Monday, April 3, 2017

Michelle Rogan, INSEAD/UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School

Up To No Good? Gender Differences In Promotions Following Participation In a Corporate Social Initiative

Time and Location: Time and Location: Time and Location: 3:00-4:30 PM, CERAS Building, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford CA 94305 (Room 123)

co-authors: Christiane Bode and Jasjit Singh

The direct participation of employees in corporate social impact initiatives has been increasing as business firms seek different means to engage with society. To date, employee participation in social impact work has been assumed to benefit individual employees through skills development and career advancement within the firm. In contrast to this positive view, we propose that participation could also have negative effects to the extent that social impact work is considered a form of non-standard work. We anticipate that employees' participation in social impact work leads decision makers to question the employees' commitment to their careers, reducing their likelihood of promotion. Furthermore, because the female gender role stereotype is more congruent with social impact work, we expect that the promotion penalty will be greater for men than for women. A discrete hazard model of promotions of employees in a management consulting firm provides support for our arguments. Our findings suggest that whereas women are afforded greater latitude, men appear to face greater labor market constraints for engaging in social impact work than women. Thus, stereotypes regarding appropriate gender behaviors may limit men's abilities to contribute towards the social impact agendas of their firms.


Monday, April 10, 2017

Sergiy Prostiv, SCANCOR Postdoctoral Scholar

Spatial Misallocation

Time and Location: Time and Location: Time and Location: 3:00-4:30 PM, CERAS Building, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford CA 94305 (Room 123)

National governments are shaping the spatial distribution of economic activity via place-based policies. The rationale behind these interventions is commonly grounded either in agglomeration externalities or in achieving cross-regional equity. However, the overall welfare effects of such policies remain ambiguous since neither of the above arguments specifies which regions should be targeted for positive effects to materialize. The grounds for policy action depend on both the overall degree of spatial misallocation in the economy and the sensitivity of each location to interventions. I use a detailed firm-level dynamic model to structure the underlying spatial processes, specify the frictions leading to misallocation, and conduct counterfactual exercises. Using microdata on the universe of plants in Sweden in 2001-2015 I find substantial negative welfare effects of spatial misallocation. Keeping the focus on the outcomes for people, not places, I then look in detail at the potential of spatial industrial policies to be welfare-enhancing.

Monday, April 17, 2017

Guido Buenstorf, University of Kassel

Drivers of Spin-off Performance in Industry Clusters: Embodied Knowledge or Embedded Firms?

Time and Location: Time and Location: Time and Location: 3:00-4:30 PM, CERAS Building, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford CA 94305 (Room 123)

co-author: Carla Costa, Utrecht University

Numerous studies attest to the distinctive performance of intra-industry spin-offs located in agglomerated regions. Both superior hires and regional embeddedness have been suggested as factors contributing to this pattern. We employ linked employer-employee data to assess their relevance in the empirical context of the Portuguese plastic molds industry. We find that the longevity of entrants is associated with the number and quality of early employees hired from within the industry, consistent with the importance of embodied knowledge flows. Our findings do not suggest that entrants’ embeddedness in the regional industry network is associated with their longevity.   

Monday, April 24, 2017

Petri Mäntysaari, Hanken School of Economics

User-friendly Legal Science: A New Scientific Discipline

Time and Location: Time and Location: Time and Location: 3:00-4:30 PM, CERAS Building, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford CA 94305 (Room 123)

It is difficult for normal legal science to prevail in the competition for scientific hegemony. Moreover, normal legal science is less practice ready than it could be. User-friendly Legal Science is a legal discipline designed to help. Its unique point of view is how users can use legal tools and practices to reach their objectives in different contexts. While normal legal science focuses on legal norms, User-friendly Legal Science primarily studies behaviour. This can help to bring legal research closer to organizational research.

Monday, May 1, 2017

Adina Sterling, Stanford Graduate School of Business

Opened Up? The Effects of Tryouts on the Hiring of Gender and Racial Minorities

Time and Location: Time and Location: Time and Location: 3:00-4:30 PM, CERAS Building, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford CA 94305 (Room 123)

For college-educated workers one of the most prevalent but understudied methods of matching individuals to organizations is a tryout, yet few investigations of tryouts and their effects on labor market matching have taken place. This article uses a highly detailed data set on over 100,000 applicants to examine how hiring practices impact the entry of professional workers into organizations and why and under what conditions tryouts may have diversifying effects with respect to gender and race. Evidence suggests tryouts relative to traditional methods of hiring have diversifying effects due to mechanisms operating on both the supply and demand-side. Evidence indicates women and racial minorities are more likely to apply for a tryout than a full-time job. On the demand-side, it is theorized that two mechanisms – preemption and passivity – may lead to a greater increase of women and minorities into organizations through tryouts, and evidence suggests the latter mechanism is the most probable. Taken together, these findings shed new light on the complex ways organizations and job-seekers are matched and contributes to our understanding of labor markets, organizations, and inequality. 

Monday, May 8, 2017

Allison Pugh, Fellow at Stanford CASBS/University of Virginia

Systematizing Human Connection: Contemporary Relationship Work

Time and Location: Time and Location: Time and Location: 3:00-4:30 PM, CERAS Building, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford CA 94305 (Room 123)

How do people manage the inherent tensions between “relational labor” – a novel concept capturing what is unique about the broad category of service work relying on emotional connections, such as therapy, teaching or nursing – and pervasive trends in many organizations to systematize, standardize and scale up that work?   On the one hand, there is the drive to identify and elicit best practices, serve more people well, and demystify relational labor as the task not simply of charismatic practitioners.  On the other hand, what scholars term the “rationalization” of work – involving processes of standardization, measurement, efficiency and control – seeks to make more predictable the idiosyncrasies of human bonds, emotion and interaction.  Rationalizing forces such as high-stakes testing in education or evidence-based medicine have largely focused on instrumental tasks and outcomes, ignoring, downplaying, or discouraging relational labor. In other words, big data is not really measuring relational labor.  Yet some futurists insist that in the AI-driven wholesale restructuring of work, humans will do precisely that which requires this unique blend of emotion and analysis.  In this talk, I will outline the contours of relational labor, and consider the impact of its rationalization, now and in the future.

Monday, May 15, 2017

Francisco Ramirez, Stanford Graduate School of Education

The Socially Embedded American University, Intensification and Globalization

Time and Location: Time and Location: Time and Location: Time and Location: 3:00-4:30 PM, CERAS Building, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford CA 94305 (Room 123)

The preeminence of American universities in multiple international rankings has led to their deployment as benchmarks in global educational discourse.  An idealized model of the socially embedded American university is dramatized by “world class” metaphors and disseminated by consultants without borders.  The latter identify “best practices” in the pursuit of excellence and portray these practices as portable.  The message is that universities can learn to be excellent by adhering to these best practices, and further, that the boundaries between university and society should be more permeable, leading to greater flexibility with respect to funding, curriculum, governance, and other organizational dimensions. 

Monday, May 22, 2017

John Skrentny, University of California, San Diego

Is there a STEM worker crisis? Science and Engineering Workforce Development in the U.S.

Time and Location: Time and Location: Time and Location: 3:00-4:30 PM, CERAS Building, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford CA 94305 (Room 123)

There is widespread and bipartisan agreement that “STEM” (science, technology, engineering and math) workers are critical for innovation to drive economic growth. There is considerable conflict, however, regarding the question of whether or not there is a shortage bordering on crisis in the U.S., or whether there is in fact a surplus of STEM workers. This presentation will explore the debate, shedding light on the history of the American goal of increasing the number of STEM workers, how that goal has changed over time, and why there might be—or might not be—a current crisis in the number of STEM workers. In doing so, the presentation will explore some potential factors shaping STEM workforce development. 

Monday, June 5, 2017

Adrienne Sörbom, Stockholm University, Stockholm Centre for Organizational Research (SCORE)

His Master’s Voice? Conceptualizing the relationship between business and the World Economic Forum

Time and Location: Time and Location: Time and Location: 3:00-4:30 PM, CERAS Building, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford CA 94305 (Room 123)

Co-author: Christina Garsten, Stockholm University, SCORE

Commonly, the relationship between corporations and non-for profit organizations, such as foundations, think tanks and private research institutes, is analyzed in terms suggesting that when acting as funders corporations set the frames for the non-for profit organization who, in turn, not only mimics but also serves as to broadcast the views of its funder. The intention of this paper is to develop the understanding of the relationship between corporations as funders and think tanks as receivers, by submitting that both parties will strive to establish and maintain its own agency, and, in so doing they, may have both overlapping and divergent interests. Drawing on the case of the Swizz based foundation/think tank World Economic Forum and its corporate funders we describe the mutuality of the funder-receiver-relationship. Evoking the Lévi-Strauss concept of the bricoleur, we analyze how the various and multifaceted priorities of corporations will not only be filtered by the Form, but the Forum will also make use of the resources at hand for organizing forth its own policy messages. The result is a complex and dynamic web of actors and voices.