What is balanced growth? This book shows that the definitions and implications of the concept of balanced growth vary significantly among the different disciplines in economic science, but are not exclusive at all.
Terms such as sustainability or balanced growth have become buzzwords. In practice, they are often a desirable vision rather than an achievable objective. Why? Doubts may arise about the extent to which such concepts are compatible with a modern market economy. Is balanced growth possible at all? Is it reasonable to accept balanced growth as a norm? Why should a balanced growth path be a desirable strategy to pursue for policymakers, managers, employees, and other societal stakeholders? Empirical evidence suggests that the actual worldwide economic growth is not balanced at all. Meanwhile, ever since the beginning of the financial and economic crisis in 2007 and its accompanying spillover effects, our globalizing world has uncompromisingly shown the flip side of its coin. Its crisis-prone character has intensified the discussion about our economic system's sustainability. Questions related to acceptable sovereign debt levels, suitable trade deficits and surpluses, firms' growth targets, resource management and efficiency have aroused high interest. What is the cause of the observed imbalances? In our opinion, this debate must involve rethinking the qualitative and quantitative dimension of our present understanding of the nature of economic growth.
This book accompanies the 9th DocNet Management Symposium of the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland. It contains contributions of the symposium's panel speakers, renowned authors to the field and young researchers. The Ph.D. students' and post-doctoral association DocNet organizes the DocNet Management Symposium on a yearly basis with the goal to foster exchange between academia and practitioners.
Despite recent attention to trust, comparatively little is known about distrust as distinct from trust. In this paper, we drew on case study data of a reorganized court of law, where intergroup distrust had grown between judges and administrators, to develop a dynamic theory of distrust. We used insights from the literatures on distrust, conflict escalation, and professional-organization relations to guide the analysis of our case data. Our research is consistent with insights on distrust previously postulated, but we were able to extend and make more precise the perceptions and behaviors that make up the elements of the self-amplifying cycle of distrust development, how these elements are related, and the mechanisms of amplification that drive the cycle. To help guide and focus future research, we modeled the process by which distrust emerges and develops, and we drew inferences on how it can be repaired.
The present research introduces the concept of decisional fit. A decision maker experiences decisional fit when the individually preferred decision strategy fits the actually applied strategy. In accordance to other fit-concepts in psychology (e.g., person-environment fit), we expected positive effects of decisional fit. Five studies examine the effects of a fit between the individual preference for intuition and deliberation (PID) and the actually used decision strategy (intuition or deliberation). A comparison of extreme types (according to participants' values on the PID scale) revealed that decisional fit enhances the perceived value of the chosen or evaluated object (Studies 1-3). In Studies 4 and 5, participants experienced less regret after decisional fit. The findings highlight the importance of considering individual differences when comparing intuitive and deliberate decision making, because strategy preferences interact with applied strategies.
With this article we contribute to the inclusion of employees with disabilities in the workplace. Based on Stone and Colella's (1996) model of factors affecting the treatment of employees with disabilities in organizations, we concentrate on the investigation of job satisfaction as a focal affective response. Besides examining job satisfaction differences between employees with and without disabilities, we focus on perceived flexibility as an organizational boundary condition, arguing for its influence on the job satisfaction of employees with disabilities. We introduce perceived centralization and formalization, representing different indicators of flexibility, as moderators of the disability-job satisfaction relationship. Regression analysis using data from 110 small and medium-sized companies with 4,141 employees reveals that employees with disabilities are less satisfied than their colleagues without disabilities in highly centralized environments. As predicted, a decentralized organizational context relates to higher job satisfaction levels for all employees, but especially for those having a disability. Contrary to our hypothesis, perceived formalization does not significantly influence the relationship between having a disability and job satisfaction. However, our results clearly indicate the need for companies and especially human resource departments to better adapt to the needs of people with disabilities by creating flexible working environments.
Im Rahmen der Forschung zu Behinderung am Arbeitsplatz ist eine zentrale Frage, ob Menschen mit Behinderung andere Erfahrungen am Arbeitsplatz machen als Menschen ohne Behinderung. In einer aktuellen Studie beschäftigen wir uns mit Arbeitszufriedenheitsunterschieden zwischen Arbeitnehmern mit und ohne Behinderung.
