A Model of Elitist Qualification

This paper deals with the collective qualification of members of society as belonging to a certain category or group based on a fixed attribute. Our model contains three main features: the existence of individual gradual opinions, the notion of elitism (only the opinions of certain individuals are taken into account to delineate the reference group), and the idea of sequentiality (elites are successively created by using the previous elites’ opinions on a social decision scheme). The main results of the paper characterize when this sequential procedure converges for some intuitive ways of aggregating individual opinions. Finally, we analyze the role of convergence for two extra basic properties (symmetry and contractiveness) that elitist rules should possess.     

Participating in the Common Good of the Firm

In a previous essay (Sison and Fontrodona 2012), we defined the common good of the firm as collaborative work, insofar as it provides, first, an opportunity to develop knowledge, skills, virtues, and meaning (work as praxis), and second, inasmuch as it produces goods and services to satisfy society’s needs and wants (work as poiesis). We would now like to focus on the participatory aspect of this common good. To do so, we will have to identify the different members of the firm as a community, drawing from corporate citizenship literature and stakeholder theory. Afterward, we will explore both the manner and the intensity of these different members’ participation and its impact on the firm’s common good.     

Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: a review of literature on factors with influence on entrepreneurial intentions

Journal of International Entrepreneurship - The purpose of this paper is to review existing literature and show the state of the art regarding the factors that influence the entrepreneurial...     

Does integrity matter for CSR practice in organizations? The mediating role of transformational leadership

Scholars have long debated whether leader's integrity affects managerial decision making with respect to social responsibility. In this paper, we propose a model in which transformational leadership mediates integrity and corporate social responsibility (CSR) and examine the relationship between these concepts. A survey of 170 senior managers from 50 organizations was conducted. Results indicate that integrity is a predictor of transformational leadership behavior and that transformational leaders’ behaviors are linked to CSR practices. It was also found that leaders rated with higher integrity are engaged in CSR because they exhibit more transformational leadership behaviors. These findings add to the extant literature by demonstrating that integrity is important as transformational leaders engage more actively on ‘responsible’ behaviors. Practical implications call for an understanding among corporate leaders of the benefits of integrity and how it relates to transformational leadership. Organizations can improve their selection and leadership development processes by focusing on these two dimensions.     

Kriging methodology for regional economic analysis: Estimating the housing price in Albacete

Because of the socioeconomic importance of the housing subsector in the local, regional, and national economy and its implications for housing policy, this paper attempts to analyze the spatial behavior of the free housing price in the city of Albacete. To achieve this aim, the authors have used the models and estimators imported from geology called kriging. To do this, it is necessary to know the spatial dependence structure of the process, which is shown in the variogram.     

Performance and Capital Structure of Privatized Firms in Europe

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to analyze whether there are differences in performance between private firms and recently privatized firms in the European Union, as well as to determine whether ownership (state-owned versus private) and regulation affect capital structure. Focusing on economic reasons that justify privatizations, we analyze whether there are differences between recently privatized state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and private firms in their profitability, leverage and efficiency during the period 1999–2002. Also, we analyze the determinants of the capital structure of these firms. Contrary to previous studies, our results show that privatized firms are not less efficient than firms with private ownership.