Liberal versus Coordinated Market Economies: Exploring HRM Practices Over Time

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 (1) ◽  
pp. 10475
Author(s):  
Paul Ligthart ◽  
Elaine Farndale
2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 967-981 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bob Jessop

Although both promote a free market and strong state, ordoliberalism is usefully contrasted with neoliberalization. Ordoliberals aim to achieve this goal by creating a juridico-political institutional fix that provides a stable framework for accumulation. Promoters of neoliberal regime shifts pursue it through strategies of destabilization that exploit resulting crises. Ordoliberalism governs through order, neoliberalization through disorder. Further, ordoliberalism corresponds more to an accumulation regime and mode of régulation-cum-governance based on a productivist concept of capital, reflecting the dominance of profit-producing capital in coordinated market economies. But it also has limited conditions of possibility and is relatively rare. In contrast, neoliberalization corresponds more to what Weber described as politically oriented capitalism, especially a finance-dominated accumulation regime, which is aligned with interest-bearing capital. It occurs in many more varieties of capitalism.


2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 205316801561487 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Ezrow ◽  
Timothy Hellwig

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 56-69
Author(s):  
Nicholas Toloudis

AbstractThis paper tests the Varieties of Capitalism (VoC) framework to explain variation in fiscal stimulus measures across OECD countries in response to the 2008-2010 economic crisis. Following Soskice (2007), I argue that coordinated market economies are less flexible with fiscal policy than liberal market economies. Multivariate analysis across 23 OECD countries demonstrates that VoC is more powerful than three competing theories: fiscal institutions, which hypothesizes more stimulus in countries with less restrictive budgetary rules; debt credibility, which hypothesizes more stimulus in less indebted countries; and political partisanship, which hypothesizes more stimulus in countries governed by the left.


2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (7) ◽  
pp. 4-6

Purpose The researchers wanted to find out a number of things. First, they wanted to assess the influence of strong unions on approaches to HRM. Second, they wanted to know if the strategic HR function had a positive effect on both person-centered and performance-centered HRM. Third, they tested the theory that the economic context had a significant influence on HRM practices. Companies in liberal market economies (LMEs), for example, were expected to adopt more performance-centered HRM, but for companies in coordinated market economies the reverse was likely to be true (CMEs). Design/methodology/approach Cristiani et al collected their data from the Cranet 2009 survey, the world’s largest comparative analysis of HRM practices. They sent out a questionnaire to senior managers responsible for HRM at private multinational companies. The authors sampled 3,406 firms across 14 countries. They placed six OECD nations in the LME group (Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK, and the USA) and ten in the CME group (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Japan, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the Netherlands). Findings The data revealed that the strategic HR function had a positive effect on the adoption of both person-centered and performance-centered HRM. The study also demonstrated that a more powerful union presence encouraged the use of person-centered approaches, whereas it discouraged performance-centered ones. The data suggested that the variety of capitalism (VoC) moderated the relationships between the strategic HR function role and performance-centered HMR, but the same impact on person-centered approaches was not found. Originality/value Proof of the moderating effect of the VoC shows that HR professionals – especially at multinationals - need to align their practices with the larger context in which their company is operating. The most valuable finding for businesses was the impact of a strong union presence on which HRM practices were likely to be accepted, or rejected.


2011 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 415-434
Author(s):  
Jukka Snell

AbstractThis chapter considers European economic integration from the perspective of varieties of capitalism. It notes the main threats that integration potentially entails both for liberal and coordinated market economies, and assesses the likelihood of damage to the different models, in particular following the Lisbon Treaty. It is argued descriptively that both types of capitalism can continue to coexist in the European Union, and normatively that it is vital that the integration project is managed in a way that does not fundamentally endanger them.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document