Transparency in netchains : evaluation and perspective

Research output: Book/ReportReportAcademic

Abstract

This paper was written for KLICT to evaluate the focus area Transparency in Netchains. It revisits the definitions and research agenda in the review paper with which the focal area started (Hofstede 2002). The definition of transparency has turned out to serve its purpose. The research has progressed especially in the area of defining transparency and identifying information to share. Questions about aims and context of transparency have also been addressed but much remain to explore. Theory from several disciplines has been used: social sciences, economics, law, organisation sciences, engineering and information technology. In the second part of the paper we look ahead. In future, operational aspects of transparency will remain within management studies, whereas strategic transparency, less directly related to individual product or service offerings of involved enterprises, is likely to become subsumed in the study of governance of netchains. This will be an interdisciplinary field inspired by institutional economics and social anthropology. The role of the consumer as the main stakeholder of netchains needs strengthening. The role of the citizen and the government as stakeholders in transparency also need investigating.
LanguageEnglish
Place of PublicationDen Bosch
PublisherKLICT
Number of pages28
Publication statusPublished - 2003

Fingerprint

transparency
evaluation
stakeholder
economic law
cultural anthropology
institutional economics
engineering science
social science
information technology
governance
citizen
management

Cite this

@book{f5d2544f7b0c4259ba120953a426154e,
title = "Transparency in netchains : evaluation and perspective",
abstract = "This paper was written for KLICT to evaluate the focus area Transparency in Netchains. It revisits the definitions and research agenda in the review paper with which the focal area started (Hofstede 2002). The definition of transparency has turned out to serve its purpose. The research has progressed especially in the area of defining transparency and identifying information to share. Questions about aims and context of transparency have also been addressed but much remain to explore. Theory from several disciplines has been used: social sciences, economics, law, organisation sciences, engineering and information technology. In the second part of the paper we look ahead. In future, operational aspects of transparency will remain within management studies, whereas strategic transparency, less directly related to individual product or service offerings of involved enterprises, is likely to become subsumed in the study of governance of netchains. This will be an interdisciplinary field inspired by institutional economics and social anthropology. The role of the consumer as the main stakeholder of netchains needs strengthening. The role of the citizen and the government as stakeholders in transparency also need investigating.",
author = "G.J. Hofstede and H.E. Schepers and J.H. Trienekens",
year = "2003",
language = "English",
publisher = "KLICT",

}

Transparency in netchains : evaluation and perspective. / Hofstede, G.J.; Schepers, H.E.; Trienekens, J.H.

Den Bosch : KLICT, 2003. 28 p.

Research output: Book/ReportReportAcademic

TY - BOOK

T1 - Transparency in netchains : evaluation and perspective

AU - Hofstede, G.J.

AU - Schepers, H.E.

AU - Trienekens, J.H.

PY - 2003

Y1 - 2003

N2 - This paper was written for KLICT to evaluate the focus area Transparency in Netchains. It revisits the definitions and research agenda in the review paper with which the focal area started (Hofstede 2002). The definition of transparency has turned out to serve its purpose. The research has progressed especially in the area of defining transparency and identifying information to share. Questions about aims and context of transparency have also been addressed but much remain to explore. Theory from several disciplines has been used: social sciences, economics, law, organisation sciences, engineering and information technology. In the second part of the paper we look ahead. In future, operational aspects of transparency will remain within management studies, whereas strategic transparency, less directly related to individual product or service offerings of involved enterprises, is likely to become subsumed in the study of governance of netchains. This will be an interdisciplinary field inspired by institutional economics and social anthropology. The role of the consumer as the main stakeholder of netchains needs strengthening. The role of the citizen and the government as stakeholders in transparency also need investigating.

AB - This paper was written for KLICT to evaluate the focus area Transparency in Netchains. It revisits the definitions and research agenda in the review paper with which the focal area started (Hofstede 2002). The definition of transparency has turned out to serve its purpose. The research has progressed especially in the area of defining transparency and identifying information to share. Questions about aims and context of transparency have also been addressed but much remain to explore. Theory from several disciplines has been used: social sciences, economics, law, organisation sciences, engineering and information technology. In the second part of the paper we look ahead. In future, operational aspects of transparency will remain within management studies, whereas strategic transparency, less directly related to individual product or service offerings of involved enterprises, is likely to become subsumed in the study of governance of netchains. This will be an interdisciplinary field inspired by institutional economics and social anthropology. The role of the consumer as the main stakeholder of netchains needs strengthening. The role of the citizen and the government as stakeholders in transparency also need investigating.

M3 - Report

BT - Transparency in netchains : evaluation and perspective

PB - KLICT

CY - Den Bosch

ER -