Search results

Organizational justice research has become the main paradigm of research in the field of HRM. The purpose of this paper is to outline a number of underlying challenges to which this paradigm is ill-suited. It broadens the traditional understanding of what is meant by fairness within the HRM literature to help explain how justice judgements are formed and may be used to influence societal-level fairness processes. It develops a framework to aid the understanding of the fairness of decisions that individuals or organizations make.

The paper presents a conceptual review of the main paradigms used in fairness research. It draws upon the organizational justice literature as the dominant paradigm in HRM research, and conducts a cross-disciplinary review that introduces a range of theories less frequently used by HRM researchers – specifically capability theory, game theory, tournament theory, equity sensitivity theory, theories of intergenerational equity, and burden sharing. It demonstrates the relevance of these theories to a number of areas of organizational effectiveness.

The paper shows that researchers are now augmenting the organizational justice research paradigm under two important pressures – awareness of hidden structures that preclude the option for real fairness; and new variables that are being added to the consideration of organizational justice.

HR functions have invested significant resources in employee engagement or insight units, but if their policies trigger significant inequality of outcomes, perceived problems of justice, a lack of burden sharing, no sense proportionality, organizations may not be able to achieve other important HR strategies such as sustaining and deepening employee engagement, developing organizational advocacy, building an employer brand, or being seen to have authenticity in its values. The framework suggests a broadened educational base for HR practitioners around fairness. It also suggests that there may be complex employees segments concerning perceptions of fairness.

The cross-disciplinary perspective taken on fairness helps deconstruct the judgements that employees likely make, enabling organizations and individuals alike to ask more critical questions about their respective behaviour.

The purpose of this paper is to expand upon the Intergenerational Foundation (IF) presentation given at the “Portraying of Ageing” conference, which was organised by the British Library and held in London in April 2014.

Changing demographics, wealth distribution, government debt and voting patterns are examined in order to question whether current government policy should continue to protect older generations at the expense of younger and future generations.

IF provides statistically robust evidence that, in spite of increasing wealth, older generations continue to be protected by government policy while younger generations are targeted for cuts from liabilities built up, but not paid for, by previous generations.

Government policy may have tipped too far in favour of older wealthier cohorts, many of whom receive automatic benefits based on reaching a certain age. Governments should consider replacing age as a proxy for need with means-testing in order to rebalance benefits more fairly across the generations.

There have been limited research studies comparing the incidence of wealth amongst older generations and the scale of liabilities being passed on to younger and future generations. This paper will be of value to policy-makers interested in rebalancing the interests of all generations more equitably.

The aim of this paper is to examine public spending cuts and welfare reforms to assess winners and losers amongst older people, children, young people and families. It proposes ways in which intergenerational fairness could be achieved through taxing wealthier older people.

The paper reviews and analyses spending and policy plans from 2010 onwards, and draws conclusions.

The paper concludes that children, young people and families are the relative losers of government spending cuts and reforms; older people have been relatively protected; the focus should be on taxing wealthier older people; intergenerational fairness needs to be addressed.

Research tends to focus on one age group, so there have not been many studies which contrast the impact of public policy on different age groups. The concept of intergenerational fairness is only beginning to be discussed.

Global systemic risks of climate change, overindebtedness in the aftermath of the 2008/2009 World Financial Crisis and the need for pension reform in the wake of an aging western world population, currently raise attention for intergenerational fairness. Pressing social dilemmas beyond the control of singular nation states call for corporate social activities to back governmental regulation in crisis mitigation. The purpose of this paper is to promote the idea of intergenerational equity in the corporate world.

Theoretical description.

In the given literature on global responsible leadership in the corporate sector and contemporary corporate social responsibility (CSR) models, intergenerational equity appears to have been neglected. While the notion of sustainability has been integrated in CSR models, intergenerational equity has hardly been touched on as for being a more legal case for codifying the triple bottom line.

Advocating for integrating intergenerational equity concerns in CSR models in academia and practice holds untapped advantages of economically influential corporate entities, corporate adaptability and independence from voting cycles.

Integrating a temporal dimension in contemporary CSR helps imbuing a longer-term perspective into the corporate world alongside advancing tax ethics and global governance crises prevention.

Future research avenues comprise of investigating situational factors influencing intergenerational leadership in the international arena in order to advance the idea of corporations tackling the most pressing contemporary challenges of mankind.

The article examines the interplay between welfare state regimes and the distribution of welfare between generations.

Using data from 2017 for 24 European countries on six standard of living dimensions, the authors investigate the intergenerational welfare distribution in a two-stage procedure: (1) the authors compare the intergenerational welfare distribution across welfare state regimes using their existing typologies and find a moderate nexus. Therefore, (2) the authors employ clustering procedure to look for a new classification that would better reflect the cross-country variation in the intergenerational welfare division.

The authors find a complex relationship between the welfare state model and welfare distribution across generations and identify the policy patterns that shape it. Continental and liberal regimes are quite similar in these terms and favour the elderly generation. Social-democratic and CEE regimes seem to be a bit more balanced. COVID-19 pandemic will probably increase the intergenerational imbalance in terms of welfare distribution in favour of the elderly.

In contrast to the majority of previous studies, which employ inputs (social expenditures) or outputs (benefits, incomes), the authors use intergenerational balance indicators reflecting living conditions of a given generation as compared to the reference point defined as an average situation of all generations.

This paper aims to highlight lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic for planning for the future of our ageing society. It looks at trends, changes in our society and implications for people of all ages. It focusses on the importance of planning and whether COVID-19 will lead to long-term changes.

This paper draws on the author’s experiences running an intergenerational organisation during the pandemic and other work associated with ageing well.

This paper highlights some of the risks and unknowns we face going forwards and points to lessons and opportunities for “building back better”.

This paper is based on a review of published articles and viewpoints.

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged people of all ages in different ways, some of which have tested intergenerational solidarity. At the same time, the pandemic has raised issues which we must all address going forward: planning for future pandemics, planning for an ageing society and ensuring that future planning works for all generations. This paper explores all these themes in the light of lessons from COVID-19. Firstly, despite much risk assessment and scenario planning, we were not well placed in the UK or across the world to respond to the multiple challenges of COVID-19. Have we learned the lessons to be able to deal better with the inevitable pandemics that will follow in the future? It is also well documented that the pandemic has exacerbated existing inequalities in our society. What will the long-term impact be for longevity and will less healthy lives reverse the trend of increasing life expectancy? Secondly, what are the lessons for our ageing society? As life expectancy rises, what will the quality of life be like in those added years? Many of today’s babies can expect to have a 100-year life. What does that mean for the way we lead our lives and can we ensure that everyone can age well? Third, these are not just issues for older people, but for people of all ages and generations. The Covid-19 experience has been different for younger and older people – whether it has been health or job security, income, taxation or housing. Questions of intergenerational fairness have again raised their heads, alongside the longer term impact for future generations.

Firstly, despite much risk assessment and scenario planning, we were not well placed in the UK or across the world to respond to the multiple challenges of COVID-19. Have we learned the lessons to be able to deal better with the inevitable pandemics that will follow in the future? It is also well documented that the pandemic has exacerbated existing inequalities in our society. What will the long-term impact be for longevity and will less healthy lives reverse the trend of increasing life expectancy? Secondly, what are the lessons for our ageing society? As life expectancy rises, what will the quality of life be like in those added years? Many of today’s babies can expect to have a 100-year life. What does that mean for the way we lead our lives and can we ensure that everyone can age well? Thirdly, these are not just issues for older people, but for people of all ages and generations. Measures that bring older and younger people together and encourage meaningful mixing will help increase understanding and awareness between generations. This has huge implications for our society and communities.

This paper reaches two main conclusions. Firstly, the well-known saying: “failing to plan is planning to fail”. This applies to all the issues discussed in this paper re future pandemics, our ageing society and future generations. Secondly, the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic should be the catalyst for changing the way we live and lead to new beginnings. We cannot just carry on as before.

Population aging in many countries has become a fundamental concern of public policy. One reason is fears that increasing numbers of elderly will place disproportionate burdens on their children in order to fund public pensions and health-related services. This analysis first discusses basic principles for assessing this question of intergenerational fairness. It then applies an empirically-based overlapping cohort dynamic microsimulation model for a quantitative analysis of the flows of taxes and cash and in-kind transfers for successive birth cohorts. The simulations cover both exogenous factors – specifically trends in life expectancy and the strength of the economy, and policy-related factors – specifically raising the age of entitlement to public pensions from age 65 to 70, and price versus relative wage indexing. The analysis concludes, among other points, that intergenerational differences are significantly smaller than intra-generational variations, and that the parents of the baby-boom generation are likely to benefit from the largest lifetime net transfers of any birth cohort from 1890 to 2010.

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate how funding support for intergenerational initiatives can have a positive impact on individuals and communities. The author aims to argue that there are strong motivations for organisations and associations supported by local and national government to adopt intergenerational approaches to their work and to outline areas where need for future work remains.

The paper describes learning gained from initiatives supported through a four‐year funding programme by the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation. Highlighting research by a range of parties on the need for and value of intergenerational work, the article moves on to describing key success factors identified through its own programme of work in creating high impact intergenerational work.

Drawing on experience gained from the support of some 50 projects under the Foundation's programme, a number of key elements are identified in the paper as particularly effective in creating successful intergenerational initiatives with significant impact: commonality – a common interest or goal shared among the different ages; co‐design – involve beneficiaries in developing activities; contribution – recognise that every participant has something to offer; community – house the work with key local players; competences – support and train staff to work with different ages.

Extending the literature base on the value of intergenerational practice, the article draws learning from a range of innovative projects in the UK and Portugal, where intergenerational work is still uncommon. The programme of funding was innovative in applying new approaches to intergenerational work including co‐design and social entrepreneurship. The article represents the first comparative analysis of a range of projects funded through the programme.