The Paradox of Power in CSR: A Case Study on Implementation

Purpose Although current literature assumes positive outcomes for stakeholders resulting from an increase in power associated with CSR, this research suggests that this increase can lead to conflict within organizations, resulting in almost complete inactivity on CSR. Methods A single in-depth case study, focusing on power as an embedded concept. Results Empirical evidence is used to demonstrate how some actors use CSR to improve their own positions within an organization. Resource dependence theory is used to highlight why this may be a more significant concern for CSR. Conclusions Increasing power for CSR has the potential to offer actors associated with it increased personal power, and thus can attract opportunistic actors with little interest in realizing the benefits of CSR for the company and its stakeholders. Thus power can be an impediment to furthering CSR strategy and activities at the individual and organizational level

Can being gay provide a boost in the hiring process? Maybe if the boss is female

Purpose – The purpose of this study was to investigate whether men and women differentially prefer hiring gay and lesbian job applicants relative to equally qualified heterosexual job applicants. Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from two samples of non-student participants. Each participant evaluated the perceived hirability of an ostensibly real job applicant by reviewing the applicant’s resume. In reality, all participants were randomly assigned to evaluate the same fictitious resume that differed only in the gender and sexual orientation of the applicant. Findings – We find that men perceived gay and lesbian job applicants as less hirable, while women perceived gay and lesbian job applicants as more hirable than heterosexual job applicants. Additionally, we show perceptions of hirability are mediated by perceptions of gay and lesbian job applicants’ competence. Implications – These results show that bias against gays and lesbians is much more nuanced than previous work suggests. One implication is that placing more women in selection roles within organizations could be a catalyst for the inclusion of gay and lesbian employees. Additionally, these results could influence when and how gays and lesbians disclose their gay identities at work. Originality/value –These studies are the first to identify a positive bias in favor of gay and lesbian job applicants. As attitudes toward gays and lesbians become more positive, results like these are important to document as they signal a shift in intergroup relations. These results will also help managers and organizations design selection processes to minimize bias towards applicants. Keywords: gender, sexual orientation, selection, bia

Tackling transition:the value of peer mentoring

This paper is aimed at those interested in the promotion of student retention in higher education; particularly those with an interest in peer mentoring as a means of student support. It critically discusses the results of an exploratory study analysing the perceptions of peer mentors and mentees within five universities in the United Kingdom. The aim of the study was to analyse how student peer mentoring can aid transition into university by focusing specifically on how senior students can support their junior counterparts in their first year at university. The paper discusses the results of a survey which was completed by 329 student peer mentors and mentees. Focusing on the benefits and outcomes of participation in Mentoring Programmes, the survey was distinctive in that it asked mentors and mentees similar questions. From a theoretical perspective, the paper contributes to debates about peer support in higher education showing that participation in such programmes can have positive outcomes from both social and pedagogic perspectives. Practically speaking, the results have important implications for Higher Education Institutions as the research highlights the importance of putting into place formally structured Peer Mentoring Programmes which facilitate student support at a time when new students are most at risk of ‘dropping out’

Exploring the impact of mentoring functions on job satisfaction and organizational commitment of new staff nurses

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although previous studies proved that the implementation of mentoring program is beneficial for enhancing the nursing skills and attitudes, few researchers devoted to exploring the impact of mentoring functions on job satisfaction and organizational commitment of new nurses. In this research we aimed at examining the effects of mentoring functions on the job satisfaction and organizational commitment of new nurses in Taiwan's hospitals.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We employed self-administered questionnaires to collect research data and select new nurses from three regional hospitals as samples in Taiwan. In all, 306 nurse samples were obtained. We adopted a multiple regression analysis to test the impact of the mentoring functions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Results revealed that career development and role modeling functions have positive effects on the job satisfaction and organizational commitment of new nurses; however, the psychosocial support function was incapable of providing adequate explanation for these work outcomes.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>It is suggested in this study that nurse managers should improve the career development and role modeling functions of mentoring in order to enhance the job satisfaction and organizational commitment of new nurses.</p

Who Said or What Said? Estimating Ideological Bias in Views Among Economists

There exists a long-standing debate about the influence of ideology in economics. Surprisingly, however, there is no concrete empirical evidence to examine this critical issue. Using an online randomized controlled experiment involving economists in 19 countries, we examine the effect of ideological bias on views among economists. Participants were asked to evaluate statements from prominent economists on different topics, while source attribution for each statement was randomized without participants’ knowledge. For each statement, participants either received a mainstream source, an ideologically different less-/non-mainstream source, or no source. We find that changing source attributions from mainstream to less-/non-mainstream, or removing them, significantly reduces economists’ reported agreement with statements. Using a model of Bayesian updating we examine two competing hypotheses as potential explanations for these results: unbiased Bayesian updating versus ideologically-biased Bayesian updating. While we find no evidence in support of unbiased updating, our results are consistent with biased Bayesian updating. More specifically, we find that changing/removing sources (1) has no impact on economists’ reported confidence with their evaluations; (2) similarly affects experts/non-experts in relevant areas; and (3) affects those at the far right of the political spectrum much more significantly than those at the far left. Finally, we find significant heterogeneity in our results by gender, country, PhD completion country, research area, and undergraduate major, with patterns consistent with the existence of ideological bias