Search results

The aim of the study is to contribute to the extending body of literature on ‘the different effects of cultural engagement’ through cases from Turkey. In the context of art and society interaction, the study seeks to find evidence from practice within the scope of the ‘cultural value’ and ‘arts marketing’ literature. ‘Co-creation’ is mentioned as an important term in the cultural engagement context, and purposeful co-creation acts are investigated in the art industry. Therefore, the research focuses on interaction in the context of culture in order to explore the complex nature of co-creation of cultural value in alternative places and cultural frames. From this perspective, the study underlines the roles of place and atmosphere in the cultural engagement process. The cultural engagement areas of art and the public are determined in three different fields: nature (art in the village), science (campus) and business (shopping mall). The case study research is realised in order to gain a detailed and holistic view of the process. While the intention of all art events is the interaction of art and society, all three cases lead to different dimensions of ‘cultural engagement’ in different contexts. In this manner, these different cultural frames enlarge our comprehensive view of the constitution of ‘art and cultural value’ in terms of place and cultural frame of the field. The study underlines that society-oriented local art events and organisations are supporting the art and society link rather than focussing the economic value of art and artists as the actors of a commercial art industry.

The harsh market environment has led to fierce levels of competition within the personal financial services sector, where banks, building societies and other providers of financial services have been criticized for offering sophisticated consumers undifferentiated products. With customer retention becoming increasingly significant for institutions within the sector, strategies which provide them with competitive advantage are becoming of paramount importance. Examines how one large building society is responding to the demands of an oversupply of financial services by developing a customer database in an attempt to improve its competitive position.

Reviews the development of the corporate social responsibility (CSR) concept and its four components: economic, legal, ethical and altruistic duties. Discusses different perspectives on the proper role of business in society, from profit making to community service provider. Suggests that much of the confusion and controversy over CSR stem from a failure to distinguish among ethical, altruistic and strategic forms of CSR. On the basis of a thorough examination of the arguments for and against altruistic CSR, concurs with Milton Friedman that altruistic CSR is not a legitimate role of business. Proposes that ethical CSR, grounded in the concept of ethical duties and responsibilities, is mandatory. Concludes that strategic CSR is good for business and society. Advises that marketing take a lead role in strategic CSR activities. Notes difficulties in CSR practice and offers suggestions for marketers in planning for strategic CSR and for academic researchers in further clarifying the boundaries of strategic CSR.

This article starts from the assumption that economic sociology, including Karl Polanyi’s work, can contribute fresh perspectives to regulation debates because it opens up new understandings of the nature of economic activity, a key target of legal regulation. In particular this article examines Polanyi’s idea that society drives regulation. For Polanyi the “regulatory counter-movement” is society’s response to the disembedding – in particular through the proliferation of markets – of economic out of social relationships. Section One of the article identifies three key challenges that arise from this Polanyian take on regulation for contemporary regulation researchers. First, Polanyi focuses on social norms restraining business behavior, but neglects social norms embedded in law as also shaping regulation. Second, he seems to imply a clear-cut conceptual distinction between “economy” and “society.” Third, his analysis sidelines the role of interest politics in the development of regulation.

Addressing the first of these three key challenges, Section Two of this article therefore argues that a Polanyian vision of “socialized” legal regulation should build on contemporary accounts of responsive law and regulation, which focus attention on social norms informing legal regulation. Section Three of this article tackles the second key challenge raised by Polanyi’s work for contemporary regulation researchers, that is, how to transcend a modernist perspective of “economy” and “society” as clearly demarcated, distinct fields of social action. It argues that discourse theory is an important alternative theoretical resource. Drawing on Laclau and Mouffe, the article suggests that understanding “economy” and “society” as performed by open and relationally constructed discourses helps to capture interconnections between “economy” and “society” that become particularly visible when we analyze how specific regulatory regimes work at a medium- and small-scale level. These points are further brought to life in Section Four through a discussion of the European Union (EU) regulatory regime for trade in risky, transgenic agricultural products, and in particular the current reform debates about the consideration of the “socioeconomic impacts” of such products.

This paper attempts to discover whether or not social networks work in the same way in different sectors of the labour market in the same society, using data from the 2008 Asian Social Survey. Labour markets in some societies are segmented; there are two segments in the labour market, namely, the core sector and the peripheral sector. The practices of each sector differs from the others. Some sectors employ CME labour markets, while others favour LME labour markets (Kanbayashi and Takenoshita, 2014). In other words, we can find both CME and LME labour market in one society.

Since Granovetter’s (1973) pioneer study, scholars are interested in investigating in what way social network influence our job searching outcomes. However, these researchers have not yet yielded consistent results. Scholars argue that the institutional context of labour market can shape the network impacts on our job search outcome (Chen, 2014; Chua, 2011).

Surprisingly, this paper finds that there is no room for the use of personal contact in the public sector in both China and Japan. But, mean status is positively related to annual income in the private companies sector in both Japan and China. The significant influences of mean status in the private sectors in both China and Japan reflect the reinforcing of existing social inequality structure. This is because as the status of contact can facilitate respondents' job attainment process, those who are already in higher social status are more likely than those who are in the bottom of the social strata, to get a better job with the help from their network members.

The above findings show us that social network can exert various impacts on people's job searching process even in the same society. This is because it is possible that the labour market are segmented. These segments have very different practices. This difference attributes to the inconsistent findings of network effects on occupational attainment process. Therefore, it is essential to locate which labour market respondents are in, and the features of this labour market. This can help us know more about the use and effectiveness of network in different types of labour markets.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the genesis of the first Macro‐Marketing Seminar and to review the institutionalization of macromarketing which resulted from it.

The paper briefly reviews the history of macromarketing, the changes in society and marketing thought, and the seminal research which led to the first Macro‐Marketing Seminar.

Early macromarketing research was supplanted by a managerial marketing focus in mid‐twentieth century while at the same time society was awakening to the interconnections between human behavior and a broad range of societal problems. The early marketing theory seminars provided a template for the first Macro‐Marketing Seminar.

The paper explains the resurgence of macromarketing which from that first pivotal Macro‐Marketing Seminar has blossomed into a multifaceted and institutionalized area of study.

Purpose – How did cooperation emerge in large-scale, fluid societies? Standard theories based on direct and indirect reciprocity among self-regarding agents cannot explain the high level of impersonal exchange observed in developed market economies.

Approach and findings – Drawing upon recent research from across the behavioral sciences, we attribute the emergence of cooperation in early trade to an evolved characteristic of human psychology that makes revenge sweet: people are willing to pay a price to punish those who betray their trust. Once cooperative expectations became fixed, institutions such as the law merchant and ethnic trading networks, as well as certain “bourgeois virtues,” helped sustain and extend trade during the medieval period.

Contribution of the paper – Our argument continues the tradition begun by F.A. Hayek in The Sensory Order (1952), by providing an integrated explanation for the rise of the market based upon the coevolution of human psychology, culture, and institutions. In our conclusion, we revisit Hayek's (Hayek, 1976, 1978, 1988) analysis of the conflict between our instincts and the institutions that have created the market order.

The business of Building Societies is readily defined: to raise funds from members and to make advances to members by way of mortgage of property. They operate on a “cost plus” basis, setting the rate which they pay to savers at a level necessary to attract sufficient funds and charging a rate of interest on mortgages that covers tax and expenses and produces a surplus. Apparently they do not charge what the market will bear, and they are reluctant to raise the mortgage rate of interest. Although they compete with each other and strive for commercial efficiency, they conceive of their function as partly a social service, and it is this aspect which justifies the use of the term “the Building Society Movement”. Nevertheless they are part of the financial market of attracting and providing funds placing them in competition with banks, finance houses, insurance companies, and so on.

Max Weber and the Austrian School of Economics share many of the same intellectual influences as well as a similar commitment to a social science characterized by methodological individualism, methodological subjectivism, and value-freedom. Although many of the links between Weber and the Austrian school have been explored, one area of agreement between Weber and Mises that is yet to be explored is their shared understanding of the nature of the market. This chapter attempts to close this gap by examining the pictures of the market in Weber’s Economy and Society and Mises’ Human Action. We find that both portrayals share important features. These include similarities regarding (i) the nature of the market; (ii) the market’s autonomous logic; (iii) the impersonality of the market; and (iv) the market in society.