Search results

The post‐war period has been characterised by a persistent and substantial expansion in the employment of women. At the same time, women have become increasingly protected in employment by a legislative framework that includes the Equal Pay Act (1970), the Social Security and Pensions Act (1975) and the Sex Discrimination Act (1975). Nevertheless, a number of vestiges of discrimination under the law still remain, such as the special treatment of women with regard to the length and timing of their paid employment. Despite the attempts to remove discrimination by legislation, there remains a considerable groundswell of opinion that there are still substantial differences in the treatment of women vis‐a‐vis men in employment. One continuing concern is the tendency of the organisation of tasks to polarise into men‐only and women‐only jobs. As a result, it has been argued that the situation approximates to a dual labour market, with women being funnelled into the secondary labour market. Complex, interacting forces are at play that make the estimation of statistical models of the existing distribution of employment by sex (from which evidence of sex discrimination might be sought) extremely difficult. A potentially more rewarding approach is to examine those jobs that employers believe to be of the men‐only or women‐only types. Questions of this type were included in a recent survey of employers across all sectors of employment in British industry. While the formulation of such questions and the interpretation of the results are associated with important problems, nevertheless, the survey provides a useful impression of the size and nature of the barriers faced by women in their search for employment opportunities and the manner in which these barriers may be broken down.

While a great deal of information has been accumulated in recent years about the role of women in employment, by the end of the 1970s considerable gaps in our understanding still remained. The Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) were instrumental in isolating and highlighting a large number of quite diverse areas where existing knowledge was deficient. In an attempt to rectify this situation, the EOC/SSRC Joint Panel funded a major new survey of ‘Women and Work’, which was undertaken by IFF Research Ltd. during 1979. Given our research interests, the authors were commissioned to analyse the results of this survey insofar as they relate to work patterns, remuneration, facilities and opportunities, with particular regard to the different experiences of men and women.

The principal aim of this article is to provide some insights into the role of economics in modelling labour demands. The impression that we have built up over time is that, while many of the existing economic theories have a considerable amount to offer in understanding the demand for labour, these theories are still in their infancy. They are generated almost entirely from within the subject rather than in co‐operation with other disciplines, and they are often tested at a macro level using econometric techniques rather than at the micro level using case study material. While much of the statistical testing at an aggregate level has been useful in confirming (and even on occasion refuting) the existing body of theory, many of the more interesting theoretical break‐throughs in economics generally have resulted from detailed knowledge of the researcher about the operation of particular firms.

The length of the working week and the flexibility of working time are two aspects which impact on the international competitiveness of Australian industry. The popular view of the Australian worker is often couched in terms such as “lazy” and “slack”, and the “sickie” appears to have gained a permanent place in Australian vocabulary. Presents evidence, however, which tends to suggest that the lazy “tag” may be somewhat inappropriate. Comparison of the Australian estimates on hours of work with international data obtained from the OECD and the ILO indicates that Australian full‐time workers are working more hours than most other OECD countries. Also, full‐time employees are working considerably longer hours than they did a decade ago. Puts forward four primary reasons for this increase in hours worked by full‐time employees: (1) a substantial increase in the proportion of employees working in excess of 48 hours per week; (2) a decrease in absence rates over the last ten years; (3) a decline in the amount of annual and long service leave taken by full‐time employees; and (4) a significant decrease over the last decade in time lost owing to industrial disputes. Of greater concern is the flexibility of working time. Evidence suggests, for example, that penalty rates of pay and working time restrictions have tended to spread through the award system to an extent that is not healthy for Australian industry. While there has been some relaxation of these rigidities, it is thought that there is considerable scope for further moves in this direction.

In the last four years, since Volume I of this Bibliography first appeared, there has been an explosion of literature in all the main functional areas of business. This wealth of material poses problems for the researcher in management studies — and, of course, for the librarian: uncovering what has been written in any one area is not an easy task. This volume aims to help the librarian and the researcher overcome some of the immediate problems of identification of material. It is an annotated bibliography of management, drawing on the wide variety of literature produced by MCB University Press. Over the last four years, MCB University Press has produced an extensive range of books and serial publications covering most of the established and many of the developing areas of management. This volume, in conjunction with Volume I, provides a guide to all the material published so far.

The librarian and researcher have to be able to uncover specific articles in their areas of interest. This Bibliography is designed to help. Volume IV, like Volume III, contains features to help the reader to retrieve relevant literature from MCB University Press' considerable output. Each entry within has been indexed according to author(s) and the Fifth Edition of the SCIMP/SCAMP Thesaurus. The latter thus provides a full subject index to facilitate rapid retrieval. Each article or book is assigned its own unique number and this is used in both the subject and author index. This Volume indexes 29 journals indicating the depth, coverage and expansion of MCB's portfolio.

The aim of the paper is to provide a framework for benchmarking firm performance (profitability) using panel data. Further, to illustrate how the estimation results can be used for simulation (what if?) exercises.

The authors apply the econometric techniques used in panel data to estimate profit functions, thereby enabling us to compute measures of firm efficiencies which can subsequently be used as benchmarking tools.

The results suggest that both large firms and those highly specialised, enjoy higher profit margins, whereas the more capital intensive a firm is, the lower is its profitability. As with previous studies there is strong evidence of the U‐shaped relationship between market share and profitability. The authors present an analysis of the distribution of firm efficiencies across industries as a whole, and by a number of industry groups.

Only a limited sample (with regard to the time span) of Australian firms is used. A major assumption of the procedure is that firm efficiencies are constant over time. Given the short time period used in the empirical application, this does not appear to be unrealistic.

The paper provides firms with easy‐to‐use tools with which to benchmark their performance relative to other firms, conditional on their base characteristics.

This is the first time that this type of benchmarking exercise has been applied to firm profitability using relatively simple panel data techniques: it will be of use to market analysts, managers and shareholders alike.

A stratified random sample of respondents was identified from databases compiled by associate researchers located in each of five countries, namely Singapore, Malaysia Taiwan, Indonesia and Japan. The aim of the study was to establish which dimensions of management skill are important to regional customers; to compare British management skills on these dimensions with those of major trading nations active in the region and to prioritise key areas for improvement if Britain is to become a valued member of the region. The major conclusion of this study was that British managers were generally perceived, amongst managers in Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Taiwan and Japan, to be inferior to Japanese and US managers and, in most areas, inferior to German managers. British managers were ranked fourth above Australian and Taiwanese managers, who were ranked as the weakest amongst the countries being investigated on a number of skills.

The purpose of this paper is to revisit the debate and reorient research on corporate social responsibility (CSR), empirically documents the political-ideological biases inherent in CSR. It concludes with possible remedies to this problem.

The approach taken in this literature review is informed by the author’s viewpoint on the growing industry of social activists, who are pushing business toward the adoption of an ever-growing panoply of quasi-regulations commonly identified as CSR. The approach is complemented by a critique of stakeholder theory.

The literature review provides empirical support for Milton Friedman’s (1970) claim that the values underpinning CSR are driven by a socialist-collectivist agenda, which is inherently opposed to capitalist/libertarian values of free enterprise and individualism.

Without critical reflection on the leftwing ideology instantiated by CSR, the business community may unwittingly adopt and sustain values that undermine free markets.

Without critical reflection on the leftwing ideology instantiated by CSR, business and research communities may unwittingly promote values that, stealth-like, undermine individual liberty and the capitalist foundations of free markets.

Purpose – This chapter makes sense of the volume and suggests avenues for future research.

Design/methodology/approach – This chapter reflects upon some of the challenges facing biology and politics; it offers two case studies of areas calling for more research and discussion.

Findings – Some evolutionary theorists criticize religion. In the process, they undermine the ability to reach out to religious people about the value of evolutionary theory. Two case studies – group selection and genetic bases of political behavior – are examined to illustrate ongoing issues that call for further attention