Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Content Type
      Content Type
      Clear All
      Content Type
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
829 result(s) for "personalism"
Sort by:
The sources of dynamism in dynamic capabilities
Research Summary: We develop a multi-level theory of dynamic capabilities (DCs) that explains resource dynamics by giving a central role to persons and interpersonal interactions rather than to abstract, firm-level entities. Our theory integrates the contrasting approaches to DCs in individual-, interpersonal-, and organization-level scholarship. Existing organization-level approaches portray DCs as collective endeavors but do not specify how they emerge and operate within organizations, while microfoundational approaches illuminate actors' contributions but reduce a firm's DCs to the cognitions and actions of a few top managers. Our integrated theory instead explains DCs as effortful social accomplishments emerging from individual employees' capacity to leverage interpersonal relationships conducive to productive dialogue. The framework we propose offers new ground for understanding how DCs can be sources of sustainable competitive advantage. Managerial Summary: How can firms navigate the transformations that relentlessly raise new threats and opportunities in dynamic environments? We suggest that firms develop dynamic capabilities to navigate change when their employees are connected through high-quality relationships, empowering their innovative potential. Strategic adaptation is possible when people are given the opportunity to act, think, and feel creatively while performing tasks, thus envisioning opportunities to improve how the firm operates. This ability supports sustainable, firm-level innovation when employees are connected through interpersonal relationships founded on constructive dialogue. Dialogue allows participants to advance and accept proposals for change even in the presence of conflicting interests and viewpoints. Managers may therefore enhance their firm's capacity for change by fostering individual integration and developing contexts that facilitate dialogue and constructive opposition.
Autocratic Breakdown and Regime Transitions: A New Data Set
When the leader of an autocratic regime loses power, one of three things happens. The incumbent leadership group is replaced by democratically elected leaders. Someone from the incumbent leadership group replaces him, and the regime persists. Or the incumbent leadership group loses control to a different group that replaces it with a new autocracy. Much scholarship exists on the first kind of transition, but little on transitions from one autocracy to another, though they make up about half of all regime changes. We introduce a new data set that facilitates the investigation of all three kinds of transition. It provides transition information for the 280 autocratic regimes in existence from 1946 to 2010. The data identify how regimes exit power, how much violence occurs during transitions, and whether the regimes that precede and succeed them are autocratic. We explain the data set and show how it differs from currently available data. The new data identify autocratic regime breakdowns regardless of whether the country democratizes, which makes possible the investigation of why the ouster of dictators sometimes leads to democracy but often does not, and many other questions. We present a number of examples to highlight how the new data can be used to explore questions about why dictators start wars and why autocratic breakdown sometimes results in the establishment of a new autocratic regime rather than democratization. We discuss the implications of these findings for the Arab Spring.
The psychology of personhood : philosophical, historical, social-developmental and narrative perspectives
\"What is a person? Surprisingly little attention is given to this question in psychology. For much of the past century, psychology has tended to focus on the systematic study of processes rather than on the persons who enact and embody them. In contrast to the reductionist picture of much mainstream theorizing, which construes persons as their mental lives, behaviours or neurophysiological particulars, The Psychology of Personhood presents persons as irreducibly embodied and socially situated beings. Placing the study of persons at the centre of psychology, this book presents novel insights on the typical, everyday actions and experiences of persons in relation to each other and to the broader society and culture. Leading scholars from diverse academic disciplines paint an integrative portrait of the psychological person within evolutionary, historical, cultural, developmental and everyday contexts\"-- Provided by publisher.
A Personalist Approach to the Just Allocation of Resources in the Midst of a Pandemic
This paper examines the ethical implications of healthcare resource allocation during the first wave of COVID-19 in Italy, from 21 February to 31 May 2020, with a focus on the utilitarian principles that prioritized age-based resource allocation. By comparing this approach to an ontological personalist bioethics framework, the study aims to offer a more equitable strategy for healthcare allocation applicable to any pandemic. Data from governmental reports, healthcare policies, and ethical guidelines were analyzed, revealing that Italy’s utilitarian method led to significant ethical concerns, particularly regarding age discrimination. In contrast, the ontological personalist approach emphasizes the dignity and intrinsic worth of each individual, irrespective of age or health condition. The findings demonstrate that this personalist framework fosters a more balanced and fair allocation of resources, respecting human dignity and offering a universally applicable alternative to age-based prioritization. Ultimately, the study suggests that integrating ontological personalist principles into healthcare policies could enhance ethical decision-making in future pandemics, ensuring that resource allocation practices align more closely with human rights and individual dignity.
Against individualism
This book is both a critique of the concept of the rights-holding, free, autonomous individual and attendant ideology dominant in the contemporary West, and an account of an alternative view, that of the role-bearing, interrelated responsible person of classical Confucianism, suitably modified for addressing the manifold problems of today.
Do Authoritarian Institutions Constrain? How Legislatures Affect Economic Growth and Investment
This article explores why authoritarian regimes create legislatures and then assesses their effect on economic growth and investment. In authoritarian regimes more dependent on domestic investment than natural resource revenue, the dictator creates a binding legislature as a credible constraint on the regime's confiscatory behavior. In regimes dependent on natural resource revenue, the nonbinding legislature serves as a mechanism for the dictator to bribe and split the opposition when he faces credible challenges to the regime. Using data from 121 authoritarian regimes from 1950 to 2002, the results indicate that binding legislatures have a positive impact on economic growth and domestic investment, while nonbinding legislatures have a negative impact on economic growth.
Personalization of Power and Mass Uprisings in Dictatorships
Most major nonviolent civil resistance campaigns target autocratic regimes. Yet, most dictators are toppled by their close supporters, not civilian protesters. Building on theories of strategic interactions between leaders, security agents, and protesters, we make three core claims: first, protesters are relatively less likely to mount a major nonviolent uprising against dictatorships with personalized security forces; secondly, personalized security forces are more likely to repress realized protest; and, thirdly, security force personalization shapes the prospects for success of mass uprisings in promoting democratic transitions. We leverage new data on security force personalization—a proxy for loyal security agents—and major nonviolent protest campaigns to test these expectations. Our theory explains why many dictatorships rarely face mass protest mobilization and why uprisings that are met with violent force often fail in bringing about new democracies.
Strongmen and Straw Men: Authoritarian Regimes and the Initiation of International Conflict
How do domestic institutions affect autocratic leaders’ decisions to initiate military conflicts? Contrary to the conventional wisdom, I argue that institutions in some kinds of dictatorships allow regime insiders to hold leaders accountable for their foreign policy decisions. However, the preferences and perceptions of these autocratic domestic audiences vary, with domestic audiences in civilian regimes being more skeptical of using military force than the military officers who form the core constituency in military juntas. In personalist regimes in which there is no effective domestic audience, no predictable mechanism exists for restraining or removing overly belligerent leaders, and leaders tend to be selected for personal characteristics that make them more likely to use military force. I combine these arguments to generate a series of hypotheses about the conflict behavior of autocracies and test the hypotheses using new measures of authoritarian regime type. The findings indicate that, despite the conventional focus on differences between democracies and nondemocracies, substantial variation in conflict initiation occurs among authoritarian regimes. Moreover, civilian regimes with powerful elite audiences are no more belligerent overall than democracies. The result is a deeper understanding of the conflict behavior of autocracies, with important implications for scholars as well as policy makers.