13 research outputs found

    Job performance and job satisfaction: an integrated survey

    Get PDF
    The empirical evidence from the econometrics of self-reported job satisfaction and from organisational psychology on job performance confronts economic theory with some puzzling results. Job performance is found to be positively correlated with job satisfaction, whereas effort is assumed to be a disutility in the theory. Economic incentives are not found to be the main motivations of job performance; in some cases, indeed, they are even counterproductive. Interest in the job is found to account better for job satisfaction. This paper proposes an integrated approach to these issues by (i) conducting an interdisciplinary critical survey, (ii) proposing a simple economic framework within which to explain the puzzles. The key idea behind this framework is that intrinsic motivations and self-esteem help explain both job satisfaction and job performance. The employer can thus adopt other, more friendly actions, besides using incentives and controls to enhance performance by employees.job performance, job satisfaction, intrinsic motivations

    The role of cooperative and social enterprises: A multifaceted approach for an economic pluralism

    Get PDF
    he role of cooperative and social enterprises in contemporary market economies has been downplayed and marginalised to date by the dominant economic approaches. This insufficient attention (Kalmi, 2008 su Cambridge Journal of Economics) derives from the limited applicability of the main assumptions of microeconomic to the case of cooperative and social enterprises. We mainly refer to models. the assumption of self-seeking individuals and of profit maximisation as the only possible firm objective. The mismatch between theoretical assumptions and empirical evidence has led to the underestimation of the growth potential, weight and role of cooperative and social enterprises. We maintain that the improvement of the scientific understanding of cooperative and social enterprises requires to enlarge and deepen the assumption of the relevant theoretical models. Individuals cannot be characterised any more as purely self-interested. Instead, the importance of motivational complexity, and the diverse nature of preferences needs to be introduced in the model as suggested by the behavioural approach. Furthermore, firms cannot be interpreted any more in an exclusive way as profit maximizers. They are instead coordination mechanisms of the economic activity, as suggested by the evolutionary approach. To this end they develop specific organisational routines, and their objectives can be diverse, ranging from purely private appropriation, to mutual benefit based on reciprocity, to public benefit aim supported by other-regarding preferences. (Le teorie economiche dominanti, ed in particolare l’approccio ortodosso e quello neo-istituzionalista, hanno sottostimato e marginalizzato il ruolo delle cooperative e delle imprese sociali nei mercati economici contemporanei. L’insufficiente attenzione a queste organizzazioni deriva principalmente dall’impossibilitĂ  di applicare ad esse le assunzioni principali della teoria microeconomica ortodossa, ossia la presenza di individui auto-interessati e di organizzazioni che puntino solo alla massimizzazione del profitto. Anche la teoria neo-istituzionalista non riesce a spiegare la presenza e la crescita del ruolo ricoperto da cooperative e imprese sociali. Per questa ragione, il presente paper Ăš volto a dimostrare come, per spiegare il ruolo di cooperative ed imprese sociali da un punto di vista scientifico, i principali modelli teorici economici debbano essere estesi. Innanzitutto, tanto gli individui quanto le istituzioni non possono essere piĂč assunti come soggetti meramente egoistici, ma ne vanno studiate la complessitĂ  motivazionale e le strutture di preferenze, cosĂŹ come proposto dalla teoria comportamentale (behavioural economics). Inoltre, le imprese devono essere concepite come meccanismi di coordinamento delle attivitĂ  economiche, come suggerito dall’approccio evoluzionista, e devono quindi esserne analizzate le specifiche routine organizzative sviluppate al loro interno e gli obiettivi organizzativi, i quali possono variare tra gli interessi di appropriazione privata dei profitti ed obiettivi pro-sociali sostenuti da preferenze altruistiche.Cooperatives, social enterprises, organizational pluralism, economic theories

    The Growth of Organizational Variety in Market Economies: The Case of Social Enterprises

    Get PDF
    Institutional and organizational variety is increasingly characterising advanced economic systems. While traditional economic theories have focussed almost exclusively on profit-maximizing (i.e. for-profit) enterprises and on publicly-owned organizations, the increasing relevance of non-profit organizations, and especially of social enterprises, requires scientists to reflect on a new comprehensive economic approach for explaining this organizational variety. The paper examines the main limitations of the orthodox and institutional theories and comes to assert the need for creating and testing a new theoretical framework, which considers the way in which diverse enterprises pursue their goals, the diverse motivations driving actors and organizations, and the different learning patterns and routines within organizations. The new framework of analysis proposed in the paper draws upon recent developments in the theories of the firm, institutional evolution, and motivational complexity to explain the presence of diverse types of organizations on a continuum ranging from purely for-profit and commercial forms to socially-oriented entrepreneurial ones. (La varietĂ  istituzionale ed organizzativa sta sempre piĂč caratterizzando le economie avanzate. Mentre le teorie economiche tradizionali hanno tuttavia focalizzato l’attenzione esclusivamente sulle imprese che massimizzano il profitto (tipicamente le for-profit) e sulle organizzazioni pubbliche, la crescente importanza, in questi ultimi anni, delle organizzazioni nonprofit e specialmente delle imprese sociali sta richiedendo agli studiosi di ripensare un approccio economico capace di spiegare questa varietĂ  organizzativa. Il presente articolo spiega i principali limiti della teoria ortodossa e delle teoria neo-istitizionalista e giunge ad affermare la necessitĂ  di creare e testare una nuova teoria economica che consideri le diversitĂ  negli obiettivi delle organizzazioni, le differenze nelle motivazioni degli attori economici e delle organizzazioni stesse, le differenti modalitĂ  di apprendimento e di generazione di routine all’interno delle organizzazioni. Il nuovo contesto di analisi proposto attinge ad alcuni recenti sviluppi delle analisi economiche dell’impresa ed in particolare all’evoluzione delle istituzioni e alla complessitĂ  motivazionale, giungendo a delineare la presenza di diverse tipologie organizzative lungo un continuum che va dalle organizzazioni interessate esclusivamente alla massimizzazione del profitto (for-profit) alle organizzazione orientate al benessere sociale.)Social enterprises, organizational pluralism, neo-institutional economics, behavioral economics, organizational continuum

    Incentives, job satisfaction and performance: empirical evidence in italian social enterprises

    Get PDF
    The paper offers a contribution to the understanding of the relations between incentives, satisfaction and performance of employees in social enterprises. It starts by criticizing the general hypotheses of the principal-agent theory and especially that employee satisfaction is determined exclusively by the level of salary received. These criticisms are explained both by looking to the organizational definition of job satisfaction by Locke and by taking a behavioural economics perspective. Job satisfaction is thus assumed to derive from a composed mix of incentives received on the job, equity perceived and employee motivations. It is no longer possible to assume that the wage is the sole (not even the most important) variable influencing worker performance. This claim is especially valid in social enterprises, where worker performance is difficult to monitor and evaluate, while high intrinsic motivations can better explain job satisfaction. The empirical analysis helps to shed light on the determinants of job satisfaction and individual performance. Data was collected on 4,134 employees working in 320 Italian social cooperatives. The paper introduces the methodologies of categorical principal components analysis, factor analysis, and Rasch models to group the items of intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction, motivations and fairness. The data was then analysed by means of linear regression where the dependent variables are not only the stated degree of job satisfaction, but also satisfaction with extrinsic and intrinsic aspects of the job. The models come to demonstrate the particular relevance of employee motivations and fairness perceived in explaining job satisfaction and its sub-dimensions. Furthermore, organizational perceptions and the work environment are found to be significant as are individual perceptions and motivations.

    Working in the profit versus not for profit sector: what difference does it make? An inquiry on preferences of voluntary and involuntary movers

    Get PDF
    We investigate what is behind the profit/not for profit wage differential by comparing judgments on job caracteristics of workers who voluntarily or involuntarily moved from the first to the second sector. We define voluntary movers those who applied for a job in a not for profit organization and, when successful, resigned from the for profit one, while involuntary movers can either have been laid off by the company or have resigned without already having a job offer in the not for profit sector when leaving the firm. We observe that almost half of voluntary movers end up with non higher wages and, surprisingly, higher job satisfaction after the change. A vast majority of them exhibit significantly higher time flexibility, improved relationships with stakeholders, closer consistence with educational skills and higher satisfaction of intrinsic motivations in the new job. Our findings support the profit/no profit compensating differential hypothesis and shed light on mechanisms which are beyond the job donation behavior of intrinsically motivated workers.Social enterprises, wage differentials, intrinsic motivations, changing job, dissatisfaction

    Compreendendo negĂłcios sociais

    Get PDF
    La variedad de instituciones y organizaciones caracteriza, cada vez mĂĄs, sistemas econĂłmicos avanzados. Al paso que las teorĂ­as econĂłmicas tradicionales enfocaban casi exclusivamente organizaciones maximizadoras de lucros (o sea, empresas generadoras de lucro) y organizaciones gubernamentales, la creciente relevancia de las organizaciones sin fines lucrativos y particularmente de las organizaciones sociales exige de los cientĂ­ficos reflexiones sobre un nuevo abordaje econĂłmico amplio, capaz de explicar tal variedad organizacional. Este artĂ­culo examina las principales limitaciones de las teorĂ­as ortodoxas e institucionales y reafirma la necesidad de crear y probar un nuevo marco teĂłrico, que tome en cuenta las formas variadas empleadas por las diversas organizaciones en la persecuciĂłn de sus objetivos, las variadas motivaciones que impelen a los atores y a las organizaciones, y los diferentes estĂĄndares de aprendizaje y rutinas dentro de las organizaciones. El nuevo marco analĂ­tico aquĂ­ propuesto se basa en desarrollos recientes, principalmente evolutivos y comportamentales, en la teorĂ­as de la empresa, que pasa a ser interpretada como un mecanismo de coordinaciĂłn de la actividad econĂłmica cuyos objetivos no coinciden forzosamente con la maximizaciĂłn de lucros. Al contrario, los agentes econĂłmicos son movidos por una complejidad de motivaciones y una voluntad intrĂ­nseca y no monetaria de desempeñar un papel crucial en la formaciĂłn de las actividades de la empresa que transcienden los objetivos puramente monetarios o financieros. Se considera que el nuevo marco sea particularmente apropiado para la correcta interpretaciĂłn del surgimiento y del papel de formas organizacionales y de propiedad no tradicionales, que no son movidas por la busca de lucros (organizaciones sin fines lucrativos) y que son reconocidas principalmente en los formatos legales de las cooperativas, ONG y empresas sociales. Este artĂ­culo considera y discute una gama de formas organizacionales que van desde actividades generadoras de lucro hasta actividades dirigidas al bien pĂșblico y que engloban organizaciones de beneficio mutuo como su principal constituyente.Institutional and organizational variety is increasingly characterizing advanced economic systems. While traditional economic theories have focused almost exclusively on profit-maximizing (i.e., for-profit) enterprises and on publicly-owned organizations, the increasing relevance of non-profit organizations, and especially of social enterprises, requires scientists to reflect on a new comprehensive economic approach for explaining this organizational variety. This paper examines the main limitations of the orthodox and institutional theories and asserts the need for creating and testing a new theoretical framework, which considers the way in which diverse enterprises pursue their goals, the diverse motivations driving actors and organizations, and the different learning patterns and routines within organizations. The new analytical framework proposed in the paper draws upon recent developments in the theories of the firm, mainly of an evolutionary and behavioral kind. The firm is interpreted as a coordination mechanism of economic activity, and one whose objectives need not coincide with profit maximization. On the other hand, economic agents driven by motivational complexity and intrinsic, non-monetary motivation play a crucial role in forming firm activity over and above purely monetary and financial objectives. The new framework is thought to be particularly suitable to correctly interpret the emergence and role of nontraditional organizational and ownership forms that are not driven by the profit motive (non-profit organizations), mainly recognized in the legal forms of cooperative firms, non-profit organizations and social enterprises. A continuum of organizational forms ranging from profit making activities to public benefit activities, and encompassing mutual benefit organizations as its core constituent, is envisaged and discussed.A variedade de instituiçÔes e organizaçÔes existentes crescentemente caracteriza os sistemas econĂŽmicos avançados. Ao passo que as teorias econĂŽmicas tradicionais enfocavam quase que exclusivamente organizaçÔes maximizadoras de lucros (ou seja, empresas geradoras de lucro) e organizaçÔes governamentais, a crescente relevĂąncia das organizaçÔes sem fins lucrativos e particularmente das organizaçÔes sociais exige dos pesquisadores reflexĂ”es sobre uma nova abordagem econĂŽmica ampla, capaz de explicar tal variedade organizacional. Neste artigo, examinam-se as principais limitaçÔes das teorias ortodoxas e institucionais e reafirma-se a necessidade de criar e testar um novo arcabouço teĂłrico, que leve em conta as formas variadas empregadas por organizaçÔes diversas na perseguição de seus objetivos, as variadas motivaçÔes que impelem os atores e as organizaçÔes, e os diferentes padrĂ”es de aprendizagem e rotinas dentro das organizaçÔes. O novo arcabouço analĂ­tico aqui proposto baseia-se em desenvolvimentos recentes, principalmente evolutivos e comportamentais, das teorias da empresa. Esta passa a ser interpretada como um mecanismo de coordenação da atividade econĂŽmica cujos objetivos nĂŁo coincidem forçosamente com a maximização de lucros. Ao contrĂĄrio, os agentes econĂŽmicos sĂŁo hoje movidos por uma complexidade de motivaçÔes e uma vontade intrĂ­nseca e nĂŁo monetĂĄria de manter um papel crucial na formação das atividades da firma, acima e alĂ©m de objetivos puramente monetĂĄrios ou financeiros. Acredita-se que o novo arcabouço seja particularmente apropriado para a correta interpretação da emergĂȘncia e do papel de formas organizacionais e de propriedade nĂŁo tradicionais, as quais nĂŁo sĂŁo movidas pela busca de lucros (organizaçÔes sem fins lucrativos), sendo reconhecidas principalmente nos formatos legais das cooperativas, OrganizaçÔes NĂŁo Governamentais (ONGs) e empresas sociais. Uma gama contĂ­nua de formas organizacionais, que vĂŁo desde atividades geradoras de lucro atĂ© atividades voltadas ao bem pĂșblico, e que englobam organizaçÔes de benefĂ­cio mĂștuo como seu principal constituinte, sĂŁo aqui consideradas e discutidas

    Compreendendo negĂłcios sociais

    Get PDF
    La variedad de instituciones y organizaciones caracteriza, cada vez mĂĄs, sistemas econĂłmicos avanzados. Al paso que las teorĂ­as econĂłmicas tradicionales enfocaban casi exclusivamente organizaciones maximizadoras de lucros (o sea, empresas generadoras de lucro) y organizaciones gubernamentales, la creciente relevancia de las organizaciones sin fines lucrativos y particularmente de las organizaciones sociales exige de los cientĂ­ficos reflexiones sobre un nuevo abordaje econĂłmico amplio, capaz de explicar tal variedad organizacional. Este artĂ­culo examina las principales limitaciones de las teorĂ­as ortodoxas e institucionales y reafirma la necesidad de crear y probar un nuevo marco teĂłrico, que tome en cuenta las formas variadas empleadas por las diversas organizaciones en la persecuciĂłn de sus objetivos, las variadas motivaciones que impelen a los atores y a las organizaciones, y los diferentes estĂĄndares de aprendizaje y rutinas dentro de las organizaciones. El nuevo marco analĂ­tico aquĂ­ propuesto se basa en desarrollos recientes, principalmente evolutivos y comportamentales, en la teorĂ­as de la empresa, que pasa a ser interpretada como un mecanismo de coordinaciĂłn de la actividad econĂłmica cuyos objetivos no coinciden forzosamente con la maximizaciĂłn de lucros. Al contrario, los agentes econĂłmicos son movidos por una complejidad de motivaciones y una voluntad intrĂ­nseca y no monetaria de desempeñar un papel crucial en la formaciĂłn de las actividades de la empresa que transcienden los objetivos puramente monetarios o financieros. Se considera que el nuevo marco sea particularmente apropiado para la correcta interpretaciĂłn del surgimiento y del papel de formas organizacionales y de propiedad no tradicionales, que no son movidas por la busca de lucros (organizaciones sin fines lucrativos) y que son reconocidas principalmente en los formatos legales de las cooperativas, ONG y empresas sociales. Este artĂ­culo considera y discute una gama de formas organizacionales que van desde actividades generadoras de lucro hasta actividades dirigidas al bien pĂșblico y que engloban organizaciones de beneficio mutuo como su principal constituyente.Institutional and organizational variety is increasingly characterizing advanced economic systems. While traditional economic theories have focused almost exclusively on profit-maximizing (i.e., for-profit) enterprises and on publicly-owned organizations, the increasing relevance of non-profit organizations, and especially of social enterprises, requires scientists to reflect on a new comprehensive economic approach for explaining this organizational variety. This paper examines the main limitations of the orthodox and institutional theories and asserts the need for creating and testing a new theoretical framework, which considers the way in which diverse enterprises pursue their goals, the diverse motivations driving actors and organizations, and the different learning patterns and routines within organizations. The new analytical framework proposed in the paper draws upon recent developments in the theories of the firm, mainly of an evolutionary and behavioral kind. The firm is interpreted as a coordination mechanism of economic activity, and one whose objectives need not coincide with profit maximization. On the other hand, economic agents driven by motivational complexity and intrinsic, non-monetary motivation play a crucial role in forming firm activity over and above purely monetary and financial objectives. The new framework is thought to be particularly suitable to correctly interpret the emergence and role of nontraditional organizational and ownership forms that are not driven by the profit motive (non-profit organizations), mainly recognized in the legal forms of cooperative firms, non-profit organizations and social enterprises. A continuum of organizational forms ranging from profit making activities to public benefit activities, and encompassing mutual benefit organizations as its core constituent, is envisaged and discussed.A variedade de instituiçÔes e organizaçÔes existentes crescentemente caracteriza os sistemas econĂŽmicos avançados. Ao passo que as teorias econĂŽmicas tradicionais enfocavam quase que exclusivamente organizaçÔes maximizadoras de lucros (ou seja, empresas geradoras de lucro) e organizaçÔes governamentais, a crescente relevĂąncia das organizaçÔes sem fins lucrativos e particularmente das organizaçÔes sociais exige dos pesquisadores reflexĂ”es sobre uma nova abordagem econĂŽmica ampla, capaz de explicar tal variedade organizacional. Neste artigo, examinam-se as principais limitaçÔes das teorias ortodoxas e institucionais e reafirma-se a necessidade de criar e testar um novo arcabouço teĂłrico, que leve em conta as formas variadas empregadas por organizaçÔes diversas na perseguição de seus objetivos, as variadas motivaçÔes que impelem os atores e as organizaçÔes, e os diferentes padrĂ”es de aprendizagem e rotinas dentro das organizaçÔes. O novo arcabouço analĂ­tico aqui proposto baseia-se em desenvolvimentos recentes, principalmente evolutivos e comportamentais, das teorias da empresa. Esta passa a ser interpretada como um mecanismo de coordenação da atividade econĂŽmica cujos objetivos nĂŁo coincidem forçosamente com a maximização de lucros. Ao contrĂĄrio, os agentes econĂŽmicos sĂŁo hoje movidos por uma complexidade de motivaçÔes e uma vontade intrĂ­nseca e nĂŁo monetĂĄria de manter um papel crucial na formação das atividades da firma, acima e alĂ©m de objetivos puramente monetĂĄrios ou financeiros. Acredita-se que o novo arcabouço seja particularmente apropriado para a correta interpretação da emergĂȘncia e do papel de formas organizacionais e de propriedade nĂŁo tradicionais, as quais nĂŁo sĂŁo movidas pela busca de lucros (organizaçÔes sem fins lucrativos), sendo reconhecidas principalmente nos formatos legais das cooperativas, OrganizaçÔes NĂŁo Governamentais (ONGs) e empresas sociais. Uma gama contĂ­nua de formas organizacionais, que vĂŁo desde atividades geradoras de lucro atĂ© atividades voltadas ao bem pĂșblico, e que englobam organizaçÔes de benefĂ­cio mĂștuo como seu principal constituinte, sĂŁo aqui consideradas e discutidas

    ComunitĂ  cooperative. Terzo rapporto sulla cooperazione sociale in Italia

    Get PDF
    Il terzo rapporto sulla cooperazione sociale fornisce vari elementi conoscitivi che consentono di definire meglio i modelli interpretativi a spiegazione del successo e della grande crescita della cooperazione sociale. Il focus del presente rapporto ù pertanto rivolto sia a spiegare lo sviluppo della cooperazione sociale che il differenziarsi dei modelli organizzativi presenti al suo interno.- Indice #4- Prefazione #10- Cap.I I contenuti del terzo rapporto sulla cooperazione sociale, Carlo Borzaga e Flaviano Zandonai #18- Cap.II I dati ministeriali: una fotografia della cooperazione sociale, Gianfranco Marocchi #46- Cap.III Le cooperative sociali nel nonprofit italiano: convergenze e divergenze strutturali, Nereo Zamaro #74- Cap.IV L’inserimento lavorativo nelle cooperative sociali, Gianfranco Marocchi #98- Cap.V La cooperazione sociale a livello locale: il caso della Lombardia, Alessandro Ronchi #120- Cap.VI Peculiarità e modelli delle cooperative sociali, Carlo Borzaga e Sara Depedri #144- Cap.VII Le reti tra cooperative sociali: il fenomeno consortile, Emmanuele Pavolini #188- Cap.VIII Alcune riflessioni sulla natura imprenditoriale della cooperazione sociale, Michele Andreaus #222- Appendice #258- Dentro le regioni #260- Bibliografia #33

    DiversitĂ©s des organisations dans les Ă©conomies de marchĂ©, rĂŽle des coopĂ©ratives et des entreprises sociales : Plaidoyer en faveur d’un pluralisme Ă©conomique

    No full text
    Les approches Ă©conomiques dominantes ont jusqu’à prĂ©sent minimisĂ© et marginalisĂ© le rĂŽle que jouent les entreprises coopĂ©ratives et sociales dans les Ă©conomies de marchĂ© contemporaines. Ce manque d’attention est certainement dĂ» au fait qu’il est difficile d’appliquer aux coopĂ©ratives et aux entreprises sociales deux des prĂ©supposĂ©s fondateurs des thĂ©ories orthodoxes sur la micro-Ă©conomie (la participation exclusive d’individus ayant Ă  coeur leur intĂ©rĂȘt propre, d’une part, et la maximisation des profits, d’autre part) comme uniques objectifs de l’entreprise. L’inadĂ©quation entre la thĂ©orie et la rĂ©alitĂ© a menĂ© Ă  une sous-estimation du potentiel de croissance, du poids et du rĂŽle des coopĂ©ratives et des entreprises sociales. Les thĂ©ories institutionnalistes ne sont pas parvenues non plus Ă  expliquer la persistance et la croissance de ce type d’entreprise. Ainsi, nous proposons d’élargir les hypothĂšses des modĂšles Ă©conomiques dominants et de considĂ©rer les entreprises comme des mĂ©canismes de coordination des activitĂ©s Ă©conomiques, dont les parties prenantes sont motivĂ©es par des finalitĂ©s diverses et affichent des prĂ©fĂ©rences complexes. Pour gĂ©rer cette complexitĂ© des motivations et des comportements, les coopĂ©ratives et les entreprises sociales dĂ©veloppent des modes d’organisation spĂ©cifiques. Il est courant que les objectifs qu’elles poursuivent soient ambigus : elles peuvent envisager la propriĂ©tĂ© privĂ©e tout en ayant des objectifs de bĂ©nĂ©fices mutuels et de bien commun soutenus par des prĂ©fĂ©rences altruistes.To date, the dominant economic approaches have downplayed and marginalized the role of cooperative and social enterprises in contemporary market economies. This insufficient attention derives from the limited applicability to the case of cooperative and social enterprises of two of the main assumptions of orthodox microeconomic theory: the presence of self-interested individuals and profit-maximization as the only possible firm objective. The mismatch between theoretical assumptions and empirical evidence has led to underestimating the growth potential, weight and role of cooperative and social enterprises. An explanation for the persistence and growth of these organizational types has not been provided by institutionalism either. We thus maintain that the assumptions of the main theoretical models must be broadened to consider firms as coordination mechanisms of economic activities, whose stakeholders are driven by a plurality of motivations and display complex preferences. In order to manage motivational and behavioral complexity, cooperative and social enterprises develop specific organizational routines. They commonly pursue ambiguous objectives. They can envisage private appropriation while having mutual benefit goals and public benefit aims supported by altruistic preferences
    corecore