Suchergebnisse

AbstractWater is a valuable resource in the world, and water resource management is an important aspect of corporate social responsibility. Does water resource management affect corporate financial performance? What is the influencing path? To find the potential relationship and influencing mechanism between water resource management and corporate financial performance, based on configuration thinking, we selected 259 A‐share listed manufacturing corporates from 2015 to 2021 as research samples, using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis method (fsQCA) to explore the configuration and influencing path of water resource management affecting financial performance. Then we analyzed it with the configuration that CSR score (excluding "environmental responsibility") affects financial performance. Our results show that: (1) poor water management and low CSR score will lead to bad corporate financial performance, but the former's severity of negative impact on corporate financial performance is more than that of the latter. Specific configurations indicate that companies with little water‐related concrete actions implemented and technology innovation will severely hurt the financial performance. (2) Good water resources management cannot directly achieve high financial performance while high CSR score can make it, indicating that water resource management is a necessary but not sufficient condition for high corporate financial performance. Our research has unmasked the "black box" influencing mechanism of water resource management on corporate financial performance to some extent, which makes the configuration relationship between water resource management and financial performance clearer, therefore owns certain theoretical significance and practical value in the field of CSR and environmental management.

Objective: The objective was to assess the role of cumulative spine loading measures in the development of a clinically meaningful decline in low-back function. Background: Cumulative spine loading has been a suspected risk factor for low-back pain for many years, yet the measures that characterize risk have not been well delineated. Methods: A total of 56 cumulative exposure measures were collected in a prospective field study of distribution center workers. An individual's risk for a clinically meaningful decline in low-back function (true cases) was explored with daily, weekly, and job tenure cumulative exposure measures using univariate and multivariate statistical modeling techniques. True noncases were individuals with no decline in low-back function. Results: An individual's risk for a clinically meaningful decline in low-back function (true cases) was predicted well versus true noncases (sensitivity/specificity = 72%/73%) using initial low-back function (p(n)), cumulative rest time, cumulative load exposure, job satisfaction, and worker age. Conclusions: Cumulative rest time was identified as an important component for predicting an individual's risk for a clinically meaningful decline in low-back function. Application: This information can be used to assess cumulative spine loading risk and may help establish guidelines to minimize the risk of a clinically meaningful decline in low-back function.

Objective: The objective is to quantify differences in physical exposures for those who stayed on a job (survivor) versus those who left the job (turnover). Background: It has been suggested that high physical job demands lead to greater turnover and that turnover rates may supplement low-back disorder incidence rates in passive surveillance systems. Method: A prospective study with 811 participants was conducted. The physical exposure of distribution center work was quantified using a moment monitor. A total of 68 quantitative physical exposure measures in three categories (load, position, and timing) were examined. Low-back health function was quantified using the lumbar motion monitor at baseline and 6-month follow-up. Results: There were 365 turnover employees within the 6-month follow-up period and 446 "survivors" who remained on the same job, of which 126 survivors had a clinically meaningful decline in low-back functional performance (cases) and 320 survivors did not have a meaningful decline in low-back functional performance (noncases). Of the job exposure measures, 6% were significantly different between turnover and cases compared to 69% between turnover and noncases. Turnover employees had significantly greater exposure compared to noncases. Conclusion: Turnover employees had similar physical job exposures to workers who remained on the job and had a clinically meaningful decline in low-back functional performance. Thus, ergonomists and HR should be aware that high turnover jobs appear to have similar physical exposure as those jobs that put workers at risk for a decline in low-back functional performance.