Search

American meritocratic ideology positions sports as level playing fields in which individuals, regardless of their background, can ascend with the right combination of ability and effort. Yet few studies challenge the sport-meritocracy ideology by empirically examining the socioeconomic backgrounds of college athletes (Allison et al., 2018). Studies of youth sport participation show that community-level income shapes athletic opportunities suggesting class is a strong barrier to physical activity (NWLC, 2015; Sabo & Veliz, 2008; Tompsett & Knoester, 2022). Class inequalities are exacerbated in sports with robust privatized youth systems like baseball (Klein et al., 2020; Post et al., 2022). Utilizing a unique quantitative dataset of NCAA Division I college baseball players (n = 19,987), we consider the extent to which a community's socioeconomic levels and racial demographics shape the chances of someone becoming a college baseball player. We compare college baseball players' hometown income levels and racial demographics to their home state and to U.S. averages. We also consider differences across competitive divisions (i.e., Non-Power 5 vs. Power 5). Findings show that college baseball players--regardless of conference affiliation--commonly come from affluent, nonminority cities, with high education and income levels, indicating that socioeconomic status is a significant predictor of college athletic participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are two ways, broadly speaking, that one might conceive of meritocratic education. On a standard, ‘narrow’ conception, a meritocratic approach to education is one which distributes certain educational goods and opportunities according to merit. On a second, ‘broader’ conception, however, meritocratic education is an educational system suited to a commitment to meritocracy – where ‘meritocracy’ refers to a particular conception of distributive justice. In this article, I argue that these two conceptions are incompatible with each other, and so the standard ‘narrow’ conception of meritocratic education is, in fact, incompatible with a commitment to meritocracy, at least given the typical way of understanding meritocracy. Of particular importance is that while meritocracy, as a view of distributive justice, requires a commitment to equality of opportunity principles, the narrowly meritocratic conception of education does not. The reason has to do with differences in the underlying justifications of the merit-based principles in each: Meritocracy appeals to moral desert, while the educational desert that is grounded by one’s merits is best thought of as a kind of institutional desert. Thus, I will argue, while meritocracy (and so the broad conception of meritocratic education) is constrained by a fair equality of opportunity requirement, narrowly meritocratic education is not. Recognizing the relationships between meritocracy, meritocratic education, and equality of opportunity, I argue, sheds considerable light on disagreements in the debate over equality of opportunity in education.

What concepts do people use to construct narratives about how to get ahead in contemporary society? To what extent do these narratives reflect distinctive constellations of beliefs? What are these constellations and is their usage contingent on social position? With these questions in mind, we used the qualitative data associated with the American Voices Project to systematically explore and map constellations of beliefs. Adopting a natural language analysis, we identify linguistic patterns that signal the relative importance of different get-ahead outlooks as cultural frames. These outlooks include not only traditional meritocratic factors, but also a range of nonmeritocratic influences, including nonrational factors such as luck and religion. Our analysis identifies three distinctive versions of meritocracy--frustrated, complex, and detached--in how people describe their life trajectories. Our findings suggest that the idea of meritocracy hides meaningful variations and nuances in the ways people construct visions of what meritocracy means and how it is constituted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Men are privileged economically, politically, and socially, yet some deny this. Previous research suggests that denial of privilege can help to manage the discomfort associated with a privileged identity, but we propose that it serves primarily to preserve privilege. In two preregistered studies (Ntotal = 911 Australian participants) we show that denial of male privilege is not unique to men and that it is strongly predicted by anti‐egalitarianism, even when controlling for gender and other variables known to predict attitudes toward inequality (facets of right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation). In Study 1, a multiple regression model accounted for 59% of the variability in reported male privilege awareness, with anti‐egalitarianism contributing 47% of the explanatory power. In Study 2, the explanatory power of anti‐egalitarianism was more modest (26%) and similar to that of gender (27%), and both also positively predicted claims of female privilege. This suggests that rather than simply reflecting unawareness of male privilege or being a way to manage a privileged identity, denying the existence of male privilege and claiming that women are privileged helps to preserve gender inequality by presenting it as a just result of meritocracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper underscores the role that structural barriers play in climate change research in Edinburgh, Scotland. By employing an intersectional gender analysis we stress how unequal power relations underly our understanding of climate change, influence the quality and nature of climate research and responses developed. Using semi-structured and unstructured interviews with women and men working in climate change, we identify the shared experiences of individuals who face gendered barriers in climate science and policy, examine their perception of privilege, and their consequent perceived success in climate change research. Our findings stress the relationship between the concept of meritocracy, the underrepresentation of women and marginalized groups in science, and the reproduction of systematic barriers to contribute to the climate debate.We stress the importance of relationships and networks in supporting and encouraging marginalized voices to succeed in participating in climate change research and science more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

FQ columnist Laurie Ouellette examines "Central," the penultimate episode of Lulu Wang's Expats, a television adaptation of Janice Y.K. Lee's bestselling novel The Expatriates, which follows the lives of several privileged American women living in Hong Kong. The feature-length special episode shifts the focus onto two foreign domestic workers who are employed by the show's wealthy female protagonists. In redirecting attention onto these two female migrant workers, "Central" challenges viewers' investments in the protagonists' lives and the genre of women's prestige television that celebrates their class status as being won through "meritocracy and neoliberal self-reliance." Further, Wang uses the "special episode" and the creative liberties that streaming has afforded for such a format not simply for representational purposes but to underline the geopolitical forces and class hierarchies that structure these women's lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article re-studies fifty-seven interviews with working-class voters conducted between 1958 and 1960 for Robert McKenzie and Allan Silver's Angels in Marble: Working Class Conservatives in Urban England (1968). It uses these interview transcripts as a window into aspects of the mid-twentieth-century vernacular, specifically vernacular understandings of the social order. It argues that a powerful meritocratic ideology runs through the interviewees' responses, articulated through the concept of 'brains'. This discourse revered academic and professionalized forms of knowledge, arguing that they should form the currency of social mobility and the criterion of good political leadership. Hierarchies premised on class, race, and gender could be reinforced if they were perceived to reward those with 'brains' and criticized if they did not. However, this vernacular ideology was circumscribed by two other vernacular concepts: 'breeding' and 'knowingness'. 'Breeding' celebrated the knowledge that came from elite experiences associated with family and upbringing. 'Knowingness' celebrated the knowledge that came from the experience of working-class life. These two concepts set a limit on the appeal of a vernacular meritocracy that based itself around 'brains'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines, from an epistemic perspective, the ideal of democratic meritocracy that has been advocated by a group of scholars known as 'Confucian meritocrats' in East Asia for nearly two decades, but which has thus far only been treated by Western political theorists as a kind of wholesale epistocracy designed specifically for a non-Western cultural context. In particular, I focus on two aspects that help to institutionally distinguish democratic meritocracy from the kind of wholesale epistocracy most enthusiastically supported by epistocrats: the meritocratic selection process consisting of a set of non-electoral mechanisms and the combination of meritocratic institutions with democratic ones. I argue that each of them could be understood as having its distinct epistemic value which, taken together, may render some versions of democratic meritocracy epistemically superior to both epistocracy and democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on narrative accounts of French business school staff and faculty about their experiences and observations of actions taken by different organizational actors in response to a trigger event, we theorize the intricate connections between organizational practices conducive to sexism and the persistence of silence around such practices. Specifically, empirical investigation demonstrates how managerial practices such as the allocation of organizational tasks and valorization of individual contributions prompt organizational members to assume a variety of stances toward gender issues. The enactment of these stances in various interactions provokes organizational counteraction in the form of sanctions, the establishment of a hermetic and formulaic communication regime, and public reinforcement of meritocratic narratives. This results in silence around organizational sexism manifesting as a collective and individual inability and unwillingness to react. This study contributes to a broader and rapidly developing literature on sexism in academic settings and the phenomenon of silencing in organizations by shedding light on the mechanisms of its persistence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, the authors consider the intersections of philosophy and education. Extending the concept of a minor pedagogy first presented by Mazzei and Smithers (2020), the authors reorient thinking toward more equitable and just pedagogy as a cultivation of difference. This paper has three major sections. In the first two, the authors review Deleuze and Guattari's (1986, 1987) concept of the minor, and then connect this to the concept of a minor pedagogy. The final section explores the work of a minor pedagogy as continuous variation with the potential to engender difference. Given that racialized neoliberal efficiency and accountability movements have perpetuated injustice across generations, the work of educational practice that contests this must be practice that slips from these major grips to produce new, more just, worlds. Minor pedagogy produces educational justice through everyday shifts in the conditions of our collective possibility, shifts that manifest difference in ways that reject re-form in the pursuit of the not yet. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Soziologie is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

AbstractIn academic contexts, failure, as compared to success, is likely to threaten self-esteem and thus, to increase the risk of psychological disengagement from one’s studies. The goal of the present research is to examine whether belief in school meritocracy (BSM) increases (vs. decreases) the effect of academic performance on self-esteem and psychological disengagement. In two pre-registered studies, university students reported their BSM. Their self-esteem and psychological disengagement were assessed following a manipulated (Study 1, N = 465) or actual (Study 2, N = 375) academic performance. Results indicated that, in both studies, BSM was positively related to performance self-esteem and negatively related to psychological disengagement. However, BSM also increased the effect of performance (manipulated or actual) on psychological disengagement. Indeed, failure led to more disengagement than success, but more so at a high level of BSM than at a lower level of BSM. The double-edge effects of belief in meritocracy are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This commentary documents how federal funding agencies are changing the criteria by which they distribute taxpayer money intended for scientific research. Increasingly, STEMM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine) funding agencies are requiring applicants for funding to include a plan to advance DEI (“Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion”) in their proposals and to dedicate a part of the research budget to its implementation. These mandates undermine the academic freedom of researchers and the unbiased generation of knowledge needed for a well-functioning democracy. Maintaining excellence in science is fundamental to the continuation of the U.S. as a global economic leader. Science provides a basis for solving important global challenges such as security, energy, climate, and health. Diverting funding from science into activities unrelated to the production of knowledge undermines science’s ability to serve humankind. When funding agencies politicize science by using their power to further a particular ideological agenda, they contribute to public mistrust in science. Hijacking science funding to promote DEI is thus a threat to our society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Do home ownership and house prices impact the shaping of individual perceptions on inequality and belief in meritocracy? We argue that home ownership and rising asset prices increase the salience of an individual's own relative economic position, which in turn facilitates belief in meritocracy. We expect that, when house prices increase, homeowners are likely to strengthen their belief in meritocracy and defend their position by rationalizing that income distribution in society is fair and that economic success and failure are primarily determined by individual efforts. Our analysis of both a Korean panel survey and a cross-national survey finds strong and robust evidence of the asset price effect. Our findings suggest that the housing price effect on economic ideology is a general pattern, which implies that there are social and political consequences to the asset price effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Universities are expected to strive for excellence but also for gender balance. Narrow interpretations of excellence in universities hinder women's advancement in academia. In this paper, we ask if there are ways that these policies may be reconciled. Excellence is an "empty signifier" that must be filled with meaning. We have investigated how Heads of Departments enact "excellence" and gender balance in hiring processes in four Norwegian universities. Many HoD argued for broadening excellence criteria and framed excellence as a collective rather than an individual concern. This allows for reconciling top-down institutional demands for excellence and diversity while catering to local needs. Thus, our paper suggests that in a context where increased diversity among faculty is called for, this may open up a space for critical reflection about the criteria for assessing academic quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The influence of the International Baccalaureate (IB) has grown impressively on a global scale. In Latin America, the IB has been mainly introduced in private schools that cater for the most affluent sectors of society and, consequently, has been mostly interpreted as contributing to processes of social reproduction and the widening of inequalities However, since the mid-2000s the IB has been promoted in state schools in countries such as Ecuador, Peru, Costa Rica and in the City of Buenos Aires in Argentina. This paper analyses the enactment of the IBDP in public schools in Costa Rica and Peru drawing on a mixed methods multiple case study. It shows how, in countries with significant socioeconomic disparities, the possibility of offering the IBDP to students at public schools was mostly justified as a matter of equity, understood as opening access to an educational programme that was only available to the most privileged sectors of society. By problematising the notions of privilege and eliteness, we discuss the complex relations between inequalities and educational opportunities and question the extent to which these programmes are affecting social structures in Costa Rica and Peru. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the 40 years since federal employment equity initiatives were launched in Canada, they have faced persistent backlash. This backlash is grounded in and fueled by conceptualizations of justice and equality that are rooted in ideologies of individualism and meritocracy. Here we draw on 140 qualitative interviews with members of six professions from across Canada, who self‐identify as Indigenous, Black or racialized, ethnic minority, disabled, 2SLGBTQ+, and/or from working‐class origins, to explore tensions between concepts of justice grounded in group‐based oppressions and those grounded in individual egalitarianism. Though affirmative action and employment equity opened up opportunities, people were still left to fight for individual rights. This push to individualism was intensified by persistent hostile misperceptions that people are less qualified and in receipt of 'unfair advantages.' Through discursive misdirection, potential for transformative institutional change is undermined by liberal discourses of individualism and meritocracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the face of the current crisis of democracy affecting multiple Western societies, largely stemming from social discontent rooted in the inequality characterizing these so-called neoliberal market and consumer societies, this essay explores the hypothesis that such social resentment and the referenced institutional crisis stem from two mechanisms implemented by the elites. These mechanisms are not only designed to ensure and perpetuate their privileges but, more importantly, to exercise control and discipline over society through: the breaking of communal bonds through extreme individualism and consumerism (1), and the internalization of failure and the justification of inequality through meritocracy (2). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite citizens' precarization and policymakers' enthusiasm for a universal basic income (UBI), this alternative to targeted welfare has, curiously, received limited popular support. We theorize that this is due to people overestimating society's meritocratic nature. Accordingly, we field a randomized survey experiment with a representative sample of the Dutch population (n = 1,630) to investigate the impact of information provision about the non-meritocratic nature of wealth and ethnic inequality on support for a UBI. Informed by extant research indicating that citizens respond differently to the same information because of material circumstances or different worldviews, we further estimate conditional average treatment effects to explore moderation by (1) income, (2) economic egalitarianism, (3) welfare chauvinism and (4) institutional trust. We find that support for a UBI is higher among individuals with lower incomes and those who are more egalitarian and less welfare chauvinistic. Nonetheless, while exposure to our factual treatment makes participants more concerned about inequality and supportive of economic redistribution in general, it neither directly nor conditionally affects their support for a UBI. Our findings suggest that a UBI may be deemed too radical an approach to addressing inequality. We discuss theoretical and policy implications and provide suggestions for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Women have been underrepresented, and even excluded from academic life throughout history. As countries look to address ongoing inequality in academia, state-mandated gender quotas for academic boards and committees have emerged as a recommended practice in Europe. Although an increasing number of countries have adopted this policy model, little is known about its efficacy or consequences. Using country-level panel data from 25 European countries between 2003 and 2018, we explore the consequences of quotas on different measures of gender in/equality in academia. Findings indicate that quotas appear to achieve their intended direct effect of increasing the representation of women on academic boards, and this, in turn contributes to greater equality in academic staff and in senior professorship positions. Despite some concerns, there is little evidence that quotas incite a backlash. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pedagogía y Saberes is the property of Universidad Pedaggica Nacional and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Previous scholarship on bureaucratic promotion acknowledges that both political and meritocratic criteria play important roles in deciding who is promoted among candidates. However, how the preferences of decision makers' superiors may shape promotion decision making receives less attention. To address this gap, we propose a three-tier hierarchical structure where middle-level bureaucrats employ three criteria to determine the promotion of subordinates: appreciation from middle-level bureaucrats' superiors, merits of lower-level candidates, and candidates' social ties to middle-level bureaucrats. Looking at middle-level bureaucrats offers a basis for the cross-layer role of upper-tier superiors in shaping middle-level bureaucrats' decisions for lower-level candidates' promotions. A conjoint survey experiment among a nationwide sample of Chinese bureaucrats reveals that bureaucrats not only prefer candidates with meritocratic attributes and social ties to themselves, but also prefer candidates appreciated by upper-tier superiors. Moreover, although political concerns are important determinants of promotion choices, merit of candidates (especially client evaluation) has the greatest influence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The neoliberal academy promotes a new managerial model based on the centrality of academic performance, conceived within the normative framework of meritocracy as the result of individual effort. The paper aims to investigate how merit and excellence are constructed, intertwined, and interpreted by Italian academics, and to understand the implications of the new logic in terms of (re) production of inequalities at individual and organizational levels. We conducted a content analysis on 176 semi-structured interviews with early and advancedcareer scholars in the STEM and SSH Departments, members of selection boards, Departments' Directors and their deputies in four Italian Universities. Findings show how the rhetoric of measurable excellence represents, for many academics, the way to reward merit and, therefore, the guarantee of impartiality and the necessary step for leaving the old academic logic based on affiliation and loyalty. However, the assumption that the new meritocratic system, opposed to the old cooptative one, is always capable of rewarding scholars for their individual value risks naturalizing and individualizing the opportunities' structure. Moreover, the margins of discretion seem to be still wide and open the door to biased evaluations and decisions guided by other organizational logics, that are obscured by the centrality of meritocratic rhetoric. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Estudios de la Gestión is the property of Universidad Andina Simon Bolivar, Sede Ecuador and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article explores the concept of merit, meritocracy, and equity in relation to the Digital Markets Act (DMA). It discusses how the DMA can be seen as promoting equity and merit over meritocracy. The article also examines the role of competition on the merits in antitrust law and raises concerns about consumers' ability to accurately assess companies in the digital market. It argues that the DMA aims to level the playing field between gatekeepers and their competitors by rebalancing the allocation of resources and ensuring equal opportunities. The article concludes by suggesting that the DMA exemplifies a commitment to fairness and equality. [Extracted from the article]

What concepts do people use to construct narratives about how to get ahead in contemporary society? To what extent do these narratives reflect distinctive constellations of beliefs? What are these constellations and is their usage contingent on social position? With these questions in mind, we used the qualitative data associated with the American Voices Project to systematically explore and map constellations of beliefs. Adopting a natural language analysis, we identify linguistic patterns that signal the relative importance of different get-ahead outlooks as cultural frames. These outlooks include not only traditional meritocratic factors, but also a range of nonmeritocratic influences, including nonrational factors such as luck and religion. Our analysis identifies three distinctive versions of meritocracy—frustrated, complex, and detached—in how people describe their life trajectories. Our findings suggest that the idea of meritocracy hides meaningful variations and nuances in the ways people construct visions of what meritocracy means and how it is constituted.

This study aims to "identify the dimensions and components of the talent management model in the Isfahan Department of Education. Given to exploratory nature of the patterns and existing frameworks in the current study, the methodology of the current study is qualitative and based on an inductive approach. Meanwhile, it is applied based on the objective and interpretive from the study's philosophical viewpoint. Based on this description, to obtain talent management requirements, semi-structured interviews with experts such as managers of the education department was conducted by designing different questionnaires to assess their deep understandings, attitude, and beliefs regarding the subject of education. For this purpose, discussions with 22 university professors, experts, and managers of the education department of Isfahan province were held regarding the talent management subject, its requirements, and necessities, and the conclusion of these interviews was prepared as a list of talent management dimensions at the education department. Then, the input and output dimensions of talent management were specified. Finally, the final model of talent management at the Department of Education was designed and provided after some amendments. In the end, organization strategy, management of talents conflict, succession, meritocracy system, strategic management of human resources, rules, and regulation, managers support, organizational culture as a talent management input, and improvement of personal efficiency, personal maturity, human force agility, personal satisfaction, emotional commitment, perceived justice, comparative advantage acquirement, adjustment with global changes, increased beneficiaries' satisfaction, improved organizational efficiency, individual and organizational excellence as talent management output were extracted. Further, some recommendations were proposed to improve the condition of talent management in the Department of Education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues that the invention of the European Union (EU) common market and the lifting of national border controls produced a mobility-control vacuum within the EU and its member states. Building on ethnographic research in the German city of Munich and symptomatic policy-paper analysis (2013–2021), it traces the emergence of a new policy field that targets 'poverty migration' and 'benefit fraud' in this vacuum. This internal border work builds on transformations of the German social system from an ethos of welfare to active labour-market policy. With the classical toolbox of national migration regimes no longer working for intra-EU movers, their mobility rights and right to residence have been increasingly restricted by making economic self-reliance a conditionality of stay and excluding those not engaged in wage labour or self-employment from welfare services. Social policy is used as a tool for controlling mobility, which we refer to as 'workfare-state borders.' This is because it reinforces the radicalization of the workfare state by either pushing the racialized and migrantized poor into precarious wage labor or depriving them of social protection. This internal border work reconnects meritocratic logics with classical articulations of racism, thus contributing to the finely tuned reinvention of a racial order in Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why have Singapore's unique developmental state arrangements persisted in a region which has experienced democratic change? This paper argues that this is due to the PAP state's successful legitimation of its unique brand of meritocracy, one which has both competitive and interventionist elements. During the colonial era, a culture of economic meritocracy evolved in a bottom-up process through social and commercial interactions between the British class and Chinese community. This was then transmuted by the PAP's top-down imposition of the institutions and discourses of political meritocracy. This cultural hybrid allows the state to sustain its hegemony in the face of progressive social change. Accordingly, our emphasis on the wider institutional environment within which merit is conceived helps to better illuminate Singapore's challenges of encouraging organic innovation, alleviating social stratification, and opening up its political arena. This paper suggests that the problems in these areas stem not from meritocracy per se, but from the PAP's "monocentric meritocracy" where merit is narrowly defined and singularly imposed in the post-colonial era. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently, epistocrats have challenged the value of democracy by claiming that policy outcomes can be improved if the electorate were narrowed to empower only those with sufficient knowledge to inform competent policy decisions. I argue that by centering on contesting how well regimes employ extant knowledge in decision-making, this conversation has neglected to consider how regimes influence the production of knowledge over time. Science and technology studies scholars have long recognized that political systems impact the productivity of expert research. I argue that in order to evaluate which regime is "smarter," we must consider not only how well they employ existing knowledge in decision-making, but we must also assess how those regimes influence the ongoing production of policy-relevant knowledge. Thus, I offer an instrumental defense of democracy based on its capacity to encourage a superior pattern and quality of expert research to inform policy decisions over time. Epistocracy may be effective at employing extant knowledge in the short run, but in the long run, democracy is a superior environment for producing knowledge to inform policy decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie ( KZfSS) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie ( KZfSS) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article proposes to defend the basic income as a pillar of a socio-cultural revolution. This is done exclusively from a literature review and articulation of different works. The introduction section presents the characteristics of a basic income. Section 2 brings how it would mitigate current capitalism problems, which are: increasing inequality, lack of equality of opportunity, means tested social security and its bureaucracy, narrow definition of paid work and future of labor. On Section 3, the author does a literature review to address two common objections against basic income: the cost, and potential labor decrease. Section 4 presents the author argument on three pillars of the socio-cultural revolution: austerity, active citizenship, and solidarity. The article ends with a general conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the COVID‐19 outbreak forced many organizations to shift to work from home (WFH) arrangements, many are now considering whether to continue these arrangements post‐pandemic. To make informed decisions, understanding the environmental factors that influence employees' capacity to WFH effectively is crucial. This study contributes to this understanding by drawing on neo‐institutional theory to develop a model that characterizes how employees' WFH outcomes are shaped by their national institutional environment. The model was tested using data from multiple national‐level sources and individual‐level data obtained via a survey. The findings reveal that employees from high competency (cognitive institutions), meritocratic (normative institutions), and more labor‐regulated (regulatory institutions) contexts demonstrate higher levels of perceived productivity and satisfaction with WFH. Moreover, the link between the institutional context and WFH effectiveness is more pronounced when employees' capacity to adjust to WFH is high. Theoretical and practical implementations for organizations, especially multinational ones, are being discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]