The historian Geraldine Forbes, writing on the origins of the woman suffrage movement in India, stated: ‘the firm insistence of organized women—that they be treated as equals of men on the franchise issue—emerged not from the perceptions of the needs of the women in India, but as the result of the influence of certain British women, in the case of the first demand for the franchise, 1917, and as a response to the nationalist movement, in the case of the second demand for franchise, 1927–33.’

The objective of this paper is to analyze the relationship between the ownership level of managers and the risk averse behavior of the firm. We measure the ownership level of the managers by the ratio of their ownership of the company relative to their total wealth for a sample of 69 individuals from the Forbes 400 list of the wealthiest individuals in the world for the period from 2001-11 using an unbalanced panel data analysis. The dependent variable is the Altman Z-score of each firm and we further test these relationships using financial leverage. The independent variables are delta and Vega of the option portfolio of the manager, R&D for the firm, total assets, the age of the manager, the tenure of the manager, stock holding of the manager, CEO/Chair duality of the manager and firma age. The Z-score is statistically significantly related to size, CEO age, CEO wealth, and duality. Financial leverage is not statistically significantly related to any of the independent variables.

W 2016 roku w referendum Brytyjczycy zadecydowali o opuszczeniu Unii Europejskiej. Celem opracowania jest określenie zmian sytuacji finansowej największych korporacji notowanych na liście Forbes Global 2000, których siedziba zarządu znajduje się na terytorium Wielkiej Brytanii w latach 2006–2018. Około ¾ z nich zlokalizowanych jest w Londynie, wobec czego przeprowadzono również bliższą analizę sytuacji finansowej firm znajdujących się w Londynie. W latach 2015–2018 nieznacznie spadła liczba siedzib zarządów zarówno w całej Wielkiej Brytanii, jak i Londynie. Również w tym czasie pogorszyły się wyniki finansowe firm, jednakże spadki były mniejsze w Londynie, niż w firmach zlokalizowanych w pozostałej części kraju. Zdecydowanie większy wpływ na liczbę firm i ich wyniki finansowe z siedzibami zarządów w Wielkiej Brytanii i w Londynie miało kryzys ekonomiczny i gospodarczy z lat 2007–2008. Mimo znaczącego spadku liczby siedzib zarządów w latach 2006–2018 są one znacznie bogatsze i potężniejsze niż przed spowolnieniem gospodarczym. Firmy operujące w skali globalnej są mniej uzależnione od rynków europejskich, natomiast bardziej wrażliwe na załamania gospodarcze w skali globalnej. Nieznaczne spadki wyników finansowych po referendum spowodowane były przez brak wiary wśród zarządzających korporacjami, że jednak dojdzie do Brexitu, co mogłoby utrudnić prowadzenie biznesu z pozostałymi krajami Unii Europejskiej.

M.Tech. Business Administration. Business School.
Optimal performance outcomes when working from home (small office home office) (SOHO) refers to the impact of job satisfaction and work-life-balance on it. Working from home doesn't have an effect on job satisfaction but does influence work-life-balance positively. Two hypotheses were investigated: (1) whether the job satisfaction of employees working from home at Alexander Forbes was affected and (2) whether the work-life-balance of employees working from home at Alexander Forbes was affected.

This article is a review of Internet privacy policies of the world’s largest companies. The report begins with a background on the right to privacy and privacy issues arising out of Internet usage. Attempts to regulate Internet privacy and self-regulatory effectiveness are also reviewed. The methodology for this study is to update and extend Internet privacy analysis by analyzing websites of the largest international companies (the Forbes International 100) for inclusion of fair information practices. In addition, a collection of consumer centered practices is defined and studied. The study was initially done in 2004 but the same companies were revisited and reviewed in 2006. Though there was some improvement in results over the approximately two year period, the general finding remains that within the Forbes International 100, fair information practices and consumer centered privacy policies are not being closely followed. It is also found that large US firms are more likely to publish a privacy policy on their website than non-US firms. Finally, if a large international firm does publish a privacy policy on its website, the level of compliance with fair information practices and consumer centered policies is not significantly different between US and non-US firms. Implications of the study for researchers and practitioners are reviewed.

One recent quote for the role of CEOs and other C-Suite executives on the innovation of a firm is: "Innovation executives are not expected to be the innovators, but the great ones can facilitate ideation processes effectively to generate great ideas" (Soloman, 2005). This paper explores the role of CEO/Top Executive participation in innovation in modern business. At the turn of the 20th century, there were many great inventors who also became successful businessmen. They founded and played key management roles in firms that created the backbone in the infrastructure and business growth of the country. Thomas Edison (GE), Alexander Graham Bell (AT&T) and the Wright Brothers (Aircraft) are just a few that come to mind. However, as the 20th century wore on, America's big business organizations became more bureaucratic with CEOs and executives leaving entrepreneurship and innovation primarily to their R&D divisions (e.g., Bell Labs and RCA Labs) and to outside organizations that could be acquired if necessary. However, recent trends indicate that this may be changing. This paper looks at today's state of innovation and examines the current role of innovation as it pertains to CEO and Top Executives. This subject of CEO/Executive innovation is approached with a view of: (1) examining if the spirit of innovation is alive at the CEO level; and (2) if it is, determining if today's CEOs/Executives are contributing to innovation in U.S. major firms. A literature review addresses some of the authors and academicians who have contributed current major ideas concerning innovation. Joel Barker is a futurist who has spent his career focusing on paradigm shifts and innovation. A famous MIT professor, Clayton Christensen, was another who developed and documented key ideas in innovation that are now mainstream e.g., the theory of disruptive innovation. Lastly, most graduate books on Business Strategy address innovation in a separate chapter and describe the latest ways that a firm can embrace innovation to be successful. Much insight into this topic was gained by examining a recent Forbes list of Executive Innovators (Forbes 2019). At the top of the Forbes list are found some common names of U.S. CEOs and Executives. Quite a few have recently displayed a healthy penchant toward reaping the benefits of innovation. Included in the list were: Sundar Pichai at Alphabet (Google); Jeff Bezos at Amazon; and Elon Musk at Tesla. Three major recent CEOs who epitomized the best in the successful harnessing of innovation over the past 30 years are also discussed in some detail: Steve Jobs (computers and other related fields), Edward Whitacre (Telecommunications) and E. Hunter Harrison (Railroads). While examining these leading CEO/Executives, deregulation in the United States economy was identified to be a potential important construct that may well have influenced positively the changing role of modern CEOs and top Executives in innovation. It is concluded that all innovation does not necessarily have to be driven by intrapreneurs within a firm or acquired from outside a firm. In fact, CEOs are more active today in driving innovation than at any time since the earliest 20th century. It appears that innovation at the CEO/Executive level has been revived and is far from being defunct!! Future CEO and Top Executive position hires should be examined with innovation in mind. At a minimum criterion for selecting a new CEO or Top Executive needs to include how well they have delivered innovation in their past executive assignments, as well as what ideas they have for generating innovation in their new job. Recommendations are also made as how to further research this topic to provide definitive factors that are driving innovation at the CEO and Executive levels today. Such research on innovation should not be limited to just technological innovations, but needs to be expanded to include innovations in such functional areas of business as marketing, operations, procurement, R&D etc. Lastly, future research could also be undertaken in innovation using techniques such as data analytics. A data-centric technique could be employed which would focus on using machine learning algorithms to identify themes that are driving the recent upsurge in CEO and Executive innovation.

Abstract In South Korea, Apple has said that as part of its next update, expected in March of 2018, it will give users the option to turn off the feature that slows down the older handsets. The firm has already reduced the price of any out-of-warranty iPhone 6 or later battery replacements, by more than half. Ian Morris, a Forbes Media contributor explains: Firstly, Apple will replace the batteries in older phones for a greatly reduced price. The company will drop this service from $79 to $29. This will apply to anyone who has an iPhone 6 or later and will be available for the next year—ending in December 2018. Secondly, the company says that it will provide more battery information from within iOS. This will give users a clear indication if it is the age of their battery that is causing them problems. For some users, it will simply be issues with apps. But the phone will make it clearer if a battery replacement would help or not. The third step is to look at how Apple manages the phones themselves. If the customer had an unexpected shutdown then he/she might find that a less than ideal way for your phone to work. So perhaps in future, we’ll see the iPhone sending notifications to warn that the battery in the device needs replacing. Or perhaps offering a choice of slowing down the max performance to get a bit more power—a bit like the existing power-saving mode. The explanation would’ve been acceptable before the issue arose or at the time of releasing updates that slowed devices. The explanation—forced by lawsuits, complaints, and information revealed by third parties—is inadequate. Temin says despite the bad software update process, very few users lost trust in Apple. However, when iPhone owners understood that the upgrades were planned to slow their devices, without even informing them, their trust just ‘vanished’.

Salisbury ironmakers throve by selling wrought iron rather then cast iron through the first half of the nineteenth century. Their finery forges and puddling works converted nearly all of the pig produced by the district’s furnaces to bar iron or forged products. However, by the 1860s, when the district’s ironmasters were smelting up to 11,800 tons of pig iron per year, they converted little of it to wrought iron. The demise of the forges left just one principal product, cast iron used mainly for railroad car wheels. Milo Barnum and Leonard Richardson had started making railroad castings in 1840. When Milo Barnum retired in 1852, his son W. H. Barnum took his place in the partnership with Richardson. The partners expanded the business by acquiring the Beckley and Forbes furnaces in 1858 and 1862, respectively, from the Adam family in East Canaan. Upon Leonard Richardson’s death, Barnum and the Richardson heirs reconstituted the business as the Barnum-Richardson Company, the firm that gradually gained control of all mines and blast furnaces in the northwest, except for the Kent furnace. A new railway facilitated the Barnum-Richardson operations. Dedicated residents of the northwest, in the face of much skepticism, raised the capital needed to build the Connecticut Western Railroad from Hartford to State Line, where it joined with the Dutchess & Columbia line running to Beacon, New York. Salisbury residents eagerly awaited its 1871 completion: they wanted to be rid of the heavy ore wagons that kept their roads a rness passing from Ore Hill to the furnaces in East Canaan. The Connecticut Western passed through Winsted, traversed difficult terrain in Norfolk, and crossed the Housatonic Railroad at Canaan, where the two companies built a handsome union station . Railroad enthusiasm also led residents in the northwest to propose impractical schemes. The Shepaug Railroad had been completed in 1872 from Danbury to Litchfield. A correspondent writing to the Connecticut Western News that year proposed extension into the Salisbury district.