scholarly journals Conflict Transformation through Prior Consultation? Lessons from Peru

2015 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 811-839 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALMUT SCHILLING-VACAFLOR ◽  
RICCARDA FLEMMER
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Conflict Transformation ◽  
Participatory Governance ◽  
Joint Decision ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
Power Asymmetries ◽  
Decision Making Processes

AbstractThis article analyses the background to and the content of the Peruvian prior consultation law – the only one enacted in Latin America to date – and its regulating decree. In contrast to the widespread conception that prior consultation is a means for preventing and resolving conflict, it argues that this new legislation will not help to transform conflicts as long as the normative framework itself is contested and the preconditions for participatory governance are not in place. Establishing these preconditions would result in state institutions capable of justly balancing the diverse interests at stake; measures that reduce power asymmetries within consultations; and joint decision-making processes with binding agreements.

Thinking styles, gender, and decision making in Latin American management

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camelia Ilie ◽  
Guillermo Cardoza
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Gender Diversity ◽  
Thinking Styles ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Purpose Many studies have analyzed how gender diversity and local culture condition the cognitive styles of managers and affect decision-making processes in organizations. Gender diversity has been defended from an equality perspective; it has been argued to improve decision-making processes and to have a positive impact on companies’ return on investment. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the differences between the thinking styles of men and women, in Latin America and the USA that support decision-making processes. An argument is given in favor of gender diversity in management teams, because of its positive implications in decision making. Design/methodology/approach The measurement instrument used was the Neethling Brain Instrument, developed based on recent neuroscience discovery. The sample comprised 1,216 executives from the USA and several countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, who have participated in executive training programs. Findings The results show differences in thinking styles by gender, but no differences were found in thinking styles or decision making between men and women at the same managerial level in either of the two regions. Similarly, results suggest that executives in the USA tend to base their management models on strategic thinking styles that focus on interpersonal relations and involve risk taking, while executives in Latin American countries tend to prefer thinking and management styles focusing on data analysis, execution, planning, and process control. Originality/value The results of the present study show that, in all regions, men score higher in rational thinking styles associated with the cortical areas, while women gravitate toward thinking styles where emotional schemes prevail, related to subcortical areas. These results could be useful for organizational leaders in charge of allocating roles and tasks to people, based on their thinking style strengths. The results can also be very valuable for Latin American organizations to design specific training and development programs for men and women accordingly with their individual needs and their managerial roles. They can also support the argument that diverse gender teams will guarantee complete decision-making processes.

scholarly journals Unravelling the participation of stakeholders in the governance models of social enterprises in Greece

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 661-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aikaterini Argyrou ◽  
Robert J. Blomme ◽  
Tineke Lambooy ◽  
Henk Kievit
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Governance Structure ◽  
Social Enterprises ◽  
Participatory Governance ◽  
Legal Form ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Social ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Legal Forms

Purpose This paper aims to examine the concept of participatory governance through membership in the context of the tailor-made legal form for social enterprises in Greece, i.e. the social cooperative enterprise (Koinsep). As such, the paper aims to contribute to the theoretical discussion regarding the participation of stakeholders in the governance of social enterprises not only as a theoretical construct prescribed by law but also by examining its implementation in practice. Design/methodology/approach The development of two in-depth case studies demonstrate whether and how the application and implementation of legal requirements regarding governance and membership permit and encourage stakeholders to participate in the decision-making processes of social enterprises. The study accordingly showcases the influence exerted by the legal regime over the social enterprise. Findings The case studies demonstrate how participatory governance is not realised in a formal manner in the organisational set-up of two social enterprises. It thereby shows how stakeholders and employees participate informally in the decision-making processes of Greek social enterprises, although legislation is conducive to formal means of participation. Research limitations/implications This study is part of a larger project involving a comparative research of tailor-made legal forms of social enterprises and corresponding organisations in three jurisdictions, i.e. Greece, Belgium, and the UK. In this study, the research was limited to the legal form of Koinsep. Practical implications This paper also contributes to the development of a better understanding of the Koinsep as a new tailor-made legal form for social enterprises in Greece. It therefore, sheds light in its function and its participatory governance structure. Originality/value The study is an original attempt to theoretically and practically examine the subject of participatory governance in the Greek social enterprises context.

Couple Decision Making

1989 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
DEBORAH D. GODWIN ◽  
JOHN SCANZONI
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Joint Decision ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Decision Dynamics

This study addresses the question of potential differences in the processes and outcomes of joint decision making in terms of the particular issue being negotiated by spouses, and the partner's behavior or assessment being examined. The proposition is tested and verified that decision-making processes vary by both spouse and the issue being discussed. Husbands' and wives' assessments of the outcomes of decision making do not differ within couples, but their assessments do vary across issues. A further proposition-that the importance of getting one's own way regarding the particular issue influences decision dynamics and outcomes-receives much less support. Future research should take into account emerging contemporary issues and avoid treating couple decision-making processes and outcomes as unidimensional. Further work on the reasons for observed differences across issues in couple decision making is needed.

Fritz W. Scharpf, “The Joint-Decision Trap: Lessons from German Federalism and European Integration”

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrienne Héritier
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Joint Decision ◽  
Liberal Intergovernmentalism ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Definition Of

This chapter examines the joint decision trap (JDT), a decision-making mechanism developed in 1988 by Fritz Scharpf to show the link between higher level government’s decisions and the unanimous or consensus agreement of lower level governments. JDT explains how the interlinking of decision-making processes translates to suboptimal policy outcomes because higher level decisions can be blocked by each lower level actor. The chapter discusses how the concept and theory of JDT offer important insights into the dynamic of European decision-making, but by no means all of its aspects. It considers the definition of JDT and its important contribution to theoretical and empirical and research on European decision-making. It then evaluates some of the arguments against JDT and the limits of its explanatory power, as well as Scharpf’s alternative to the theoretical debate between (liberal) intergovernmentalism and neofunctionalism. The chapter concludes by assessing the continuing heuristic value of JDT.

Does participatory decision‐making in top management teams enhance decision effectiveness and firm performance?

2009 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 696-714 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abraham Carmeli ◽  
Zachary Sheaffer ◽  
Meyrav Yitzack Halevi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Firm Performance ◽  
Top Management Teams ◽  
Management Teams ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Top Management ◽  
Joint Decision ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Participatory Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Processes

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine how participatory decision‐making processes in top management teams (TMT) influence strategic decision effectiveness and firm performance.Design/methodology/approachData from 94 TMTs are collected from structured surveys. Each firm's CEO provides data on strategic decision effectiveness, and a senior executive member of the TMT provided data on participatory decision‐making processes and firm performance.FindingsResults show that participatory decision‐making processes in the TMT are positively associated with decision effectiveness, but there is both a direct and an indirect relationship (through decision effectiveness) between participatory decision‐making processes and firm performance.Originality/valueThis paper sheds light on the importance of joint decision‐making processes among TMT members for improving choices and enhances firm performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document