Individualism and the cultural roots of management practices

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 4 The effect of culture and formal institutions on management practices. Enlarged sample, including multinationals Model 14 Model 15 Model 16 Model 17 Model 18 Model 19 Intercept 1.98*** (.123) 1.91*** (.108) 1.89*** (.111) 2.16*** (.115) 2.14*** (.106) 2.09*** (.110) Individualism Legal origin .942*** (.179) .808*** (.181) .793*** (.180) .715*** (.167) .608*** (.182) .567*** (.176) UK law -.266*** (.091) - -.036 (.114) -.176* (.084) - -.004 (.121) French law Type of welfare state -.109 (.083) - .060 (.085) -.036 (.076) - .108 (.086) LME - -.083 (.093) -.011 (.120) - -.062 (.092) .024 (.125) CME - .285*** (.081) .316*** (.102) - .184** (.079) .255** (.101) Firm-level controls Standard set Standard set Standard set Standard + firm type Standard + firm type Standard + firm type No. of firms 2,955 2,955 2,955 5,228 5,228 5,228 No. of country sectors 278 278 278 307 307 307 -2Loglikelihood 5,210.0 5,202.9 5,201.8 9,241.6 9,238.1 9,236.0 Pseudo R 2 Notes: See Table 3. 14.6% 15.9% 16.1% 19.0% 19.6% 19.9% 34
Table A.1 Country-level independent variables. Country Individualism Historical pathogen prevalence Mean management quality, enlarged sample UK law 35 French law Liberal Market Economy (LME) Coordinated Market Economy (CME) Collectivism Labor dismissal index Australia 90 -.200 3.04 1 0 1 0 4.14 .143 .351 Brazil 38 1.02 2.70 0 1 0 0 5.16 .571 .568 Canada 80 -1.29 3.14 1 0 1 0 4.22 .286 .262 China 20 1.00 2.63 0 0 0 0 5.86 .429 .432 France 71 -.510 3.06 0 1 0 0 4.66 .857 .744 Germany 67 -.930 3.22 0 0 0 1 4.27 .571 .702 Great Britain 89 -.960 3.00 1 0 1 0 4.08 .143 .282 Greece 35 .150 2.76 0 1 0 0 5.28 .286 .519 India 48 .900 2.69 1 0 0 0 5.81 .857 .443 Ireland 70 -.390 2.84 1 0 1 0 5.12 .286 .343 Italy 76 .220 3.14 0 1 0 0 4.99 .429 .650 Japan 46 .510 3.19 0 0 0 1 4.72 .000 .164 Poland 60 -.800 2.89 0 0 0 0 5.55 .571 .640 Portugal 27 .560 2.83 0 1 0 0 5.64 .714 .809 Sweden 71 -.930 3.24 0 0 0 1 3.46 .714 .740 United States 91 -.860 3.35 1 0 1 0 4.22 .143 .218 Notes: Countries that are neither a Liberal Market Economy (LME) nor a Coordinated Market Economy (CME) are base category in the analyses. Similarly, the base category for legal system is neither a UK nor a French legal system. Collectivism scores for Germany and Canada are calculated as weighted averages of scores for East and West Germany and for French- and English-speaking Canada respectively. Most data sets do not contain separate scores for Great Britain, so we used those for the UK instead. Part of our robustness checks involves estimating our empirical models with these countries excluded. Index of labor regulation
Page 1 and 2: 12008-GEM Individualism and the cul
Page 3 and 4: Individualism and the cultural root
Page 5 and 6: Individualism and the cultural root
Page 7 and 8: including objective performance app
Page 9 and 10: entrepreneurship and other producti
Page 11 and 12: come with the work of Bloom and Van
Page 13 and 14: organizational phenomena. Culture m
Page 15 and 16: 3.1.1. Management practices Our dep
Page 17 and 18: 3.1.2. Culture, formal institutions
Page 19 and 20: House et al. (2004) report on the G
Page 21 and 22: For the formal empirical model we h
Page 23 and 24: A possible limitation of our analys
Page 25 and 26: Economists are increasingly researc
Page 27 and 28: References > > Acemoglu, D., P. Agh
Page 29 and 30: Davis, D.W., K.M. Dowley, and B.D.
Page 31 and 32: Hsieh, C.-T., and P.J. Klenow. 2009
Page 33 and 34: Murray, D.R., and M. Schaller. 2010
Page 35 and 36: Table 1 Descriptive statistics for
Page 37: Table 3 Robustness of individualism
Page 41 and 42: Table A.3 Robustness: Individualism

Individualism and the cultural roots of management practices

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?