Purpose This study investigates the relationship between individual dimensions of digital maturity in the context of Industry 4.0 and financial and operational performance outcomes. Moving beyond aggregate maturity measures, the analysis adopts a dimensional perspective to capture the differentiated and potentially asymmetric performance effects of specific digital capabilities in industrial firms operating in a low-maturity regional context. Design/methodology/approach The empirical analysis is based on a cross-sectional sample of 140 industrial companies located in Portugal's Dão Lafões region. Digital maturity was measured using a structured questionnaire grounded in the IMPULS model, which covers six core dimensions. Financial and operational performance indicators were obtained from the SABI database. Robust multiple linear regression models were employed to assess the relationships between digital maturity dimensions, overall digital maturity level, firm size, and five performance indicators: Return on Assets, Internationalization, Indebtedness, Interest Rate and Productivity. Findings The results confirm a generally low level of digital maturity across the sample (mean = 1.13 on a 0–5 scale), alongside substantial heterogeneity among firms. Despite this low maturity context, several digital maturity dimensions exhibit statistically significant associations with performance. Positive effects are observed mainly for productivity and Return on Assets, while specific dimensions are associated with lower levels of indebtedness. However, these effects are neither uniform nor linear across performance indicators, revealing short-term trade-offs and asymmetric relationships. The impact on internationalization is heterogeneous and appears to be more pronounced among smaller firms. Practical implications For managers and policymakers operating in SME-dominated and less digitally mature regions, the results highlight the importance of prioritizing targeted digital capability development over broad, undifferentiated digital transformation strategies. Originality/value The findings demonstrate that digital maturity should not be interpreted as a homogeneous driver of firm performance. Instead, performance outcomes depend on the specific configuration of digital capabilities adopted by firms, as well as on organizational and contextual characteristics such as firm size.
Purpose This study examines how ESG performance reduces firm risk and how AI disclosure strengthens this effect, using 2020-2024 panel data from 1,310 European firms. Results show that ESG lowers leverage-based risk, especially when firms disclose AI initiatives. Design/methodology/approach The study analyzes panel data from 1,310 listed firms across 15 European countries over the period 2020-2024, yielding 6,550 firm-year observations. Firm risk is measured using financial leverage, ESG scores are obtained from Bloomberg and AI disclosure is measured through content analysis using both a binary disclosure indicator and an AI word-count measure. The analysis applies fixed effects regression as the baseline model, supported by generalized method of moments (GMM), random effects, Heckman two-step estimation and additional robustness checks. Findings The results reveal a significant negative relationship between ESG performance and firm risk, supporting the risk-reducing potential of sustainability engagement. Moreover, AI disclosure strengthens this relationship, indicating that firms disclosing AI-related initiatives in their reports experience greater risk mitigation benefits from ESG practices. Robustness tests confirm the consistency of the findings across alternative specifications. Originality/value This study contributes to the sustainability, risk management and digital governance literature by showing that AI disclosure acts as a complementary transparency mechanism that enhances the effectiveness of ESG performance in reducing firm risk. Rather than treating ESG and digital transformation as separate dimensions, the study highlights their interaction and provides evidence that AI-related disclosure can improve stakeholder confidence, reduce information asymmetry and support more effective risk management.
There is a range of methodologies and techniques aimed at improving the effectiveness and efficiency of operational activity. Examples are business process reengineering, total quality management and organisation development. Such methods differ from each other in how “improvement” should be achieved and implemented and even what to improve. In this paper a number of improvement methods, together with their aims and implementation processes, are discussed. It becomes apparent from a review of these methods, based on the literature available, that none of the methods presented is particularly adept at identifying what to improve – how to find potential improvement areas. The paper describes a performance factor model and a measurement model designed to fill this gap; they are guides as to what to analyse and how to measure in improvement work.
As global markets grow increasingly efficient, competition no longer takes place between individual businesses, but between entire supply chains. Collaboration can provide the competitive edge that enables all the business partners in a supply chain to prevail and grow. This paper presents a framework for customer‐supplier collaboration that facilitates effective and efficient supply chain operation. The paper reveals that the level of involvement of customers and suppliers differs across different supply chain processes and also across different sectors. While the involvement of customers is high in demand management and product development, the involvement of suppliers is high in transportation and inventory management processes. The paper also reveals that about 50 percent of the organizations surveyed indicate that suppliers and customers have little or virtually no role in the demand management, inventory management, and product development processes.
When you take on responsibility for other people you need a framework to understand and address how they think, feel and behave. Facilitation provides that framework. It doesn't offer you proscriptive solutions; instead it uses, proven principles and practice to enable you to get the best out of each of the people with whom you are working. As a facilitator, you also need to be able to adapt your style and approach to the situation you are in. This requires good self-awareness and a solid understanding of your role and responsibilities. Once this is in place you can then start to facilitate teams, coach colleagues and train groups effectively. In Anthony Landale and Mica Douglas's The Fast Facilitator, the authors have established a format based around both the core skills that facilitators need to develop as well as the issues they will have to face at work. It is divided into three parts - Essential Facilitation, Groups and Team Facilitation and Creative Facilitation - offering material to suit all facilitators whatever their level of expertise. The manual will help you develop your own understanding of facilitation as well as providing interventions and activities that you can use with others. It includes: ¢ Theoretical insights and models to help you understand the dynamics of people management; ¢ Activities, exercises, games and practice sessions which managers or trainers can use with their groups to build skills around work issues; ¢ Coaching ideas and techniques for managers who may want extra guidance when working one-to-one with team members; and ¢ A wealth of techniques, reading sources, inspirational ideas and practical exercises for the facilitator's own self-development. The Fast Facilitator illustrates the competencies that practising facilitators need to develop and shows just how this distinctive approach can make a real difference to the way people operate and the outcomes that can be achieved in organizations.
