Sven-Kristjan Bormann, Svetlana Ridala and Ott-Siim Toomet
The purpose of this paper is to analyse the relationship between skills in the Estonian, Russian and English language, and labour market outcomes in Estonia, a linguistically…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to analyse the relationship between skills in the Estonian, Russian and English language, and labour market outcomes in Estonia, a linguistically divided country.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors use the Estonian Labour Force Surveys 1992–2012. The authors rely on multivariate linear regression models to document the relationship between language skills and labour market outcomes.
Findings
Estonian language knowledge (for ethnic Russians) are important determinants of unemployment. Wage, in contrary, is closely related to English skills. Ethnic Russian men do not earn any premium from speaking Estonian, while women, fluent in Estonian earn approximately 10 per cent more. For ethnic Estonians, Russian fluency is associated with a similar income gain.
Research limitations/implications
Due to the observational nature of the data, the effects reported in this study are not causal effects. As a second limitation, the self-reported language skills data may be imprecise and hence the effects the authors report may be too small.
Practical implications
The results stress the role of workplace segregation, both along gender and ethnic lines, in determining the individual labour market experience.
Originality/value
The authors provide a comprehensive overview of the effects of language skills in a rapidly developing labour market in a linguistically divided economy. The authors analyse several languages with different legal status and document long-term trends in the effects.
Details
Keywords
Sigrit Altmäe, Kulno Türk and Ott‐Siim Toomet
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between Thomas‐Kilmann's Conflict Management Modes (CMM) and Fiedler's Leadership Style (LS) measures, both in the data…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between Thomas‐Kilmann's Conflict Management Modes (CMM) and Fiedler's Leadership Style (LS) measures, both in the data, and from the theoretical perspective. Based on the conceptual similarities, the authors first propose the existence of a relationship between Thomas‐Kilmann's CMM and Fiedler's LS measures, then establish the presence of the relationship, based on a dataset of Estonian managers.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors use a unique dataset of 343 leaders and specialists from different Estonian organizations, on both Thomas‐Kilmann's CMM and Fiedler's Least Preferred Co‐worker test. The data were analyzed by multivariate methods.
Findings
The results indicate that leaders who are task‐oriented, according to Fiedler's model, tend to use more competing as the dominant CMM, while relationship‐oriented leaders are more accommodating. The authors also analyze the effect of individual characteristics, finding that younger managers are more task‐oriented while older ones are typically relationship‐oriented and conflict avoiding; women are more collaborative and less conflict avoiding, and men tend to use the accommodating mode more than women. Surprisingly, women tend to be more competitive.
Originality/value
This is the first study to establish a relationship between Fiedler's Leadership Style and Thomas‐Kilmann's Conflict Mode Instrument. This relationship can potentially be used for assessing the reliability and validity of measurements. The particular shape of it may be used to analyze the links between conflicts, relationships and assertiveness. Additionally, the paper provides an empirical analysis of conflict management habits and leadership styles of Estonian managers.