Productivity,performance and project management in the scientific instrument industry

Scientific instruments have short product lifecycles and a lengthening of the time between design and application has serious financial implications. This paper reports on research aimed at obtaining a greater understanding of the factors which influence this interface. Interviews were conducted at 32 companies in two countries, the United Kingdom (UK) and the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). The study showed that there are statistically significant differences between the two countries and that in the FRG there are also differences between projects led by people with different qualifications and background experience. These differences are analysed and discussed and factors identified which influence productivity and performance in the scientific instrument industry.     

Medical school guidelines for investigating misconduct and fraud in science

Institutional review boards (IRBs) are legally required to determine whether the balance between the risks and benefits (the risk-benefit ratio or RBR) of a proposed study is “reasonable” or “proportional”. This obligation flows from their duty to protect the interests of research subjects. It has been argued that it is difficult, perhaps even impossible for IRBs to determine the RBR of studies, because the risks and benefits are not only heterogeneous, but also incommensurable. After arguing that the relevant meaning of incommensurability is incomparability, we discuss whether the risks of participating in a trial and the benefits are comparable. We conclude that at least the risks and the benefits to participants are comparable. In the last section we show that the main problem of RBR analyses is that of interpersonal incompensability. IRBs have to assume that risks to research subjects be compensated by benefits to others. The question is: To what extent? When does it become unreasonable to ask that patients accept the risks of participating in a trial for the benefit of science and/or future patients?     

Are risks and benefits of oncological research protocols both incommensurable and incompensable?

Institutional review boards (IRBs) are legally required to determine whether the balance between the risks and benefits (the risk-benefit ratio or RBR) of a proposed study is "reasonable" or "proportional". This obligation flows from their duty to protect the interests of research subjects. It has been argued that it is difficult, perhaps even impossible for IRBs to determine the RBR of studies, because the risks and benefits are not only heterogeneous, but also incommensurable. After arguing that the relevant meaning of incommensurability is incomparability, we discuss whether the risks of participating in a trial and the benefits are comparable. We conclude that at least the risks and the benefits to participants are comparable. In the last section we show that the main problem of RBR analyses is that of interpersonal incompensability. IRBs have to assume that risks to research subjects be compensated by benefits to others. The question is: To what extent? When does it become unreasonable to ask that patients accept the risks of participating in a trial for the benefit of science and/or future patients?     

Marriage, divorce, and legal change: new evidence from England and Wales

In this article, we explain the evolution of divorce rates in England and Wales over the post-war period. Following the approach of the predominantly North American literature in this area, we focus on the liberalization of divorce law and socioeconomic factors as determinants of the divorce rate. In line with the development of the literature, we find that the introduction of liberalized, no-fault divorce law had a significant effect on the divorce rate in England and Wales. The finding that the law affects the divorce rate is consistent with the view that marriage is characterized by indivisibilities that inhibit Coasian bargaining.     

The effects of macroeconomic developments on individual companies' flows of funds

A system of models is described which traces the impact on individual companies' finances of changing the macroeconomic environment. This system comprises models of individual firms integrated with Cambridge's large-scale disaggregated model of the UK economy. Illustrative projections are provided for the period 1980–1988 for three companies under alternative exchange rate and interest rate assumptions; a balance sheet, income appropriation account and funds flow statement is generated for each company-year and each assumption. These case studies illustrate how sensitive companies' finances can be to changes in the macroeconomic environment and also how dissimilar can be the response of different companies' flows of funds to the same macroeconomic change.