Search results

This study aims to elucidate the dynamics of monetary and fiscal policy interactions in Brazil, focusing on the impacts of positive shocks in government consumption and interest rates. By comparing rational and behavioral agent responses, it clarifies how these frameworks influence gross domestic product (GDP), inflation, private and government consumption and nominal interest rates.

The study employs a new Keynesian dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model with Bayesian estimation from 2000Q1 to 2022Q4, capturing rational and behavioral behaviors with adjustments for Brazilian economic idiosyncrasies. Impulse response functions (IRF) assess the dynamic effects of policy shocks, providing a comparative analysis of the two frameworks.

Behavioral agents show greater initial sensitivity to policy shocks, causing more pronounced fluctuations in GDP, inflation and private consumption compared to rational agents. Over time, the behavioral approach leads to a more robust recovery, while the rational approach results in a quicker return to equilibrium but less pronounced long-term recovery. The study also finds fiscal policy can partially offset the negative impacts of monetary tightening, with a more delayed effect in the behavioral model.

This paper provides insights into the interplay between monetary and fiscal policies under different agent expectations, emphasizing the importance of incorporating behavioral elements into macroeconomic models to better capture policy dynamics in emerging markets.

This paper examines the prospects of developing rational policy processes. The approach taken is to examine two components of policy processes. First, the paper analyses the way in which rationality has been applied to three different models, or modes of public administration: Weberian bureaucracy; market or rational actor political behaviour; and managerialism. The analysis suggests that “rational” approaches to public administration are inherently value‐laden, emphasising norms such as institutional integrity, representation or efficiency. Second, analysis is undertaken of policy implementation which is one phase of the policy process. The paper examines “top‐down”, “bottom‐up”, institutional and statutory‐coherence approaches to policy implementation. Contrasts amongst these competing models of policy implementation reinforce previous findings that there appears to be little prospect of achieving policy rationality because of the inability of the current approaches to policy analysis to enable reconciliation of fundamental normative assumptions underpinning the approaches. The current methods utilised by policy analysts do not appear to be able to provide either the tools or the structures required to achieve instrumental rationality in policy sciences.

The purpose of this paper is to map the variety in organizational design approaches, to clarify their differences, and to find out what constitutes good designing in practice.

A series of in‐depth interviews with experienced, high‐reputation consultants is used to reconstruct organizational design practice.

The paper presents a typology with three organizational design approaches, stemming from different theoretical traditions. The paper demonstrates that the three approaches comprise both traditional design activities – analysis, design, implementation, and evaluation – experimental activities, and political activities, but that the emphasis, elaboration, rationale and order of these activities are very different for each approach.

The study provides a framework for further research on the contextualization of design processes, investigating which design approaches work under which conditions.

Practitioners can use the results of this study to clarify, improve and enrich their own approach of organizational designing.

Management literature contains many models of organization design processes, but empirical studies of these processes are rare, and not yet existing in the context of management consulting. The paper fills some of the gaps.

On many occasions, organizational science research has been referred to as fragmented and disjointed, resulting in a literature that is, in the opinion of many, difficult to navigate and comprehend. One potential explanation is that scholars have failed to comprehend that organizations are complex and intricate systems. In order to move us past this morass, we recommend that researchers extend beyond traditional rational, mechanistic, and variable-centered approaches to research and integrate a more advantageous pattern-oriented approach within their research program. Pattern-oriented methods approximate real-life phenomena by adopting a holistic, integrative approach to research wherein individual- and organizational-systems are viewed as non-decomposable organized wholes. We argue that the pattern-oriented approach has the potential to overcome a number of breakdowns faced by alternate approaches, while offering a novel and more representative lens from which to view organizational- and HRM-related issues. The proposed incorporation of the pattern-oriented approach is framed within a review and evaluation of current approaches to organizational research and is supplemented with a discussion of methodological and theoretical implications as well as potential applications of the pattern-oriented approach.

An exciting opportunity that many advanced industrial democracies faced in the late 1990s was the movement from budgetary deficit to surplus. This came after years of persistent deficits. Traditional decisionmaking theories such as budgetary incrementalism failed to explain this longrun relationship, since it has been inherently a short-run theory. This paper uses rational expectations theory to demonstrate its relationship to budgetary decision-making reforms and the deficit (surplus) for Canada, the UK and the United States. The results demonstrated that there was an intertemporal budget constraint in operation in the three countries, and decision-makers at the macro level used rational expectations in the formulation of their annual budget. In the theory, budget actors strived to balance their budget, but did so over the longrun as opposed to the short-run incrementalist interpretation.

This article explores how strategy formulation affects firm performance to determine whether rational/analytical strategy formulation is more effective than emergent/reflexive strategy formulation. Additionally, the article assesses if such superiority holds for different cultural contexts.

Meta-analysis was performed using the Raju, Burke, Norman, and Landis (RBNL) procedure applied to a dataset of 43 empirical studies reporting 54 effect sizes on strategy–performance relationships.

Implementing a formal strategy formulation process positively relates to firm performance. Rational/analytical formulation approaches are more effective than emergent/reflexive approaches in enhancing firm performance, especially for cultures with low future orientation, high uncertainty avoidance, and high power distance.

The reduced number of published empirical studies limited the scope and generalizability of the results across countries, industries, or firms. This limitation might be especially true for Latin American firms given the absence of relevant studies in this region. Another potential limitation is related to the distinction between strategy formulation and strategy implementation. Given the empirical nature of the studies meta-analyzed, strategic tools are used as a proxy to determine the formulation approach.

Firms that operate in short-term oriented, uncertainty-avoiding, and elitist cultures should favor implementing rational/analytical strategy formulation techniques rather than emergent/reflexive approaches. Although prescriptive recommendations are limited by the lack of studies in Latin America, firms in this region would seem to be better off using rational/analytical strategy formulation approaches.

These findings provide a partial explanation for the varying results yielded by strategy formulation and suggest cultural contexts in which rational/analytical strategy formulation should be more effective than emergent/reflexive approaches.

Este artículo explora cómo la formulación de la estrategia afecta el desempeño de la empresa y busca determinar si la formulación de la estrategia racional / analítica es más efectiva que la formulación de la estrategia emergente / reflexiva. Además, el artículo evalúa si dicha superioridad es válida para diferentes contextos culturales.

El metaanálisis se realizó aplicando el procedimiento de Raju, Burke, Norman y Landis (RBNL) a un conjunto de datos de 43 estudios empíricos que reportaron un total de 54 tamaños de efecto sobre las relaciones estrategia-rendimiento.

La implementación de un proceso formal de formulación de estrategias se relaciona positivamente con el desempeño de la empresa. Los enfoques de formulación racional / analítica son más efectivos que los enfoques emergentes / reflexivos para mejorar el rendimiento de la empresa, especialmente para culturas con baja orientación al largo plazo, alta evitación de incertidumbre y alta distancia al poder.

El reducido número de estudios empíricos publicados limitó el alcance y la generalización de los resultados entre países, industrias o empresas. Esta limitación podría afectar especialmente a las empresas latinoamericanas dada la ausencia de estudios relevantes en esta región. Otra limitación potencial está relacionada con la distinción entre la formulación y la implementación de la estrategia. Dada la naturaleza empírica de los estudios meta analizados, las herramientas estratégicas se utilizan como proxy para determinar el enfoque de formulación.

las empresas que operan en culturas orientadas al corto plazo, que evitan la incertidumbre y que muestran alta distancia al poder deberían favorecer la implementación de técnicas de formulación de estrategias racionales / analíticas en lugar de enfoques emergentes / reflexivos. Aunque las recomendaciones prescriptivas están limitadas por la falta de estudios en América Latina, las empresas en esta región parecen estar mejor utilizando enfoques de formulación de estrategias racionales / analíticas.

estos resultados proporcionan una explicación parcial de los resultados variados producidos por la formulación de la estrategia y sugieren contextos culturales en los que la formulación de la estrategia racional / analítica debería ser más efectiva que los enfoques emergentes / reflexivos.

A preceding paper by Baum examined the valuation of reversionary freehold interests, distinguishing between conventional and modern approaches. This paper applies the same approach to the valuation of leaseholds, and falls into two parts. Part 1 examined conventional leasehold valuations and the criticisms that may be made, concluding that both dual rate and single rate conventional valuations should be abandoned except in limited circumstances. Part 2 identifies three alternative modern approaches — real value, rational model and DCF — and compares their use in three general variations of leasehold valuation. The results are compared, and recommendations for their use are made. Finally an overview of the application of modern approaches to investment property valuation is presented.

Program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) is a priority setting approach that assists decision makers with allocating resources. Previous PBMA work establishes its efficacy and indicates that contextual factors complicate priority setting, which can hamper PBMA effectiveness. The purpose of this paper is to gain qualitative insight into PBMA effectiveness.

A Canadian case study of PBMA implementation. Data consist of decision-maker interviews pre (n=20), post year-1 (n=12) and post year-2 (n=9) of PBMA to examine perceptions of baseline priority setting practice vis-à-vis desired practice, and perceptions of PBMA usability and acceptability.

Fit emerged as a key theme in determining PBMA effectiveness. Fit herein refers to being of suitable quality and form to meet the intended purposes and needs of the end-users, and includes desirability, acceptability, and usability dimensions. Results confirm decision-maker desire for rational approaches like PBMA. However, most participants indicated that the timing of the exercise and the form in which PBMA was applied were not well-suited for this case study. Participant acceptance of and buy-in to PBMA changed during the study: a leadership change, limited organizational commitment, and concerns with organizational capacity were key barriers to PBMA adoption and thereby effectiveness.

These findings suggest that a potential way-forward includes adding a contextual readiness/capacity assessment stage to PBMA, recognizing organizational complexity, and considering incremental adoption of PBMA’s approach.

These insights help us to better understand and work with priority setting conditions to advance evidence-informed decision making.