2012
DOI: 10.1017/s1833367200000742
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The impact of comparative state-directed development on working conditions and employee satisfaction

Abstract: In this research, I apply and extend Kohli's (2004) state-directed development framework to better understand countrylevel factors influencing cross-national differences in job characteristics and job satisfaction. Prior research has indicated that the nature of work has changed dramatically in recent years in response to economic shifts and an increasingly global economy. However, there is little agreement on whether the overall quality of work has improved or declined over that period and little is known abo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results in models 8 and 12 in Table IV show that whether a country is what Kohli (2004) would classify as a cohesive-capitalist or a fragmented multi-class state does have a significant impact on worker satisfaction, while controlling for all level-1 independent variables. Thus, this HLM result provides evidence supporting H3a and H3b (consistent with regression results for these hypotheses in Westover, 2013b). However, other suggested empirical measures exploring the role of the state as an autonomous actor within a globalized economy (economic freedom index, rigidity of employment index, human development index, and democratization index) do not have statistically insignificant impacts on worker satisfaction, while controlling for all level-1 independent variables.…”
Section: State-directed Developmentsupporting
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The results in models 8 and 12 in Table IV show that whether a country is what Kohli (2004) would classify as a cohesive-capitalist or a fragmented multi-class state does have a significant impact on worker satisfaction, while controlling for all level-1 independent variables. Thus, this HLM result provides evidence supporting H3a and H3b (consistent with regression results for these hypotheses in Westover, 2013b). However, other suggested empirical measures exploring the role of the state as an autonomous actor within a globalized economy (economic freedom index, rigidity of employment index, human development index, and democratization index) do not have statistically insignificant impacts on worker satisfaction, while controlling for all level-1 independent variables.…”
Section: State-directed Developmentsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Thus, based on the different needs fulfillment models of Maslow (1943), Alderfer (1972), and Herzberg et al (1959), workers in cohesive-capitalist and neopatrimonial states with relatively worse working conditions would be more motivated and satisfied by extrinsic workplace factors, while workers in fragmented multi-class states with better working conditions would be better able to move beyond the various extrinsic "existence" needs and move toward the more "self-actualization" and "personal fulfillment" intrinsic needs. Thus, the next two hypotheses, following Kohli's typology, are as follows (see also Westover, 2013b):…”
Section: Job Satisfaction and State-directed Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…National business systems (Haake, 2002) illustrate how country-specific patterns can be created by historical patterns and interdependence between specific characteristics of the country such as the political sector, governmental institutions, labour unions, financial institutions, private business etc. Country-specific patterns are important because the most generalizable models appear to lack applicability across countries (Westover, 2014). Management fashions can have very different consequences in different countries depending on the national business systems (Andersson et al, 2011).…”
Section: Travelling Ideas and Ghost Myths In National Business Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…National business systems (Haake, 2002) illustrate how country-specific patterns can be created by historical patterns and interdependence between specific characteristics of the country such as the political sector, governmental institutions, labour unions, financial institutions, private business etc. Country-specific patterns are important because the most generalizable models appear to lack applicability across countries (Westover, 2014). Management fashions can have very different consequences in different countries depending on the national business systems (Andersson et al, 2011).…”
Section: Travelling Ideas and Ghost Myths In National Business Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%