This paper develops a framework for understanding the relationships between approaches to learning adopted by students in the context of higher education and the culture of the country they were brought up in. The paper, after examining the more widely used Kolb's learning styles, opts for another categorisation, namely the so called learning approaches developed by Entwistle and others (for example, Entwistle and Ramsden, 1983; Biggs, 1987; Entwistle, 1992; Tait, Entwistle and McCune, 1998; Biggs, Kember and Leung, 2001). Each of the main categories of learning approaches identified by his school, namely, deep, surface apathetic, and strategic are related to Hofstede's cultural dimensions, namely, power distance, individualism vs. collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, long vs. short time orientation and masculinity vs. femininity and a series of hypotheses developed that could be tested in cross cultural samples. This study would give practical hints on students moving out to study in different cultures (e.g. for higher education) and for teachers dealing with students from multiple cultures. (PDF) Does culture influence learning styles in higher education?. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254836756_Does_culture_influence_learning_styles_in_higher_education [accessed Jul 09 2018].

We investigate how professional recruiters perceive and assess potential board director candidates. Based on a human capital perspective, individual characteristics will represent certain human capital resources, perceived as more or less useful for the firm. We focus on what characteristics are critical for a candidate to be perceived as appointable to a board. We are particularly interested in the role visible vs. more hidden aspects of human capital in these assessments. The aim of the study is to uncover central actors’ ideas and assumptions of what constitutes the ideal board director. This will add knowledge as to how board compositions are created and changed. We conducted eight semi-structured, in-depth interviews with professional recruiters in Germany and Norway. The results show that formal competence is partly downplayed as selection criteria for board positions, while experience has a central role. Further, our results show that experiences have both a concrete and a symbolic side, where certain individual characteristics appear to represent an image of a successful director of a board. Further, our data show that symbolic capital, labeled “habitus”, is a crucial prerequisite for an individual to be appraised as an ideal candidate. The results indicate preferences for stability and predictability in recruitment processes, which may contribute to explain the persistently low proportion of women on corporate boards.