Credit unions are traditionally small, community-embedded and co-operatively-owned financial services organizations that developed to correct various market failures. Recent changes to regulatory policy in the financial services industry in Canada, coupled with advances in technology and urbanization of the population, have led to numerous mergers and consolidations among credit unions, particularly in Western Canada. This has the potential to undermine some of the historic benefits of CUs when compared to other financial services organizations, as it may require credit unions to begin to operate more like banks. My thesis provides a detailed examination of how senior leaders in one large Western Canadian credit union are handling these issues, and explores what the broader implications might be for policy and governance of credit unions in Canada. Using data collected through semi-structured interviews with top management and board members, this study provides insight into senior leaders’ perceptions of and responses to competing institutional logics in a credit union. Implications for policy, as well as decision-making surrounding co-operative governance, strategy, and structure will be discussed.

Module extraction is an important reasoning task, aiding in the design, reuse and maintenance of ontologies. Reasoning services such as subsumption testing and MinA extraction have been shown to bene t from module extraction methods. Though various syntactic traversal-based module extraction algorithms exist for extracting modules, many only consider the subsumee of a subsumption statement as a selection criterion for reducing the axioms in the module. In this dissertation we extend the bottom-up reachability-based module extraction heuristic for the inexpressive Description Logic EL, by introducing a top-down version of the heuristic which utilises the subsumer of a subsumption statement as a selection criterion to minimize the number of axioms in a module. Then a combined bidirectional heuristic is introduced which uses both operands of a subsumption statement in order to extract very small modules. We then investigate the relationship between MinA extraction and bidirectional reachabilitybased module extraction. We provide empirical evidence that bidirectional reachability-based module extraction for subsumption entailments in EL provides a signi cant reduction in the size of modules for almost no additional costs in the running time of the original algorithms. / Computer Science / M. Sc. (Computer Science)

The thesis investigates methods for uniform interpolation in expressive description logics. Description logics are formalisms commonly used to model ontologies. Ontologies store terminological information and are used in a wide range of applications, such as the semantic web, medicine, bio-informatics, software development, data bases and language processing. Uniform interpolation eliminates terms from an ontology such that logical entailments in the remaining language are preserved. The result, the uniform interpolant, is a restricted view of the ontology that can be used for a variety of tasks such as ontology analysis, ontology reuse, ontology evolution and information hiding. Uniform interpolation for description logics has only gained an interest in the research community in the last years, and theoretical results show that it is a hard problem requiring specialised reasoning approaches. We present a range of uniform interpolation methods that can deal with expressive description logics such as ALC and many of its extensions. For all these logics, these are the first methods that are able to compute uniform interpolants for all inputs. The methods are based a new family of saturation-based reasoning methods, which make it possible to eliminate symbols in a goal-oriented manner. The practicality of this approach is shown by an evaluation on realistic ontologies.

No description available.

No description available.

Yes / Despite growing concern in the social innovation (SI) literature about the tackling of grand challenges, our understanding of the role of multinational enterprises (MNEs) remains in its infancy. This article examines foreign MNE subsidiaries’ SI investments focusing on United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs) in host countries. Using financial data from large listed subsidiaries of foreign MNEs operating in India, along with hand-collected data from firms’ disclosures of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activity for five years starting in 2015, we utilise the externalities framework propounded by Montiel et al. (2021). This neatly translates the 17 UNSDGS into actionable goals to examine the efforts of foreign MNE subsidiaries in increasing positive externalities as opposed to reducing negative externalities via SI related investment in host countries. The study also evaluates the effects of the local embeddedness of the foreign MNE subsidiaries on SI investment. We find that MNE subsidiaries tend to favour increasing positive externalities as compared to reducing negative externalities through their SI investments. Also, older subsidiaries tend to prioritize greater investments in SI projects related to reducing negative externalities and subsidiaries with higher MNE ownership tend to reduce investments in SI projects related to increasing positive externalities. We discuss possible interpretations of the exploratory results using the institutional logics perspective and conclude with implications for policy and future research.

Evaluation is an institutionalized practice in the western public sector with several applications and uses. At the same time, the effectiveness and use of evaluation is seldom demonstrated. This evaluation paradox is due to the fact that evaluation is constrained and shaped in relation to, among others, a political context.  In this dissertation, the political context is examined from the assumption that governance shapes evaluation. The aim is to analyze the relationship between governance and evaluation, by studying the translation (i.e. inter­pretation) of the European Union evaluation approach ongoing evaluation in Sweden, in the context of Cohesion policy 2007-2013, which in Sweden aims at reinforcing competitiveness and employment. The relation­ship is examined through documents and interviews on a European union and a Swedish level, and in the translation process in between. With key concepts such as steering logics, participatory evaluation and translation through framing, the formation of evaluation in relation to governance has been mapped. This is particularly interesting in Sweden where the approach puts forth ideals of learning and interaction that seem to depart from ongoing evaluation.    Results show that governance cannot fully explain the shape of evaluation. Instead, Swedish agencies and other implementing actors have promoted their evaluation norms while at the same time fulfilling the Swedish ministries’ learning frame. It is an actor perspective comple­menting the relation­­ship between gover­nance and evaluation previously presented. The evaluation approach in Sweden has been translated to a practical participatory evaluation approach within a larger group of collabora­tive inquiry. In conclusion, evaluation on both levels has functioned as a relatively un­critical supportive resource for decision making within predetermined boundaries, more connected to the object of evaluation than to a larger gover­nance context. Evaluation in Sweden is being separated from questions of accounta­bility, and participation in evaluation is for goal fulfillment rather than for critical examination of basic assumptions underpinning projects and programs. Results made possible through the lens of trans­lation show that the Swedish approach was made possible by the vague borders of the field of evaluation, the rhetorical use of evaluation terminology in translation, skilled institutional entrepreneurs using legitimizing strategies, and the framing by the Commission and state ministries that opens up for national variation.

We introduce a family of logics extending the lightweight Description Logic EL, that allows us to define concepts in an approximate way. The main idea is to use a graded membership function m, which for each individual and concept yields a number in the interval [0,1] expressing the degree to which the individual belongs to the concept. Threshold concepts C~t for ~ in {<,<=,>,>=} then collect all the individuals that belong to C with degree ~t. We further study this framework in two particular directions. First, we define a specific graded membership function deg and investigate the complexity of reasoning in the resulting Description Logic tEL(deg) w.r.t. both the empty terminology and acyclic TBoxes. Second, we show how to turn concept similarity measures into membership degree functions. It turns out that under certain conditions such functions are well-defined, and therefore induce a wide range of threshold logics. Last, we present preliminary results on the computational complexity landscape of reasoning in such a big family of threshold logics.

Prisons are a specific type of organization with distinct challenges for their management. Most importantly, prisons - as well as understandings of how to 'successfully' manage them - are embedded in a pluralistic environment that consists of a variety of stakeholders with different ideas and expectations with regard to role and governance of prisons. This study addresses the question of which different understandings of 'good' prison management can be found in the Austrian discourse and how the expected complexity constituted by contradictory expectations is manifested in the shared narratives of prison managers. I draw on an institutional theory perspective in order to reconstruct the distinct constellation of institutional logics at the field level as well as at the individual level. Empirically, the study has four central elements: First, I identify the institutional logics at the field level as well as the relevant actors in the field. Second, I reconstruct the prevalent institutional logics as well as the metaphors in use at the individual level. Third, I compare field level and individual level. Finally, I am particularly interested in whether and how metaphors are used by prison managers to enact institutional logics and establish relationships between them. To answer the questions concerning the field level, I focused on articles in five Austrian newspapers from 1970 to 2015. Regarding the individual level, I conducted eight narrative interviews with (former) Austrian prisons managers. Methodologically, I combine a variety of different analytical approaches, namely content analysis, metaphor analysis, and objective hermeneutic analyses. The findings reveal two different 'types' of logics, namely governance and purpose logics. These logics differ in their content (what they claim jurisdiction over), their structure (their relationships within and across types), and in the metaphors used (purpose logics have a more restricted set of metaphors, while governance logics have a more differentiated set). Further, the empirical analyses show that metaphors play a variety of roles with regard to logics. They may either specify individual logics, set up competing logics against each other, stress complementarities between logics, or create relationships between otherwise unrelated logics. Summing up, this dissertation contributes, first, to literature on cross-level relationships of institutional logics by linking field-level results with individual-level results. Second, it extends literature on institutional pluralism and institutional complexity by arguing that constellations of logics do not only exist at different levels but there may also be different types of logics within a constellation. Third, I contribute to rhetorical approaches in institutional theory by showing how metaphors are a way of manifesting institutional pluralism. Fourth, for the practice of prison management, the study has implications for the planning and realization of change management efforts.

With the increasing demands of engaging in sustainability, the financial industry’s dominating market logic is currently being challenged. Banks are therefore experiencing demands to manage and legitimize sustainability, identified as containing both a market- and social logic, into a profit driven context. The aim of this study was thus to explore, at a micro level, how multiple logics of sustainability can be managed and legitimized in an organization where the dominant logic is being challenged. This was done by conducting a case study where the primary data was collected through semi-structured interviews with employees from Group Sustainable Finance (GSF) who are responsible for driving the sustainability agenda at Nordea. The results demonstrate that sustainability has been managed through a compromising strategy where elements of both the market- and social logic has been altered to appropriately suit the context characterized by profit maximization. During the process, an interesting finding evolved concerning how the micro perspective exposed the existence of conflicts within a single logic, defined as intra-logic conflicts. The results also contributed to identify stakeholder triggers as well as how normative-, instrumental-, and value rhetorical strategies are applied to legitimize Nordea’s sustainability practices.