Kellogg's (Canada)

Purpose This paper introduces the PIVOTAL Framework and the PIVOTAL Infinity Marketing Canvas®, a next-generation strategic model designed to link organizational purpose with innovation, stakeholder value, and long-term relationship building. The aim is to provide leaders with a practical, integrative approach for navigating strategic complexity in a rapidly changing environment. It is particularly relevant in transformation and innovation contexts, multi-stakeholder environments and ecosystem settings where legitimacy, adoption and long-horizon value matter. Design/methodology/approach The paper is conceptual in nature. It synthesizes established perspectives from strategic management, purpose-driven leadership, stakeholder theory, dynamic capabilities, service-dominant logic and relationship marketing to highlight theoretical gaps in existing models. Based on this analysis, it develops a unified framework and visual canvas that support strategic alignment and managerial decision-making. Findings The PIVOTAL Framework reconceptualizes strategy as a continuous, purpose-driven cycle connecting seven elements: Purpose, Innovation, Value, Outreach, Transfer, Advocacy and Lifetime Value. The PIVOTAL Infinity Marketing Canvas® operationalizes this logic by integrating organizational perspectives (purpose, innovation and value creation) with stakeholder perspectives (problems, pains, gains, values, advocacy and Lifetime Value). Illustrative examples demonstrate how organizations can apply the framework to enhance strategic coherence, stakeholder engagement and sustainable value creation. The framework helps leadership teams diagnose common disconnects (e.g., strong purpose but weak transfer; high outreach but unclear value; innovation without advocacy) and align initiatives accordingly. Research limitations/implications As a conceptual and practitioner-oriented paper, the PIVOTAL framework has not yet been empirically validated across contexts. This limitation offers clear avenues for research: future studies can test whether the Canvas improves strategic alignment, innovation focus, adoption (“transfer”), advocacy and long-term value outcomes using multi-case designs, executive surveys or longitudinal data. Comparative research could assess incremental usefulness versus established canvases and strategy tools, and identify boundary conditions (e.g., industry turbulence, regulation, ecosystem dependence, cultural context). Further work can refine measurement approaches for transfer, advocacy and lifetime value in purpose-led transformation initiatives. Practical implications As a conceptual and practitioner-oriented article, the PIVOTAL framework has not yet been empirically tested across settings. Future research could examine how well the Canvas improves strategic alignment, innovation focus, adoption (“transfer”), advocacy and long-term value outcomes, using multi-case studies, executive surveys or longitudinal designs. Studies could also explore boundary conditions (e.g., industry turbulence, regulation, ecosystem dependence, cultural contexts) and compare PIVOTAL with established canvases to assess incremental usefulness. In addition, research could refine measurement approaches for transfer, advocacy and lifetime value in purpose-led transformation initiatives. Social implications The framework encourages organizations to move beyond short-term optimization by embedding purpose, stakeholder value and long-term relationships into strategic decision-making. By strengthening “transfer” from intent to adoption and fostering advocacy, PIVOTAL supports more responsible implementation, trust-building and transparency—especially in contexts where societal legitimacy matters. This can contribute to better stakeholder outcomes such as fairer value creation, more sustainable innovation choices and stronger customer and employee relationships. When applied thoughtfully, the approach can help organizations align growth objectives with broader social value and long-term resilience. Originality/value The paper contributes a holistic strategic model that bridges theory and practice by positioning purpose as the central organizing principle of strategy. It extends existing frameworks by integrating innovation, stakeholder value, relational dynamics and long-term advocacy into a unified strategic logic. The Canvas offers leaders a practical, action-oriented tool for orchestrating strategy, collaboration and organizational alignment across functions. Unlike specialist tools that focus mainly on business model design or value propositions in isolation, PIVOTAL provides an end-to-end leadership architecture linking purpose to execution (“transfer”), advocacy and long-term value outcomes. It is designed to complement rather than replace established canvases by making the missing links between strategic intent and adoption explicit.

To understand processes that govern the abundance and distribution of species, ecologists typically collect either long time series without surveying potential drivers or perform short-term experiments that may not scale up. We characterized the annual population dynamics of Arctia virginalis for 40 years and conducted experiments to examine the relative roles of abiotic conditions, host plants, predation, parasitoids, and viral infection. Rather than finding a single limiting factor, these factors were all important at some times or places. Annual densities varied by a thousand times and showed evidence of a regime shift around 2002, coincident with changing precipitation patterns. Wet sites and wet years supported higher densities, and precipitation interacted with most of the factors considered. Population control was context dependent, but water availability was generally the relevant context. Precipitation seems to be important for other Lepidoptera in western North America. Studies that include experimental tests of population drivers are required to manage insect populations.

Many researchers want to control for both individual-level demographic/health variables and area-level socioeconomic status (area-SES) when studying health outcomes. However, comparative assessments of area-SES indices across geographic levels and a range of health outcomes are scarce. Compare predictive power for 3 commonly used area-SES indices: the Graham Social Deprivation Index (SDI), the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), and the CDC Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), for a variety of health outcomes, at different geographic levels (county, 5-digit zip-code, census tract, and census block group). Also compare these indices to the simpler Townsend Deprivation Index (TDI) and population percent in poverty (area-Poverty). Principal research methods are logistic and ordinary least squares regression. Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, COVID-19 decedents, and drug overdose decedents. SDI, SVI, ADI, TDI, area-Poverty. All-cause mortality, diabetes incidence and prevalence, hypertension, renal disease, and 30-day hospital readmission for Medicare beneficiaries; COVID-19 mortality; overdose mortality; Medicare fee-for-service spending. All measures predict the health outcomes, controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and comorbidities, at zip code, tract, and block-group levels. Predictive power is comparable for SDI, SVI, and a standardized version of ADI, and generally superior to TDI, area-Poverty, and non-standardized ADI. Predictive power is highest at tract level, similar at block-group; reasonably strong at zip code, but weaker at county level. Across a range of health outcomes, we find similar predictive power for SDI, SVI, and standardized ADI, ideally measured at census tract level. SDI has the value of being more parsimonious, with similar performance. Non-standardized ADI cannot be recommended.

In recent years, a vibrant literature has emerged that studies the first states in history, both as substantive topic of interest and as an important input into understanding modern government. This survey article presents, structures, and discusses recent advances in the theoretical and empirical study in the economics of the origins of government and the state. The core hypotheses in this literature view the nature of government as extractive or cooperative. I discuss how this fundamental dichotomy in the view of the state has influenced its study and review empirical contributions. The fundamental dichotomy is not resolved, leaving room for further research.

The present research identifies a psychological phenomenon that helps to explain how people who prefer the same option to the same degree (e.g., two people equally prefer Politician A over Politician B) can differ in their negativity toward the same undesired outcome (e.g., one person reacts more negatively toward Politician A's defeat). Across multiple domains and a variety of methodologies (e.g., archival, longitudinal, experimental; N = 12,830), we provide evidence for a prevalent phenomenon we label the opposer's loss effect. When people frame a preference in terms of opposition to the nonpreferred option ("I'm anti politician B") versus support for the preferred option ("I'm pro Politician A"), it does not change the extremity of their overall preference; however, opposers (vs. supporters) nonetheless report greater negativity to relevant, unwelcome news. As we show, this framing shifts secondary characteristics of the preference, namely, it decreases their feelings of ambivalence in their preference, which amplifies opposers' negativity when that preference is thwarted. Altogether, these findings advance the literature on framing effects, expand the known antecedents to felt ambivalence, and provide practical advice for forecasting negative, mass sentiment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).