Service of SURF
© 2025 SURF
The EU and national governments rely on expert panels and opinions for their policies (EU, 2003; EU, 2006a; EU, 2006b) on SME ownership transfers. Also entrepreneurs depend on expert opinions and advice. We know from expert studies that expert judgment may lead to confusion and conflicting results. Can we rely on expert opinions in ownership transfers, especially if there are different specialists involved? 71 Dutch SME specialists on ownership transfers (accountants, bankers, business brokers, business consultants) and 10 entrepreneurs were interviewed with open questions. The answers were counted and the averages of different groups of specialists were tested by one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD. The results indicate that expert opinions are largely divergent on issues, but become convergent on solutions. Most given solutions by experts are more awareness/information and involving professional advice. Not the accountant, the international most widely used advisor by entrepreneurs in ownership transfers, but the business broker seems best fit to advice. Business brokers are active in more phases of the ownership transfer, are better connected to other specialists and have the most structured working method. We detect serious market failure to provide advice for entrepreneurs on business transfers. More than one specialist is needed, the best suited advisor - the business brokers - are unattainable for most micro firms. To overcome market failure transfer vouchers might connect entrepreneurs better to business brokers. Our results are confined by the sample, being small, select and national
Risk matrices have been widely used in the industry under the notion that risk is a product of likelihood by severity of the hazard or safety case under consideration. When reliable raw data are not available to feed mathematical models, experts are asked to state their estimations. This paper presents two studies conducted in a large European airline and partially regarded the weighting of 14 experienced pilots’ judgment though software, and the calculation of agreement amongst 10 accident investigators when asked to assess the worst outcome, most credible outcome and risk level for 12 real events. According to the results, only 4 out of the 14 pilots could be reliably used as experts, and low to moderate agreement amongst the accident investigators was observed.
There are substantial differences between models of the economic impacts of tourism. Not only do the nature and precision of results vary, but data demands, complexity and underlying assumptions also differ. Often, it is not clear whether the models chosen are appropriate for the specific situation to which they are applied. The goal of this article is to provide an overview and evaluation of criteria for the selection of economic impact models. A literature review produced 52 potential criteria, subdivided into 10 groups. Based on an analysis of experts' opinions, the perceived importance of each criterion was determined and a set of essential criteria created. To illustrate the usage of these essential criteria, five models (export base, Keynesian, ad hoc, input-output and computable general equilibrium) were evaluated and compared based on their performance on these criteria. This paper builds on the existing literature by showing that it is possible to make a more informed choice among economic impact models of tourism.
LINK