Search results

This issue is a selected bibliography covering the subject of leadership.

Recently, star variables and the post-crisis nature of cyclical fluctuations have attracted a great deal of interest. In this chapter, the authors investigate different methods of assessing business cycles (BCs) for the European Union in general and the euro area in particular. First, the authors conduct a Monte Carlo (MC) experiment using a broad spectrum of univariate trend-cycle decomposition methods. The simulation aims to examine the ability of the analysed methods to find the observed simulated cycle with structural properties similar to actual macroeconomic data. For the simulation, the authors used the structural model’s parameters calibrated to the euro area’s real gross domestic product (GDP) and unemployment rate. The simulation outcomes indicate the sufficient composition of the suite of models (SoM) consisting of popular Hodrick–Prescott, Christiano–Fitzgerald and structural trend-cycle-seasonal filters, then used for the real application. The authors find that: (i) there is a high level of model uncertainty in comparing the estimates; (ii) growth rate (acceleration) cycles have often the worst performances, but they could be useful as early-warning predictors of turning points in growth and BCs; and (iii) the best-performing MC approaches provide a reasonable combination as the SoM. When swings last less time and/or are smaller, it is easier to pick a good alternative method to the suite to capture the BC for real GDP. Second, the authors estimate the BCs for real GDP and unemployment data varying from 1995Q1 to 2020Q4 (GDP) or 2020Q3 (unemployment), ending up with 28 cycles per country. This analysis also confirms that the BCs of euro area members are quite synchronized with the aggregate euro area. Some major differences can be found, however, especially in the case of periphery and new member states, with the latter improving in terms of coherency after the global financial crisis. The German cycles are among the cyclical movements least synchronized with the aggregate euro area.

In order to succeed in an action under the Equal Pay Act 1970, should the woman and the man be employed by the same employer on like work at the same time or would the woman still be covered by the Act if she were employed on like work in succession to the man? This is the question which had to be solved in Macarthys Ltd v. Smith. Unfortunately it was not. Their Lordships interpreted the relevant section in different ways and since Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome was also subject to different interpretations, the case has been referred to the European Court of Justice.

Purpose – Are members of socially dominant groups aware of the privileges they enjoy? We address this question by applying the notion of hypocognition to social privilege. Hypocognition is defined as lacking a rich cognitive or linguistic representation (i.e., a schema) of a concept in question. By social privilege, we refer to advantages that members of dominant social groups enjoy because of their group membership. We argue that such group members are hypocognitive of the privilege they enjoy. They have little cognitive representation of it. As a consequence, their social advantage is invisible to them.

Approach – We provide a narrative review of recent empirical work demonstrating and explaining this lack of expertise and knowledge in socially dominant groups (e.g., White People, men) about discrimination and disadvantage encountered by other groups (e.g., Black People, Asian Americans, women), relative what members of those other groups know.

Findings – This lack of expertise or knowledge is revealed by classic cognitive psychological measures. Relative to members of other groups, social dominant group members generate fewer examples of discrimination that other groups confront, remember fewer instances after being presented a list of them, and are slower to respond when classifying whether these examples are discriminatory.

Social Implications – These classic measures of cognitive expertise about social privilege predict social attitude differences between social groups, specifically whether people perceive the existence of social privilege as well as believe discrimination still exists in contemporary society. Hypocognition of social privilege also carries implications for informal interventions (e.g., acting “colorblind”) that are popularly discussed.

This chapter highlights some of the tensions and most promising points of convergence between the strategic management and stakeholder theory literatures. We briefly examine the early development of both areas, identifying some of the background assumptions and choices that informed how the fields evolved, and how these factors led the two fields to engage in scholarly pursuits that seldom intersected for a period of years, followed by a renewal of interest among strategists in themes that are central to stakeholder theory. From this discussion, we develop a larger agenda with specific topics as examples of areas that offer promise for integrative research that can advance knowledge in both fields. Our vision of the future is one in which the larger aspirations of scholars in strategy and stakeholder theory are more fully realized with human purposes, broadly defined, as the focal point.

Phillips, J. has drawn the distinction between wrongful dismissal at common law and unfair dismissal under statute. He points out the considerable difference which exists between the position at common law and the position under statute. “The common law” he says “is concerned merely with the contractual relationship between the parties, whereas a complaint of unfair dismissal…is concerned with the statutory right of an employee not to be unfairly dismissed.” There thus exists a fundamental difference between the two concepts, both of which are in their different circumstances important. In this monograph, it is proposed to treat the common law of wrongful dismissal. Statutory unfair dismissal will be the subject of discussion in a future monograph.

Entrepreneurial bricolage has been proposed as a method of alleviating resource constraints of entrepreneurial firms. However, the outcomes of bricolage for a firm may vary greatly. One of the most pressing issues is to clarify how bricolage may enhance firm growth. Based on case studies, Baker and Nelson (2005) propose that applying bricolage in limited areas (“selective bricolage”) may enable firms to grow, whereas excessive (“parallel”) bricolage may lead to the opposite outcome. However, the process of testing the generalizability of this relationship using quantitative methods has just begun. In this chapter, we describe our efforts to develop a scale that measures bricolage manifestation in firms by using the “environmental domains” of Baker and Nelson (2005) to facilitate quantitative testing of the bricolage–growth relationship.