1. Introduction: General Overvıew Of Crıses Models And Fınancıal Crıses -- 2. Dutch Tulıp Manıa: Tulıp Crıses -- 3. Bengal Bubble (1669-1772) And East Indıa Syndrome (1669-…) -- 4. The Danısh State Bankruptcy Of 1813 -- 5. 1873 – 1896 Long Depressıon -- 6. Australian Banking Crisis of 1893.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
1. Introduction: General Overvıew Of Crıses Models And Fınancıal Crıses -- 2. Dutch Tulıp Manıa: Tulıp Crıses -- 3. Bengal Bubble (1669-1772) And East Indıa Syndrome (1669-…) -- 4. The Danısh State Bankruptcy Of 1813 -- 5. 1873 – 1896 Long Depressıon -- 6. Australian Banking Crisis of 1893.
PurposeThe purpose of this study is to reveal the mediating role of scenario planning between reflection and task performance in new product development (NPD) teams.Design/methodology/approachA cross-sectional research design was used to collect data from 78 NPD teams and 194 employees. The mediation analyses were conducted through the bootstrap PROCESS macro method.FindingsThe results of this study yielded support for two of three hypotheses. The authors found that the relationship of reflection with product development speed and new product success is mediated by scenario planning. There was no mediation of scenario planning between reflection and product development cost.Research limitations/implicationsThese findings show how teams can capitalize on reflective thinking practices to increase NPD task performance through scenario planning.Practical implicationsThis study provides useful guidelines for team leaders on how to accelerate product development processes and to increase the market success of a new product. Leaders should encourage their teams to review their previous performance metrics with ongoing changes in the business environments.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to examine the mediating role of scenario planning on the reflection–task performance relationship in NPD teams.
Bu çalışmada, Türkiye'nin en önemli ticari ortağı konumunda bulunan Almanya ile karşılıklı dış ticareti üzerinde reel döviz kuru ve döviz kur oynaklığının etkileri sektörel (SITC Rev. 3'e göre 1-digit üzerinden 10 sektör ile) bazda incelenmiştir. 2002-2015 dönemini kapsayan üç aylık veriler ile her bir sektörün ihracat ve ithalat akımları, gelir etkisini görmek için Türkiye ve Almanya'nın gayri safi yurtiçi hasılası, fiyat etkilerini görmek için reel döviz kuru (Avro/Türk Lirası) ve reel döviz kuru oynaklığının bir fonksiyonu olarak tanımlanmıştır. Döviz kuru oynaklığı üç aylık dönemlerde aylık reel döviz kuru değerlerinin standart sapması olarak alınmıştır. Değişkenler arasındaki uzun dönem ilişkiler Pesaran ve Shin (1999) ve Pesaran, Shin ve Smith (2001) çalışmalarında tanımlanan sınır sınaması ve otoregresif dağıtılmış gecikme modeli (ARDL) ile incelenmiştir. Analiz sonuçlarına göre, reel döviz kuru oynaklığı reel döviz kuru ile birlikte Almanya ile dış ticaretimizde payı yüksek olan sektörlerde belirleyici olarak bulunmuştur.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.