Jonathan Langton


Leave a comment

Web 2.0 FAIL – Wikipedia rejects educational Creative Commons content

FULL DISCLOSURE:  Jonathan Langton is currently employed full-time as Project Manager, Multimedia Content Development in the Learning Innovation department of IE Business School.

The Learning Innovation department of IE Business School maintains a rich catalogue of interactive, multimedia content, including cases, technical notes and simulations.  These materials, developed by IE professors, form an important of IE’s online and on-campus courses, however the majority of this content is also freely available on the internet under a Creative Commons licence.

In researching material related to the content they produce, Learning Innovation’s project managers often encounter Wikipedia articles among the first search results returned from the internet.  From time to time these Wikipedia articles refer to other academic articles or website that prove to be highly useful and more in depth than the summary treatment that Wikipedia usually, and quite rightly, provides.  Recently one such project manager realised that some of IE Business School’s multimedia teaching materials is highly relevant to certain specific Wikipedia entries and could provide a valuable resource to those accessing those articles. Continue reading


Leave a comment

Why I Have(n’t) Deleted my Facebook Account (via Hans de Zwart: Technology as a Solution…)

I am well known for my resistance to the Facebook revolution, which without credible competitors looks like a bad thing. This erudite debate summarises well some of my feelings…

Why I Have(n't) Deleted my Facebook Account Arjen Vrielink and I write a monthly series titled: Parallax. We both agree on a title for the post and on some other arbitrary restrictions to induce our creative process. Some people would consider Facebook a threat to the open Internet (e.g. Tim Berners-Lee), whereas other people see it as a key tool for promoting democracy in this world (e.g. Wael Ghonim). We decided to each argue both sides of the argument (300 words “for” and 300 words “aga … Read More

via Hans de Zwart: Technology as a Solution…


1 Comment

Patent vs Copyright – A Question of Reinforcing Behaviour

A  common dilemma for managers is the risk of creating a company culture that reinforces negative behaviours, or fails to reward behaviours that they would like to encourage.  The classic example is the company that pays great lip-service to the importance of teamwork, yet apportions employee bonuses on the basis of individual performance.  This type of comparative reward scheme, that pits team members against each other, actually creates a disincentive for employees to collaborate and reduces teamwork.  Copyright and patents are two of the systems in place to reward, or protect, the more creative members of society and in that sense  they are similar, however they are not applied in the same context and operate quite differently.  Those differences then raise an interesting question – to whom does society offer more protection and which forms of creativity are better rewarded or valued? Continue reading


Leave a comment

Is a Smoking Ban a Sign of Modern Spain?

On the 21st December 2010 the “Nueva Ley Anti-tabaco”, or New Anti-tobacco Law, Ley 42/2010, finally passed through both houses of parliament in Spain to become a law which would come into force just 12 days later on the 2nd January, 2011.  And not before time.  It may surprise many to discover that there is already anti-smoking legislation in place in Spain, Ley 28/2005, which the new legislation modifies.  The modification is necessary since the original law is so riddled with exemptions, exceptions and loopholes that the law has had little or no impact. Continue reading


2 Comments

The False Reinvestment Assumption and the Propagation of Incorrect Ideas – Part 3

In the first post on this subject it was seen that the origin of the Reinvestment Assumption is based in confusion and misinterpretation, and that it has been shown to be unnecessary by academics in the peer-reviewed literature.  The second post looked a little more closely at clarifying the confusion that spawned the fallacious concept and a common error employed in its justification.  However the question remains, of how this demonstrably flawed idea maintains its credibility, which clearly it does, among so many academics and professionals in the field.  Hence the most startling discovery of Keef and Roush“On average, over seven-tenths of all texts in [the] sample, independent of their academic discipline, offered the fallacy”, that is, the Reinvestment Assumption.  This finding shows that there is fairly high probability that anyone who has studied the concepts of NPV and IRR will have heard of the Reinvestment Assumption, thus it endures and it is interesting to consider just how this situation is propagated. Continue reading