Search results

In WTO proceedings The Dispute Settlement Body has generally adopted a standard of review that is less than deferential even in the Anti‐Dumping agreement which envisages a deferential standard of review. What should be the applicable standard of review in WTO proceedings? The purpose of this paper is to present an analysis of the concept of “deference as respect” as developed by David Dyzenhaus and discuss its application to the WTO. This paper argues that the WTO should apply a standard of “deference as respect” in the interest of preserving economic sovereignty and the legitimacy of the WTO.

The paper involves the analysis of relevant case law and also the analysis and application of the concept of “deference as respect” in WTO proceedings. It also uses a comparative methodology in that it highlights the application of domestic legal principles at the international level.

The main finding is that within the WTO there is need to balance the requirements of trade liberalisation which eschews protectionism and the requirements of sovereignty and legitimacy. This balance can partly be achieved when a standard of review akin to “deference as respect” is applied.

This paper is different from previous writings on WTO standard of review in that it applies the concept of “deference as respect”. This analysis and application will provide academics and members of the DSB with a new way of assessing the standard of review in the WTO.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the nature of customer deference to service providers in service encounters, and articulate its chief antecedents, experiences and consequences.

Data were collected in Thailand, using critical incident technique. A total of 253 subjects share their experiences of being “deferential” (i.e. “kreng-jai” in Thailand) during everyday service encounters.

The findings indicate that in cultures in which the cultural norm (i.e. kreng-jai) is to be considerate of others, customers often become deferential of the service provider during service encounters, especially when customers perceive that the service provider’s well-being is compromised. However, customer deference involves aversive feelings which lead customers to devise coping strategies and avoid future contact with a company.

Using a specific cultural norm, the findings challenge prior finding that people from collectivist culture are more likely to tolerate and be satisfied with service encounters, and document the role of previously unexamined customer-related factors in driving satisfaction in ordinary service encounters.

The findings recommend service providers to preempt customers’ deference by establishing and communicating the role and acceptable behaviors, managing physical distance with customers, and monitoring customer non-verbal behavior and facial expressions to detect the customers’ true feelings.

No prior research has comprehensively examined the phenomenon whereby consumers seek to benefit service providers at the expense of their own well-being. This study demonstrates that customer deference degrades customer satisfaction even in ordinary service encounters.

The purpose of this paper is to illuminate the mechanism which can explain and predict subordinates’ deferential behaviour in China.

Data were collected using mail surveys. The study used two sources of data (supervisor and subordinate) obtained via two separate sets of surveys. In total, 600 questionnaires were distributed to subordinate–supervisor dyads employed in a variety of organizations, and 441 dyad-level questionnaires were collected.

The paper revealed that supervisors’ political mentoring (PM) moderated the strength of the mediated relationships between a supervisor’s trust in the subordinate and the subordinate’s deference to supervisor via supervisor–subordinate guanxi. Furthermore, the direct interaction effect of a supervisor’s trust and PM influenced the subordinate’s deference to supervisor only when the level of PM was low.

This study clarifies the mechanism by which supervisor’s specific behaviours affect subordinate’s deference to supervisor, and explores how supervisor–subordinate dyad creates a reciprocal relationship. The research indicates the unique effect of supervisor’s PM in Chinese organizations, and reinforces the importance of considering supervisor’s trust in the subordinate.

The purpose of this study is to examine how employees’ deference to leader authority may induce their unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB) and whether this translation is more likely to materialize in the presence of two personal factors (dispositional greed and proactive personality) and two organizational factors (workplace status and job rotation).

The empirical assessment of the research hypotheses relies on quantitative survey data collected among 350 Canadian-based employees who work in the healthcare sector. The statistical analyses include hierarchical moderated regression.

The role of deference to leader authority in stimulating UPB is greater when employees (1) have a natural disposition to always want more, (2) enjoy initiative taking, (3) believe that they have a great deal of prestige in the organization and (4) operate in an organizational environment in which job rotation across different departments is encouraged.

The results inform managers about the risk that employees’ willingness to obey organizational authorities unconditionally might escalate into negative behaviors that can cause harm to both the organization and employees in the long run, as well as the personal and organizational circumstances in which this escalation is more likely to occur.

This study extends extant research by investigating the conditional effects of an unexplored determinant of UPB, namely, a personal desire to defer to organizational leaders.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between employees’ deference to leaders’ authority and their upward ingratiatory behavior, which may be invigorated by two personal resources (dispositional greed and social cynicism) and two organizational resources (informational justice and forgiveness climate).

In this study survey data were collected among employees who work in the banking sector.

Strict adherence to leaders’ authority stimulates upward ingratiatory behavior, especially when employees (1) have a natural tendency to want more, (2) are cynical about people in power, (3) believe they have access to pertinent organizational information and (4) perceive their organization as forgiving of mistakes.

For human resource (HR) managers, this study points to the risk that employees’ willingness to comply blindly with the wishes of organizational leaders can escalate into excessive, inefficient levels of flattery. Several personal and organizational conditions make this risk particularly likely to materialize.

This study extends prior human resource management (HRM) research by revealing the conditional effects of an unexplored determinant of upward ingratiatory behavior, namely, an individual desire to obey organizational authorities unconditionally.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a scale for measuring consumer doubt toward new products.

The scale was developed in several steps. A large pool of items to represent consumer doubt was generated. Experts reviewed the scale items for conciseness and clarity. An exploratory factor analysis to examine the unidimensionality, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of each construct was conducted. The model was then validated using partial least squares modeling. Finally, the scale and its form were validated, and potential response biases assessed. Data from three studies were used.

The results show that by focusing on reasons for deference, rather than acceptance, the scale yields new insight into innovation success and failure. The CDNP scale is a reliable and valid measurement instrument to assess consumer doubt toward new products.

For researchers, the results show that only considering positive aspects on innovation adoption can lead to only a partial understanding of how innovation diffuses in the market.

By overcoming consumer doubt at early stages of innovation launch, companies could overcome problems related to innovation failure.

The literature on innovation adoption has almost exclusively focused on why innovations succeed by examining consumer acceptance of innovations. Yet, a potentially more serious issue that would need to be tackled is why innovations fail. This paper focuses on consumer doubt toward new products, i.e. a lack of conviction that a new product will fulfill its promises. Three studies show that the scale of consumer doubt is valid, and it provides new insights into innovation adoption.

To examine a statement issued by Justice Antonin Scalia on November 10, 2014, concurrently with the Supreme Court ' s denial of certiorari in a criminal insider trading case, which raises profound questions about how the courts interpret the federal securities laws and the degree of deference they give to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the context of criminal enforcement.

The article discusses the points raised in the justice ' s statement and their potential implications for future securities enforcement cases.

The statement suggests that the traditional deference courts accord the SEC under the landmark decision in Chevron USA Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 US 837 (1984) may be inappropriate and potentially inconsistent with the rule of lenity, which requires that ambiguous criminal laws be interpreted in a defendant ' s favor.

Expert guidance from experienced securities lawyers.

There remain several underaddressed issues in the procedural justice literature. The authors draw from a rich body of psychological research on how the sociopolitical orientation to group inequality influences individual views on government and apply this to perceptions of procedural justice.

This study uses a laboratory-style experimental design to examine the extent to which social dominance orientation (SDO) shapes how people view the language of law enforcement. Four treatments are tested: procedural justice, rapport, deference, and direct.

The authors find that, overall, exclusively emphasizing rapport – as opposed to procedural justice, deference, or directness – is not beneficial to fostering positive perceptions of police. Additionally, a higher SDO score is associated with lower perceptions of officer respect in the video and regardless of condition. Finally, while higher SDO score is correlated with greater trust in police (both a specific officer and the police in general), it is also associated with a lower sense of obligation to obey both the officer in the video and the police as an institution. Further, procedural justice or direct communication styles can attenuate the negative impact of SDO on views of police better than rapport or deference communication styles. Thus, the picture that emerges from this research is more nuanced than a straightforward relationship between SDO and support for police.

This study used an experimental design to examine for the first time the role that a sociopolitical orientation may play in procedural justice theory. While research finds strong links between procedural justice and increased cooperation with police, obligation to obey, and trust in police, few studies have delved into the individual-level factors that research has yet to delve into whether sociopolitical orientation may play a role in informing police actions and communication training.

This paper aims to explore how researchers in general, and field researchers in particular, might respond to systems of governance of the researchers' activity in ways that can support rather than distort the quality of the research.

We draw upon literature on serendipity to develop a framework for engaging with the positive and negative potentials of systems of governance. We ground our analysis in discussion of participation in the field comprising two parts: first, the examination of our own activities and second, the accounts of participation found in two career-autobiographical interviews with emeritus professors of management accounting from Japan.

We highlight the potential for a productive tension between two contrasting perspectives that researchers might take on governance of their activity. A contractual perspective sees the value of targets and detailed pre-planning. A reflexive perspective sees the value of exploring the unexpected and considering many alternatives. We offer a framework for considering serendipity and the conditions that facilitate serendipity to help researchers maintain a productive tension between these perspectives.

We build upon retrospective accounts of two successful individuals whose careers evolved in a specific context. The intention is not to set out what might be generally achievable in a research career, nor to propose specific lines of action or planning in relation to specific systems of governance, since these vary across countries and over time. Rather, the paper draws on these materials to illuminate the more general challenge of preparing for serendipity in a way that goes beyond simple opportunism.

We analyse how researchers' mindfulness of serendipity and the nature of contexts that facilitate serendipity can encourage a productive tension between contractual and reflexive perspectives on governance of academic activity.

This study aims to investigate Australian civil tribunal decisions to ascertain compliance with decisional quality standards in Australian law, with a particular focus on strata and community title cases.

An orthodox doctrinal legal analysis and assessment of cases and tribunal policies was adopted. All Australian jurisdictions were surveyed, including federal, state and territory jurisdictions. The case law in each jurisdiction was screened to identify whether the principles applicable to decisional quality were engaged and then analysed as to the extent of that engagement.

Where a party presents a substantial, clearly particularised argument relying upon established facts, tribunals are obliged to address those facts and the arguments by way of an active intellectual process. However, appellate decisions disclose a degree of deference not often accorded to judicial officers, and there is a need for a more disciplined approach to ascertain whether any errors have been made by a tribunal lie on the critical path to the decision. As strata and community title disputes become more complex, the importance of decisional quality standards can only increase.

Up to date as of 1 March 2023.

The present position would appear to be that where a party presents a substantial, clearly particularised argument relying upon established facts, a tribunal must address its mind to those facts and the arguments by way of an active intellectual process. The requirement is limited to circumstances prescribed by a statute and factual and legal issues which are necessary to be determined in order for the tribunal to be satisfied as to circumstances prescribed by a statute. However, where the errors are not gross and plainly obvious, appeals from defective tribunal decisions are unlikely to succeed. There is a degree of deference not often accorded to judicial officers. That deference is unfortunate when tribunals are allocated jurisdiction over what quite often are significant property disputes.

The impact on community living of uncorrected poor quality tribunal decisions can be immense, depending on the degree of error. For example, water ingress into people’s homes might remain unremedied for many years, as, for example, occurred in the Marinko case.

The research and analysis is entirely original. A search of journals and textbooks did not identify any prior analysis, at least in the Australian context, relating to decisional quality standards of tribunals.