Search results
1 – 3 of 3Samantha A. Conroy and John W. Morton
Organizational scholars studying compensation often place an emphasis on certain employee groups (e.g., executives). Missing from this discussion is research on the compensation…
Abstract
Organizational scholars studying compensation often place an emphasis on certain employee groups (e.g., executives). Missing from this discussion is research on the compensation systems for low-wage jobs. In this review, the authors argue that workers in low-wage jobs represent a unique employment group in their understanding of rent allocation in organizations. The authors address the design of compensation strategies in organizations that lead to different outcomes for workers in low-wage jobs versus other workers. Drawing on and integrating human resource management (HRM), inequality, and worker literatures with compensation literature, the authors describe and explain compensation systems for low-wage work. The authors start by examining workers in low-wage work to identify aspects of these workers’ jobs and lives that can influence their health, performance, and other organizationally relevant outcomes. Next, the authors explore the compensation systems common for this type of work, building on the compensation literature, by identifying the low-wage work compensation designs, proposing the likely explanations for why organizations craft these designs, and describing the worker and organizational outcomes of these designs. The authors conclude with suggestions for future research in this growing field and explore how organizations may benefit by rethinking their approach to compensation for low-wage work. In sum, the authors hope that this review will be a foundational work for those interested in investigating organizational compensation issues at the intersection of inequality and worker and organizational outcomes.
Details
Keywords
Zahirul Hoque and Matt Kaufman
The organizational decision-making perspective (ODM) has a legacy regarding its concern for budgeting as an essential organizational routine in decision-making. Budgeting has also…
Abstract
Purpose
The organizational decision-making perspective (ODM) has a legacy regarding its concern for budgeting as an essential organizational routine in decision-making. Budgeting has also become a direct concern to organizational institutional theory (OIT) because of its prominent role in institution building, where budgeting can build trust in inter-organizational relationships. This paper builds on these two perspectives to explore organizational budget processes' formation, disruption, and re-creation over time.
Design/methodology/approach
We conducted a comprehensive review and critical analysis of the ODM and OIT perspectives, focusing on a fundamental paradox between ODM's emphasis on stability through organizational routines and OIT's focus on organizational legitimacy through the decoupled expression of organizational values. We then expanded on these paradoxical concerns in the context of budgeting, formalizing them into specific research propositions for future studies.
Findings
Tensions around the stability, decay, and re-creation of budgets as organizational routines emerge as a pressing issue requiring further empirical investigation from the ODM perspective. A critical issue in the OIT perspective is the potential for organizational budgets to provide an opportunity to decouple from practice through routinized expressions of rationality and to facilitate loose coupling in practice. These findings offer a fresh perspective and open up new avenues for future research in this area.
Originality/value
This paper contributes to the accounting and organizational research literature by shedding light on how organizations respond to the potential decay of budget routines and the manifestation of organizational values in decoupling processes by further re-creating and elaborating budget processes.
Details
Keywords
Nunzia Nappo and Giuseppe Lubrano Lavadera
The main aim of this study was to examine gender differences in job satisfaction in Europe.
Abstract
Purpose
The main aim of this study was to examine gender differences in job satisfaction in Europe.
Design/methodology/approach
For the empirical analysis, data from the Sixth European Working Conditions Survey were used. Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition with a principal component analysis (PCA) aggregated variable, after unconditional quantile regressions in a multiple imputation background, was implemented.
Findings
Women report higher job satisfaction than men do. Women were significantly more satisfied than men for the middle levels of the job satisfaction distribution.
Originality/value
This study expands the evidence on the determinants of job satisfaction in the European labour market by applying a recent form of decomposition that invests in unconditional quantile regression (UQR). To the best of this study knowledge, this is the first time that the Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition with a PCA aggregated variable after unconditional quantile regression has been employed to study gender-based differences in job satisfaction.
Details