Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund

UID:

Format: 40 pages : , illustrations ; , 21 × 29.7 cm.

Content: AUTHOR-SUPPLIED ABSTRACT: Abstract: This thesis examines the analysis of the impact that pet-friendly policies in an organization have on the well-being of its employees. Nowadays, organizations are aware of the importance of creating a positive well-being environment as part of their organizational culture and the burnout and distress that entails the workload. Previous studies have shown the positivity in people's lives created when their level of well-being is high. Furthermore, research has proved that pets could increase well-being despite some constraints. Therefore, some organizations opted to implement pet-friendly policies. For data collection, a survey was chosen as a quantitative method approach, where 65 answers were collected by the thesis' author. The findings clearly stated positive and negative thoughts about having pets in the workplace. In addition, the respondents also provide some reasons. Finally, all the information was analyzed and tested to prove if a positive correlation exists when employees who feel comfortable with pets present positive well-being. Keywords: pet-friendly policies, well-being, organizational culture, burnout, distress, workload, positive well-being, pets, workplace, survey, quantitative method, positive correlation.

Note: DISSERTATION NOTE: Bachelor of Arts thesis in Business Administration - Human Resource Management & Leadership, Berlin International University of Applied Sciences, 2022. , MACHINE-GENERATED CONTENTS NOTE: Table of Contents TABLE OF FIGURES ........................................................................................ iii TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................... iii Abstract ............................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1. Introduction ........................................................................................ 1 1.1. Context...................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. Literature review.................................................................................2 2.1. Introduction...................................................................................................2 2.2. Definition of well-being ............................................................................ 3 2.3. Factors driving well-being ......................................................................... 4 2.4. The growing importance of well-being ...................................................... 6 2.5. Well-being at work....................................................................................7 2.5.1. Definition ..............................................................................................7 2.5.2. Factors impacting well-being at work.....................................................8 2.6. Animals and well-being ............................................................................. 9 2.7. Conclusion .............................................................................................. 11 Chapter 3. Methods............................................................................................12 3.1. Introduction............................................................................................. 12 3.2. Survey distribution .................................................................................. 12 3.3. Survey design .......................................................................................... 13 3.4. The sample .............................................................................................. 14 3.5. Data analysis ........................................................................................... 14 Chapter 4. Results..............................................................................................16 4.1. Introduction.................................................................................................16 4.2. Context .......................................................................................................16 4.2.1. Demographics of the sample.....................................................................16 4.2.2. Well-being results ....................................................................................17 4.2.3. Pet-friendly results ................................................................................... 20 4.2.3.1. Comfort with pets in the workplace ....................................................... 20 4.2.3.2. Discomfort with pets in the workplace...................................................20 4.2.3.3. Pet-friendly workplaces and well-being ................................................. 21 4.2.4. Testing the research question 1: animals and well-being ........................... 22 4.2.4.1. The no group ......................................................................................... 22 4.2.4.2. The yes group........................................................................................22 Chapter 5. Discussion ........................................................................................23 Chapter 6. Conclusions ...................................................................................... 24 References .....................................................................................................25 Appendix 1. ........................................................................................................IV Appendix 2. .........................................................................................................V Thesis Declaration Page......................................................................................XI

Language: Undetermined

Keywords: Academic theses

URL: FULL

UID:

Format: 34 pages : , illustrations ; , 21.59 × 27.94 cm.

Content: AUTHOR-SUPPLIED ABSTRACT: Abstract: This paper is an explanation of the new technologies and cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum. It gives an in-depth explanation of what blockchain is, covering its characteristics, main challenges, and criticisms. It delves into the Non-Fungible token space, explaining the main characteristics and challenges in the retail fashion industry and also analyzing a study case from Nike, Inc. where they acquired the studio/team called RTFKT (pronounced “artifact”). It finishes the study with an analysis of the NFT industry utilizing Porter's Five Forces to understand the competitiveness of the industry and a VRIO analysis to understand if RTFKT can create a competitive advantage for Nike. Keywords: new technologies, cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin, Ethereum, blockchain, characteristics, challenges, criticisms, Non-Fungible token, retail fashion industry, study case, Nike, Inc., RTFKT, Porter's Five Forces, VRIO analysis, competitive advantage

Note: DISSERTATION NOTE: Bachelor of Arts thesis in Data Science & Business, Berlin International University of Applied Sciences, 2022. , MACHINE-GENERATED CONTENTS NOTE: Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1.1. The motivation for the study 1.2 Research question 2. Methodology (Research approach) 3. Literature review 3.2 Blockchain and its essential characteristics 3.3 Blockchain and its main challenges 3.4 Proof-of-Work and Proof-of-Stake: a brief explanation 3.5 What is bitcoin, and how does it work? 3.6 What is Ethereum, and how does it work? 3.7 Non-Fungible Tokens and main characteristics 3.8 How the retail and retail luxury industry can use Non-Fungible tokens 3.9 Blockchain and Non-fungible tokens criticism and challenges 4. Nike acquiring RTFKT (Case Study) 5. Porter’s five forces 5.1 Porter’s Five Forces applied to the NFT industry 6. VRIO Model 7. Limitations of the study 8. Discussion 9. Results 10. Conclusion References Appendices: - Declaration Page

Language: Undetermined

Keywords: Academic theses

URL: FULL

UID:

Format: 59 pages : , illustrations ; , 21 × 29.7 cm.

Content: AI-GENERATED ABSTRACT: Abstract: This thesis examines the relationships between Glassdoor ratings, employee recommendations, and measures of environmental responsibility and sustainability practices within companies. The study utilizes data from various companies to analyze these connections and provide valuable insights into the complex nature of company performance evaluation. The findings reveal a strong positive correlation between Glassdoor ratings and employee recommendations, indicating that higher Glassdoor ratings are associated with a greater likelihood of employees recommending their employer to others. This highlights the significance of fostering a positive work environment that promotes employee satisfaction and advocacy. However, the analysis also reveals that Glassdoor ratings do not significantly correlate with measures of environmental responsibility as assessed by the CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project) or sustainability practices evaluated by Sustainalytics. This suggests that employee perceptions and satisfaction may not directly reflect or strongly influence a company's environmental efforts. Other factors such as compensation, work-life balance, and opportunities for professional growth might impact employee evaluations. The research underscores the multidimensional nature of evaluating company performance and sustainability practices. While employee satisfaction is essential, decision-makers and stakeholders must consider a comprehensive approach incorporating multiple metrics and perspectives beyond employee feedback alone. This is crucial for accurately evaluating a company's alignment with environmental and social aims. The small sample size, potential biases in the data sources, the correlational character of the analysis, and the omission of other factors affecting employee satisfaction are some of the study's drawbacks. Future research should overcome these constraints to increase our understanding of the intricate connections between employee satisfaction, business success, and sustainable practices. Keywords: Glassdoor, employee retention, employee engagement, environmental responsibility, company performance evaluation, CDP, Sustainalytics

Note: DISSERTATION NOTE: Bachelor of Arts thesis in International Management & Marketing, Berlin International University of Applied Sciences, 2023. , MACHINE-GENERATED CONTENTS NOTE: Table of Contents 1. Introduction............................................................................1 2. Literature Review....................................................................3 2.1 Environmental Sustainability................................................3 2.2 Environmental, Social, Governance Report (esg).......................4 2.3 Employee Turnover Rate.......................................................6 2.4 Sustainability and Employee Turnover Rate.................................7 3. Research Methods...................................................................9 3.1 Employee Retention and Engagement Rate Data.........................9 3.1.1 Turnover Rates from Reports..........................................9 3.1.2 Limitations of Current Turnover Rate Metrics and the Need for Glassdoor 2-indicators Collection.....................................10 3.1.3 Glassdoor 2-indicators Collection..................................12 3.2 Climate Change Score and Esg Ratings.................................13 3.2.1 Cdp Climate Change Score...........................................13 3.2.2 Sustainalytics Rating.................................................14 4. Data Analysis.......................................................................15 4.1 the Data Collected..........................................................15 4.1.1 Mercedes Benz Group Ag..........................................16 4.1.2 Basf Se...............................................................16 4.1.3 Deutsche Telekom Ag.............................................16 4.1.4 Allianz Se.............................................................16 4.1.5 Siemens Ag.........................................................16 4.1.6 Sap Se...............................................................17 4.1.7 Volkswagen Ag......................................................17 4.1.8 Bayer Ag.............................................................17 4.1.9 Deutsche Börse Ag.................................................17 4.1.10 Infineon Technologies Ag........................................17 4.1.11 Deutsche Post Ag................................................18 4.1.12 Vonovia Se........................................................18 4.1.13 Münchener Rück Ag............................................18 4.1.14 Kering S.a..........................................................18 4.1.15 Airbus Se..........................................................18 4.1.16 Eni S.p.a..........................................................19 4.1.17 Lvmh S.a..........................................................19 4.1.18 Asml Holding N.v...............................................19 4.1.19 Banco Santander S.a............................................19 4.1.20 Axa S.a............................................................19 4.1.21 Enel S.p.a..........................................................20 4.1.22 Philips Electronics N.v..........................................20 4.1.23 Ab Inbev Sa-nv................................................20 4.1.24 Sanofi-aventis S.a...............................................20 4.1.25 L'oréal S.a..........................................................20 4.1.26 Stellantis Nv................................................21 4.1.27 Iberdrola S.a.................................................21 4.1.28 Air Liquide S.a...................................................21 4.1.29 Schneider Electric S.a...........................................21 4.1.30 Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria.................................21 4.1.31 Bnp Paribas S.a..................................................22 4.1.32 Adyen.............................................................22 4.1.33 Danone...........................................................22 4.1.34 Essilorluxottica..................................................22 4.1.35 Vinci S.a........................................................22 4.1.36 Pernod-ricard S.a...............................................23 4.1.37 Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.a...........................................23 4.1.38 Adidas Ag........................................................23 4.1.39 Hermes International S.a.......................................23 4.1.40 Kone Corp.......................................................23 4.1.41 Ahold Delhaize.............................................24 4.1.42 Safran.........................................................24 4.1.43 Crh Plc..........................................................24 4.2 Statistical Analyses........................................................25 4.2.1 Cdp Scores.........................................................25 4.2.2 Sustainalytics......................................................25 5. Discussion.........................................................................26 6. Limitations.........................................................................28 7. Conclusion.........................................................................30 references............................................................................31

Language: Undetermined

Keywords: Academic theses

URL: FULL

UID:

Format: 59 pages : , illustrations ; , 21 × 29.7 cm.

Content: AI-GENERATED ABSTRACT: Abstract: This thesis examines the relationships between Glassdoor ratings, employee recommendations, and measures of environmental responsibility and sustainability practices within companies. The study utilizes data from various companies to analyze these connections and provide valuable insights into the complex nature of company performance evaluation. The findings reveal a strong positive correlation between Glassdoor ratings and employee recommendations, indicating that higher Glassdoor ratings are associated with a greater likelihood of employees recommending their employer to others. This highlights the significance of fostering a positive work environment that promotes employee satisfaction and advocacy. However, the analysis also reveals that Glassdoor ratings do not significantly correlate with measures of environmental responsibility as assessed by the CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project) or sustainability practices evaluated by Sustainalytics. This suggests that employee perceptions and satisfaction may not directly reflect or strongly influence a company's environmental efforts. Other factors such as compensation, work-life balance, and opportunities for professional growth might impact employee evaluations. The research underscores the multidimensional nature of evaluating company performance and sustainability practices. While employee satisfaction is essential, decision-makers and stakeholders must consider a comprehensive approach incorporating multiple metrics and perspectives beyond employee feedback alone. This is crucial for accurately evaluating a company's alignment with environmental and social aims. The small sample size, potential biases in the data sources, the correlational character of the analysis, and the omission of other factors affecting employee satisfaction are some of the study's drawbacks. Future research should overcome these constraints to increase our understanding of the intricate connections between employee satisfaction, business success, and sustainable practices. Keywords: Glassdoor, employee retention, employee engagement, environmental responsibility, company performance evaluation, CDP, Sustainalytics

Note: DISSERTATION NOTE: Bachelor of Arts thesis in International Management and Marketing, Berlin International University of Applied Sciences, 2023. , MACHINE-GENERATED CONTENTS NOTE: Table of Contents 1. Introduction............................................................................1 2. Literature Review....................................................................3 2.1 Environmental Sustainability................................................3 2.2 Environmental, Social, Governance Report (esg).......................4 2.3 Employee Turnover Rate.......................................................6 2.4 Sustainability and Employee Turnover Rate.................................7 3. Research Methods...................................................................9 3.1 Employee Retention and Engagement Rate Data.........................9 3.1.1 Turnover Rates from Reports..........................................9 3.1.2 Limitations of Current Turnover Rate Metrics and the Need for Glassdoor 2-indicators Collection.....................................10 3.1.3 Glassdoor 2-indicators Collection..................................12 3.2 Climate Change Score and Esg Ratings.................................13 3.2.1 Cdp Climate Change Score...........................................13 3.2.2 Sustainalytics Rating.................................................14 4. Data Analysis.......................................................................15 4.1 the Data Collected..........................................................15 4.1.1 Mercedes Benz Group Ag..........................................16 4.1.2 Basf Se...............................................................16 4.1.3 Deutsche Telekom Ag.............................................16 4.1.4 Allianz Se.............................................................16 4.1.5 Siemens Ag.........................................................16 4.1.6 Sap Se...............................................................17 4.1.7 Volkswagen Ag......................................................17 4.1.8 Bayer Ag.............................................................17 4.1.9 Deutsche Börse Ag.................................................17 4.1.10 Infineon Technologies Ag........................................17 4.1.11 Deutsche Post Ag................................................18 4.1.12 Vonovia Se........................................................18 4.1.13 Münchener Rück Ag............................................18 4.1.14 Kering S.a..........................................................18 4.1.15 Airbus Se..........................................................18 4.1.16 Eni S.p.a..........................................................19 4.1.17 Lvmh S.a..........................................................19 4.1.18 Asml Holding N.v...............................................19 4.1.19 Banco Santander S.a............................................19 4.1.20 Axa S.a............................................................19 4.1.21 Enel S.p.a..........................................................20 4.1.22 Philips Electronics N.v..........................................20 4.1.23 Ab Inbev Sa-nv................................................20 4.1.24 Sanofi-aventis S.a...............................................20 4.1.25 L'oréal S.a..........................................................20 4.1.26 Stellantis Nv................................................21 4.1.27 Iberdrola S.a.................................................21 4.1.28 Air Liquide S.a...................................................21 4.1.29 Schneider Electric S.a...........................................21 4.1.30 Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria.................................21 4.1.31 Bnp Paribas S.a..................................................22 4.1.32 Adyen.............................................................22 4.1.33 Danone...........................................................22 4.1.34 Essilorluxottica..................................................22 4.1.35 Vinci S.a........................................................22 4.1.36 Pernod-ricard S.a...............................................23 4.1.37 Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.a...........................................23 4.1.38 Adidas Ag........................................................23 4.1.39 Hermes International S.a.......................................23 4.1.40 Kone Corporation......................................................23 4.1.41 Ahold Delhaize.............................................24 4.1.42 Safran.........................................................24 4.1.43 Crh Plc..........................................................24 4.2 Statistical Analyses........................................................25 4.2.1 Cdp Scores.........................................................25 4.2.2 Sustainalytics......................................................25 5. Discussion.........................................................................26 6. Limitations.........................................................................28 7. Conclusion.........................................................................30 references............................................................................31

Language: Undetermined

Keywords: Academic theses

URL: FULL

UID:

Format: 40 pages : , illustrations ; , 21 × 29.7 cm.

Content: AUTHOR-SUPPLIED ABSTRACT: Abstract: This thesis examines the analysis of the impact that pet-friendly policies in an organization have on the well-being of its employees. Nowadays, organizations are aware of the importance of creating a positive well-being environment as part of their organizational culture and the burnout and distress that entails the workload. Previous studies have shown the positivity in people's lives created when their level of well-being is high. Furthermore, research has proved that pets could increase well-being despite some constraints. Therefore, some organizations opted to implement pet-friendly policies. For data collection, a survey was chosen as a quantitative method approach, where 65 answers were collected by the thesis' author. The findings clearly stated positive and negative thoughts about having pets in the workplace. In addition, the respondents also provide some reasons. Finally, all the information was analyzed and tested to prove if a positive correlation exists when employees who feel comfortable with pets present positive well-being. Keywords: pet-friendly policies, well-being, organizational culture, burnout, distress, workload, positive well-being, pets, workplace, survey, quantitative method, positive correlation.

Note: DISSERTATION NOTE: Bachelor of Arts thesis in Business Administration - Human Resource Management and Leadership, Berlin International University of Applied Sciences, 2022. , MACHINE-GENERATED CONTENTS NOTE: Table of Contents TABLE OF FIGURES ........................................................................................ iii TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................... iii Abstract ............................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1. Introduction ........................................................................................ 1 1.1. Context...................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. Literature review.................................................................................2 2.1. Introduction...................................................................................................2 2.2. Definition of well-being ............................................................................ 3 2.3. Factors driving well-being ......................................................................... 4 2.4. The growing importance of well-being ...................................................... 6 2.5. Well-being at work....................................................................................7 2.5.1. Definition ..............................................................................................7 2.5.2. Factors impacting well-being at work.....................................................8 2.6. Animals and well-being ............................................................................. 9 2.7. Conclusion .............................................................................................. 11 Chapter 3. Methods............................................................................................12 3.1. Introduction............................................................................................. 12 3.2. Survey distribution .................................................................................. 12 3.3. Survey design .......................................................................................... 13 3.4. The sample .............................................................................................. 14 3.5. Data analysis ........................................................................................... 14 Chapter 4. Results..............................................................................................16 4.1. Introduction.................................................................................................16 4.2. Context .......................................................................................................16 4.2.1. Demographics of the sample.....................................................................16 4.2.2. Well-being results ....................................................................................17 4.2.3. Pet-friendly results ................................................................................... 20 4.2.3.1. Comfort with pets in the workplace ....................................................... 20 4.2.3.2. Discomfort with pets in the workplace...................................................20 4.2.3.3. Pet-friendly workplaces and well-being ................................................. 21 4.2.4. Testing the research question 1: animals and well-being ........................... 22 4.2.4.1. The no group ......................................................................................... 22 4.2.4.2. The yes group........................................................................................22 Chapter 5. Discussion ........................................................................................23 Chapter 6. Conclusions ...................................................................................... 24 References .....................................................................................................25 Appendix 1. ........................................................................................................IV Appendix 2. .........................................................................................................V Thesis Declaration Page......................................................................................XI

Language: Undetermined

Keywords: Academic theses

URL: FULL

UID:

Format: 34 pages : , illustrations ; , 21.59 × 27.94 cm.

Content: AUTHOR-SUPPLIED ABSTRACT: Abstract: This paper is an explanation of the new technologies and cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum. It gives an in-depth explanation of what blockchain is, covering its characteristics, main challenges, and criticisms. It delves into the Non-Fungible token space, explaining the main characteristics and challenges in the retail fashion industry and also analyzing a study case from Nike, Incorporated where they acquired the studio/team called RTFKT (pronounced "artifact"). It finishes the study with an analysis of the NFT industry utilizing Porter's Five Forces to understand the competitiveness of the industry and a VRIO analysis to understand if RTFKT can create a competitive advantage for Nike. Keywords: new technologies, cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin, Ethereum, blockchain, characteristics, challenges, criticisms, Non-Fungible token, retail fashion industry, study case, Nike, Incorporated, RTFKT, Porter's Five Forces, VRIO analysis, competitive advantage

Note: DISSERTATION NOTE: Bachelor of Arts thesis in Data Science and Business, Berlin International University of Applied Sciences, 2022. , MACHINE-GENERATED CONTENTS NOTE: Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1.1. The motivation for the study 1.2 Research question 2. Methodology (Research approach) 3. Literature review 3.2 Blockchain and its essential characteristics 3.3 Blockchain and its main challenges 3.4 Proof-of-Work and Proof-of-Stake: a brief explanation 3.5 What is bitcoin, and how does it work? 3.6 What is Ethereum, and how does it work? 3.7 Non-Fungible Tokens and main characteristics 3.8 How the retail and retail luxury industry can use Non-Fungible tokens 3.9 Blockchain and Non-fungible tokens criticism and challenges 4. Nike acquiring RTFKT (Case Study) 5. Porter's five forces 5.1 Porter's Five Forces applied to the NFT industry 6. VRIO Model 7. Limitations of the study 8. Discussion 9. Results 10. Conclusion References Appendices: - Declaration Page

Language: Undetermined

Keywords: Academic theses

URL: FULL

UID:

Format: iv, 35 pages ; , 30 cm.

Content: MACHINE-GENERATED SUMMARY NOTE: "This paper intends to explore the mechanisms in the human psyche, which are responsible for shaping decisions regarding purchasing behavior. The study focuses on the marketing communication tools responsible for directing consumers towards choosing a specific product or service, as well as analyzing how these strategies operate. A special outlook on the fashion industry’s marketing strategies will presented to further solidify the research on the marketing tools explored throughout the paper. The analysis concerning the fashion industry strategies will be presented through the lens of fast-fashion and premium fashion products and how each sector’s strategies and their characteristics shape consumer choices in a social media setting."

Note: DISSERTATION NOTE: bachelor thesis in Business Administration, Berlin International University of Applied Sciences, 2019. , MACHINE-GENERATED CONTENTS NOTE: Abstract -- INTRODUCTION : Need and justification for the study -- Research objectives -- Research question -- LITERATURE REVIEW : Consumer behavior theories : Psychoanalytic theory ; Pavlovian theory ; Evolutionary psychology perspective -- The factors influencing consumer behavior : Socio-cultural factors ; Personal & psychological factors -- CONSUMER BEHAVIOR AND MARKETING : Forms of influencing consumer behavior : Authority figure/influencer ; Emotional loyalty ; Brands as displays of personality ; Brand reputation ; Differentiation & individuality -- The difference between marketing online and offline related to behavior influence -- Consumer motivation to purchase brands -- OVERVIEW OF MARKETING COMMUNICATION TOOLS : The implications of the Industry 4.0 -- The advantages of social media for understanding and tracking consumer preferences -- The development of social media and marketing tools -- The consumer decision process -- Social media’s implications in the fashion industry -- Digital marketing success factors within the context of the fashion industry -- Consumer behavior towards buying premium products -- METHODOLOGY/RESEARCH APPROACH : Limitations and restrictions -- Conclusion & discussion -- References.

Language: English

Keywords: Academic theses ; Academic theses

URL: FULL

URL: FULL