Open Access

The case of the financial scientist Karl Helfferich is one of the most spectacular «revolving door» incidents between academia, business and politics in the late Empire and early Weimar Republic. The historical judgement of Helfferich, however, is shaped by his polemical agitation against the so-called fulfilment policy after the First World War, as well as against Matthias Erzberger and Walther Rathenau in particular. This essay aims at a more differentiated view of Helfferich and draws on texts left by Helfferich himself, some of which are autobiographical, in order to make his position in and between the various «systems» clear. His career in the Wilhelmine era is described and his contribution to the difficult negotiations on the construction of the Baghdad Railway and to overcoming inflation is discussed. The end of the Empire also brought an end to this career of power-based expertise. While Helfferich’s bitterness about the end of the empire was vented in polemics, his sobriety and expertise continued to come to the fore in debates on financial, budgetary and monetary policy. Helfferich’s career is only superficially a case of a «revolving door» in that expertism and his supposedly superior expertise always determined his self-image and his uncompromising manner of appearance and argumentation differed significantly from the habitus of other politicians of the early Weimar Republic.

In this paper, we investigate the protective effect of smart street lighting on public safety. Smart lights have a variety of features, such as video surveillance or gun-shot detection. Some of these features can have a deterrent effect on crime. Other features, however, such as adaptive brightness control, may also encourage crime. Using a comprehensive dataset on the crimes committed in downtown San Diego (CA) during 1st May 2017 and 30th April 2018, we investigate the crime rates a priori and posterior to the installation of smart lights in this area. The results of the empirical analysis suggest that smart lights have a statistically significant negative impact on crime and that their installation increases the safety of citizens.

This article explores the impact of different advertising disclosure strategies (i.e., explicit sponsorship disclosure, concealing disclosure, impartiality disclosure, and no disclosure) in influencer marketing on influencer-related outcomes (user engagement, user sentiment, and influencer credibility) and marketer-related outcomes (user attitude towards the brand and users’ intention to purchase). We conducted two field experiments and an online survey with an experimental design in collaboration with an active micro-influencer on Instagram. The results of the studies indicate that from a marketers’ perspective, it is best when influencers promote products as genuine recommendations and use impartiality disclosure. From an influencer’s perspective, the optimal disclosure strategy depends on whether the influencer seeks to improve engagement with their content or their levels of credibility. When influencers’ primary focus is to increase engagement, if they provide information on sponsorship or non-sponsorship, they do not have to worry about decreasing engagement rates due to the employed disclosure strategy. Suppose influencers’ goal is to increase their credibility. In that case, it depends on their content (whether it is rich in genuine recommendations or sponsored content) and the group they want to target—i.e., if they seek to target followers versus non-followers.

While digitalization offers numerous new possibilities for value creation, managers have to overcome a number of threats and obstacles that it harbors. In this context, the concept of Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR) is of increasing interest to practitioners. Drawing on the well-established paradigm of Corporate Social Responsibility, CDR comprises a set of principles designed to encourage the ethical and conscientious development, adoption, and utilization of digital technologies. This work aims at contributing to the evolving research base by empirically assessing consumer preferences and a consumer segmentation approach with regard to companies’ concrete CDR activities, thus supporting the operationalization of CDR. Hence, this work provides concrete guidance for firms’ CDR activities in practice. To this end, a series of Best–Worst Scaling and dual response studies with a representative sample of 663 German-speaking participants assesses consumers’ perspectives on firms’ concrete (possible) activities within several CDR dimensions. Both DURE studies reveal the potential halo effect of data privacy and security activities on the perception of the CDR engagement at large, suggesting a more holistic approach to digital responsibilities. Besides, the findings reveal that in case of CDR one size does not fit all. Especially in terms of informational approaches, consumer preferences are rather heterogeneous suggesting that consumer segmentation is beneficial for companies. Additionally, the high importance of price for the consumers’ evaluation shows that it can be useful to offer a slimmed-down version in terms of CDR activities for more price-conscious consumers.

SAFE's monthly Manager Sentiment Index is constructed by extracting sentiment from corporate financial disclosures of listed companies in Germany, offering significant insights into top management’s perspectives. This white paper outlines the methodology behind the index and its financial implications. Information about managers’ assessment of firms’ performance and financial conditions is material to investors but, at the same time, hard to observe. The SAFE Manager Sentiment Index quantifies managers’ beliefs using textual analysis of financial reports and earnings conference call transcripts. We show that the index is a strong predictor of future stock market returns. In summary, the SAFE Manager Sentiment Index provides a practical tool for key stakeholders such as investors, analysts, and policymakers seeking timely signals of corporate sentiment.