English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore how financial risk is managed and commercial decisions are made within a successful UK livestock market. Design/methodology/approach – An autoethnographic approach is used, in which the researcher is both active participant and reflective observer. \udFindings – In contrast to “best practice” described in management texts, commercial risk management and financial decision making in this community are successfully guided by rumour. \udResearch limitations/implications – The paper is limited to the extent that one believes in the validity of autoethnography, however, it is argued that these findings are a reflection of the wider nature of the agricultural community, immersed as it is in life and death, and that this culture is significantly different to that commonly addressed by textbooks. Practical implications – This paper highlights a distinction between the tenets of the western world as addressed in textbooks and the agricultural community that exists alongside, and it suggests that following best practice might not lead to success if that best practice is ignorant of the culture in which it is rooted. \udOriginality/value – This paper provides empirical evidence that the tenets of the rural community are at odds with those of sanitised western management and that successful management of financial risk is culture specific. It questions why such differences exist and furthers debate about the influence of “our common neglect of death”

Sticks and stones: decision making by rumour