Search results

There is a strong body of research that indicates that teacher quality has a stronger effect on student learning than any other school-based factor. At the same time, most teacher evaluation systems have traditionally failed to distinguish among different levels of teacher effectiveness or to link evaluation results to professional development in meaningful ways. In this chapter, we compare teacher responses in S. Korea and the United States to evaluation policies. We provide initial evidence that teachers and principals in Seoul defined “effective teachers” as those who helped manage their schools in areas such as affairs/planning, curriculum/instruction, science and technology, discipline, and extra-curricular activities. In contrast, the Michigan teachers and principals in the study were more likely to view effective teachers as those who planned instruction to meet student needs and provided evidence of student engagement and learning. In addition, educators’ notions of effective teachers seemed related to their responses to new teacher evaluation policies. In particular, the teachers in Seoul strongly resisted the new teacher evaluation policies while their counterparts in Michigan either supported the new evaluation policies or at least did not actively resist them. These differences seemed related to regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive elements associated with the teacher evaluation policies in the jurisdictions where the teachers and principals worked.

My approach comprises two main points. I begin by reiterating my proposed argument that corporate social responsibility develops within organisations, over time, in four general phases and that practitioner attitudes are moving away from the dominant phase of social responsibility (SR) as public relations activity (Hemingway, 2013). The financial crash of 2008 was the catalyst for this marked gear shift in the awareness of organisational ‘ethics’ and ‘morality’ (SR) that was previously confined to the concerns of the business ethics scholars. Second, I contend that the legitimacy and credibility of SR in business schools is lagging behind that shift due to misunderstandings about its relevance, the obsession with performance metrics and a lack of political will in some cases. In the final part of this article, I suggest ways forward for research, teaching and practice.

The study of humor has a long tradition in philosophy, sociology, psychology, anthropology, and communications. Evidence from these fields suggests that humor can have effects on creativity, cohesiveness, and performance, but organizational scholars have paid it relatively little attention. We hope to “jump-start” such a research program. To do this, we first outline the theoretical rationale underlying the production and appreciation of humor, namely, its motivational, cognitive, and emotional mechanisms. Next, we review the literature linking humor to creativity, cohesiveness, and other performance-relevant outcomes. In particular, we note how this literature is theoretically well-grounded, but that the empirical findings are largely correlational and/or based on qualitative research designs. Finally, we go beyond the current humor literature by developing specific predictions about how culture might interact with humor in organizational contexts. Throughout the paper, we discuss possible research directions and methodological issues relevant to the study of humor in organizations.

The COVID-19 pandemic and its related economic meltdown and social unrest severely challenged most countries, their societies, economies, organizations, and individual citizens. Focusing on both more and less successful country-specific initiatives to fight the pandemic and its multitude of related consequences, this chapter explores implications for leadership and effective action at the individual, organizational, and societal levels. As international management scholars and consultants, the authors document actions taken and their wide-ranging consequences in a diverse set of countries, including countries that have been more or less successful in fighting the pandemic, are geographically larger and smaller, are located in each region of the world, are economically advanced and economically developing, and that chose unique strategies versus strategies more similar to those of their neighbors. Cultural influences on leadership, strategy, and outcomes are described for 19 countries. Informed by a cross-cultural lens, the authors explore such urgent questions as: What is most important for leaders, scholars, and organizations to learn from critical, life-threatening, society-encompassing crises and grand challenges? How do leaders build and maintain trust? What types of communication are most effective at various stages of a crisis? How can we accelerate learning processes globally? How does cultural resilience emerge within rapidly changing environments of fear, shifting cultural norms, and profound challenges to core identity and meaning? This chapter invites readers and authors alike to learn from each other and to begin to discover novel and more successful approaches to tackling grand challenges. It is not definitive; we are all still learning.

We investigate the relationship between job complexity and skill development of adult workers in Europe using the Cedefop European Skills and Jobs Survey. ¹ The results suggest that challenging workplaces in which jobs are designed to include complex tasks that place high demands on workers’ skills also stimulate skill development. Increasing the degree of job complexity has positive and robust effects on the degree of skill development. Skill development is also positively linked to job tenure. The analysis stresses the importance of on-the-job learning and contextual workplace characteristics for adult workers’ skill development.