No abstract

No abstract

We know that there are cross-cultural differences in psychological variables, such as individualism/collectivism. But it has not been clear which of these variables show relatively the greatest differences. The Survey of World Views project operated from the premise that such issues are best addressed in a diverse sampling of countries representing a majority of the world’s population, with a very large range of item-content. Data were collected online from 8,883 individuals (almost entirely college students based on local publicizing efforts) in 33 countries that constitute more than two third of the world’s population, using items drawn from measures of nearly 50 variables. This report focuses on the broadest patterns evident in item data. The largest differences were not in those contents most frequently emphasized in cross-cultural psychology (e.g., values, social axioms, cultural tightness), but instead in contents involving religion, regularity-norm behaviors, family roles and living arrangements, and ethnonationalism. Content not often studied cross-culturally (e.g., materialism, Machiavellianism, isms dimensions, moral foundations) demonstrated moderate-magnitude differences. Further studies are needed to refine such conclusions, but indications are that cross-cultural psychology may benefit from casting a wider net in terms of the psychological variables of focus.

Sustainability is a topic of growing importance today in all aspects of organizational life. Businesses and managers are increasingly considering ways to incorporate a balance among economic, ecological, social, and cultural value creation into their business models. At the same time, the world is becoming exponentially more complex. Indeed, complexity theory and thinking are now apparent in academic and practice accounts of sustainability in business, as scholars and practitioners recognize the limitations of traditional reductionist approaches to systemic problems. To date, however, a more theoretical framing of sustainability lags behind accumulating practical evidence. The purpose of this article is to address this gap by developing a complexity-based framework for understanding and managing sustainability in complex adaptive systems. We aim for simplicity, wholeness, and practicality in our approach, taking a qualitative rather than quantitative perspective on complex systems. Using several contemporary case examples, the article describes the important qualities of complex systems and develops them into a working framework that integrates principles

No abstract