To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The public debate is rife with polarized views of how to deliver essential services such as education, health, and security. While some tout privatization as a way to supplant bad governments, others warn that private firms maximize profits at the expense of socially oriented service attributes. In reality, all forms of service delivery—public, private and hybrid public private-collaborations—have merits and flaws. This book scrutinizes the menu of delivery forms in public services and the conditions that should make them work. It argues that privatization benefits from capable government units committing to well-defined policy objectives, mobilizing critical resources, and incentivizing effective and inclusive delivery. Societies counting on capable governments can also reject single solutions and experiment with plural paths of improvement, where public and private organizations co-exist and learn from each other. This book will appeal to students, academics, managers and policy makers interested in examining the public-private boundary and the many ramifications of this focal issue.
Optimal distinctiveness – being both 'similar to' and 'different from' peers – is an important imperative of organizational life and represents a common research question of organizational scholars across various disciplinary domains such as strategy, organization theory, entrepreneurship, and international business. This Element reviews the historical grounding and recent development of optimal distinctiveness scholarship, based on which an orienting framework is proposed to stress the highly contextualized and dynamic nature of optimal distinctiveness. The orienting framework provides several powerful and unique angles for understanding organizations' competitive positioning in various types of markets, for applying optimal distinctiveness research to different levels of analysis, and for nurturing a more cross-disciplinary and mutually generative conversation on optimal distinctiveness theory.
Organizations characterized by a climate and culture of competition and overwork facilitate the emergence of the workaholism phenomenon, as they provide favorable conditions for employees to spend more time in the workplace. Many of these employees are successful in their careers both in financial terms and in job satisfaction. This article aims to study the influence of workaholism on the perception of career success. The sample consists of 234 Portuguese individuals who were working in a professional context. The results reveal that pleasure at work influences career success perception in both objective and subjective dimensions and that work involvement influences only the subjective dimension of the career success perception. The findings of this study will contribute to the increase of knowledge in the workaholism and career success areas in light of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic so that companies are able to adopt strategies in order to optimize their resources and increase their productivity.
Strah et al. (2021) claimed “pay inequality between men and women remains a salient societal issue” (p. 1). We agree that it is a societal issue, but we believe this issue has already been solved by existing job evaluation procedures. Job evaluation procedures have shown to be reliable and valid methods for assessing whether an organization can meet equal pay standards. The authors presented no scientific evidence that this was inaccurate. In fact, nearly 50 years ago there was considerable evidence that equal pay standards, both scientific and legal, were met by job evaluation.