The Globalization of Inequality. By François Bourguignon . Translated by Thomas Scott-Railton . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2015. 224 pp. ISBN 978-0691160528, $27.95 (Cloth).
Gary Fields of Cornell University recently wrote a book review in ILR Review for The Globalization of Inequality. An excerpt from the book review:
In this book, he [François Bourguignon] has produced a concise and nontechnical masterpiece of exceptional analytical and policy clarity. His professional expertise and policy involvement shine through in every chapter. Although the book is written for concerned global citizens, professional economists and other social scientists can learn much from reading it.
Bourguignon begins by posing some provocative questions. Is globalization responsible for rising inequality in the world? Does this represent the death knell for equality? If it continues, will the quest for social justice be squelched?
His analysis makes a crucial distinction between three types of inequality in standards of living: inequality between countries, inequality within countries, and inequality among the world’s people. It is the last of these—what he terms “global inequality”—that is his primary concern and is at the heart of the book.
You can read the full review from ILR Review by clicking here. Like what you read? Click here to sign up for e-alerts and have all the research and reviews like this sent directly to your inbox!
Management educators who use teams in the classroom often face challenges in holding team members accountable for their performance. In a new Journal of Management Education podcast, associate editor Cindi Fukami talks with Dr. H. Kristl Davison of the University of Mississippi about her article, “How Individual Performance Affects Variability of Peer Evaluations in Classroom Teams: A Distributive Justice Perspective,” co-authored by Vipanchi Mishra of Iona College and Mark N. Bing and Dwight D. Frink, both of the University of Mississippi. Forthcoming in JME, the paper is now available in the journal’s OnlineFirst section. Click here to play or download the podcast interview or subscribe on iTunes by following this link.
Dr. H. Kristl Davison is a Clinical Assistant Professor of Management at the University of Mississippi. She received her M.S. and Ph.D. in Industrial-Organizational (I/O) Psychology from Tulane University. She has worked as an Employee Selection Specialist for GTE/Verizon, and has also consulted in the areas of compensation, employee surveys, and statistical analysis. Her research interests include organizational justice and ethics, employment discrimination, gender and diversity issues, counterproductive workplace behavior, applicant faking, and personnel selection. She has published her research in journals such as Journal of Management Education, Academy of Management Learning and Education, Journal of Applied Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Personnel Psychology, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Organizational Research Methods, and Journal of Business and Psychology.
Dr. Cynthia V. Fukami is Professor in the Daniels College of Business at the University of Denver. She is currently Associate Editor of the Journal of Management Education, and serves on the editorial board for Academy of Management Learning and Education, among others. She has served on the Academy of Management’s Teaching Committee, and was the Chair of the Board of Directors of the Organizational Behavior Teaching Society (OB-1). She co-edited Sage’s Handbook of Management Learning, Education and Development with Steven Armstrong.
Emilio J. Castilla, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Stephen Benard, Indiana University published “The Paradox of Meritocracy in Organizations,” in the December 2010 issue of Administrative Science Quarterly. This article won the 2010 Academy of Management’s Best Paper Award in Organizational Behavior.
“In this article, we develop and empirically test the theoretical argument that when an organizational culture promotes meritocracy (compared with when it does not), managers in that organization may ironically show greater bias in favor of men over equally performing women in translating employee performance evaluations into rewards and other key career outcomes; we call this the ‘paradox of meritocracy.'”
This article was also highlighted on orgtheory.net. To see their post, please click here.