Search results

Purpose: This chapter provides an overview of the results so far within the Stay Home, Stay Safe research project in the Netherlands. The project started in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic and is aimed at examining short- and long-term consequences of restrictions taken to control the spread of the COVID-19 virus on domestic violence (DV). Restrictions may have resulted in social isolation and familial stress, which in turn may have led to an increase in DV. The main research question is whether, and if so which types of, DV increased during periods of COVID-19 restrictions.

Methodology/approach: This project used national data on DV before (2019) and during the different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2022), from different sources (i.e., official registered reports, advices as well as file data of DV agencies). Trends in the prevalence, nature, and the role of reporters of DV before the pandemic are compared to trends during the pandemic.

Findings: Trends of DV registrations show no differences in the prevalence before and during different phases of the pandemic. The number of advice requests at the reporting agencies seem to have increased. However, this finding cannot be unambiguously subscribed to pandemic-specific circumstances, because this upward trend already consistently started in 2019. A shift was observed from professional reporters toward relatively more non-professional reporters, mostly neighbors.

Originality/Value: In contrast to previously published research, the current project uses data from multiple sources and examines information not only on trends in prevalence of DV records, but also on the type of reporter, and the nature of the violence.

In the workplace, forgiveness can increase positive interactions between the victim and offender in the aftermath of a conflict. As an important intrapersonal factor in an organization, a victim’s power motives may shape one’s forgiveness. However, previous research shows inconsistent results because it only considers explicit power motives while ignoring the possible contingent role of implicit power motives in influencing forgiveness. This paper aims to consider both implicit and explicit power motives and aims to examine their joint effect on interpersonal forgiveness in the workplace conflict.

Polynomial regressions with response surface analysis were conducted with 415 Amazon Mechanical Turk users. Implicit power motives were measured by using a modified picture story exercise technique, whereas explicit power motives were measured via self-response scales.

First, congruence in power motives was associated with higher empathy and forgiveness than incongruence. In addition, high-implicit/high explicit power motives led to higher level of empathy and forgiveness than low-implicit/low-explicit power motives. Furthermore, directional power motive incongruence had an additive effect on forgiveness, such that discrepantly low-implicit/high-explicit power motives were more detrimental to empathy and forgiveness than discrepantly high-implicit/low-explicit power motives. Finally, empathy underlies the combined effect of implicit and explicit power motives on forgiveness.

The findings suggest that in a workplace conflict, managers should consider an employee’s explicit and implicit motives. To build the harmony group work climate, managers can improve intrapersonal implicit–explicit power motive congruence by providing developmental support and training focusing on self-enhancement and self-affirmation with the low-explicit-powerful employees. Further, to promote forgiveness in a conflict, organizations can use empathy-based exercise and provide team building activities to increase employees’ empathy and perspective-taking toward others.

By integrating implicit–explicit framework, this paper conciliates previous studies investigating the relationship between power and forgiveness by proposing that the two types of power motives, implicit and explicit power motives, jointly influences a victim’s forgiving tendency. This study serves as a meaningful touchstone for future research to consider both implicit and explicit power motives into the organizational conflict framework.

The aim of the chapter is to develop some approaches to turn education, predetermining the quality of human capital, into the most important factor of national inclusive development. This problem is titled by the World Bank Report (2018) as “Learning: to realize education’s promise.” There has been revealed a fundamental contradiction between the two processes: the training technology is improved, the treasury of knowledge is enriched, the scientific progress accelerates, on one side, but on the other side, according to the international Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) study (2015), about 28% of the Russian 15-year-olds, for example, did not master the minimum necessary skills in at least one area of the three (natural science, mathematics, and communication in their native language). Meanwhile the correlation between educational and economic “failures” is high. Reduction in school failure in half (up to 15%) corresponds to the growth of the country’s GDP by 2% at the perspective of 10 years, by 5–6% – in 20 years, and by over 10% – in 30 years. The authors identify and substantiate the most important factor of the low basic knowledge of schoolchildren: it deals with the phenomenon of stable psychological and cognitive barriers in their minds. As a result of this theory, a model of educational consciousness has been developed, which makes it possible to overcome educational failure and to form algorithms for successful learning.

At the dining room table in a modest house in Sonyea, New York, Bohdan Wynar and David Parish worked to edit the latter's manuscript on state government publications. The now‐well‐known publishing firm, Libraries Unlimited, began in that unpretentious setting, but the result of their effort was a landmark in state government bibliography. For the first time, in the 1970s librarians had a guide to valuable reference material at the state level which has long been known as a complicated, yet rewarding, area in which to work.

Pragmatism in the sense of harmonizing rules and reality for the sake of appropriate problem solving and overall performance is a ubiquitous phenomenon in organizational life. As such it has been generalized as an everyday requirement of making organizations work and a virtue of human decision making under the condition of complexity, strategic dilemmas or “wicked problems.” This chapter addresses both the theoretical and the normative dimensions of pragmatism in organizations, public administration in particular. The main statement is that the necessary theoretical clarification concerns the distinction between pragmatism and what is referred to as a logic of appropriateness while the normative limits of pragmatism refer to the necessity of ranking logics of appropriateness and related values plus the ability to act on the basis of accurate judgment which is primarily, even if not exclusively, a matter of leadership.