Hertie School Research Repository
Not a member yet
2650 research outputs found
Sort by
Sozialunternehmertum
No full textSozialunternehmertum bezieht sich auf die innovative Nutzung wie Kombination von Ressourcen zur Bewältigung sozialer Probleme und Bedürfnisse. Wir zeichnen Debatten um die Definition von Sozialunternehmertum nach und stellen institutionellen Wandel und die Verfolgung vielfältiger Ziele als Schlüsselmerkmale von Sozialunternehmertum heraus. Auf Basis einer Diskussion verschiedener Arbeiten der Management-, Organisations- und Unternehmertumsforschung eröffnen wir eine prägnante und generative Perspektive auf Sozialunternehmertum. Sie soll helfen, die Erforschung sozialer Innovationen voran zu treiben
The diffusion of contested practices across environments: Social movements’ boundary-bridging role
No full textWe examine the diffusion across country institutional environments of a corporate practice that is contested by potential adopters. We show that the diffusion process is in crucial ways driven by the mobilization of social movement activists in favour of the corporate practice in the target institutional environment. We further show that social movement activism is particularly relevant for the pioneering introduction of a foreign practice into a new institutional environment in the early stages of the diffusion process, while more conventional institutional pressures become relevant at later stages of the process. Results from the study of the adoption of the corporate governance practice ‘say on pay’ by Swiss companies between 2007 and 2012 largely support our hypotheses and underline the boundary-bridging role of transnationally connected social movement activists
Multi-body Interactions and Non-Linear Consensus Dynamics on Networked Systems
No full textMulti-body interactions can reveal higher-order dynamical effects that are not captured by traditional two-body network models. In this work, we derive and analyse models for consensus dynamics on hypergraphs, where nodes interact in groups rather than in pairs. Our work reveals that multi-body dynamical effects that go beyond rescaled pairwise interactions can only appear if the interaction function is non-linear, regardless of the underlying multi-body structure. As a practical application, we introduce a specific non-linear function to model three-body consensus, which incorporates reinforcing group effects such as peer pressure. Unlike consensus processes on networks, we find that the resulting dynamics can cause shifts away from the average system state. The nature of these shifts depends on a complex interplay between the distribution of the initial states, the underlying structure and the form of the interaction function. By considering modular hypergraphs, we discover state-dependent, asymmetric dynamics between polarised clusters where multi-body interactions make one cluster dominate the other
Structural Policies for Growth and Jobs: Best Practices, Benchmarking and the Role of the Eurogroup
No full textThis briefing paper analyses the role of the Eurogroup in European economic governance. It assesses the effectiveness of thematic discussions, proposes improvements to the process, and suggests how the legitimacy of Eurogroup actions and decisions could be strengthened
Europe’s problem is not (just) Germany
No full textGermany has been accused of transforming the EU into a “bad International Monetary Fund” by promoting conditionality and competitiveness. In a response to Hans Kundnani, Jörg Haas argues that insisting on rules and reforms is actually a constructive contribution to the debate about the EU’s future. The real issue with Germany is that it seems unwilling to comply with the laws it has shaped. This is part of a broader problem: the ever-growing influence of national governments in the EU makes it easy for powerful states to circumvent rules. We need an EU that ensures fair treatment for strong and weak members alike
Die Verhandlungen zum Brexit: Finanzielle und wirtschaftliche Auswirkungen
No full textDer Austritt des Vereinigten Königreichs aus der Europäischen Union beschäftigte am 24. April 2017 den Europaausschuss des Bundestags. In einer öffentlichen Anhörung nahmen einige Experten zum einen zu den finanziellen Auswirkungen und den wechselseitigen Verpflichtungen, zum anderen zu Statusfragen und wirtschaftlichen Aspekten des Brexit Stellung. Nach Ansicht von Peter Becker, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, Berlin, wäre der beste Verhandlungsauftakt zunächst eine Verständigung beider Verhandlungspartner auf eine pragmatische Vorgehensweise. Das beste Verhandlungsergebnis aus Sicht der EU wäre, den aktuellen Mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen unverändert auslaufen zu lassen. Jörg Haas, Jacques Delors Institut, weist darauf hin, dass der Brexit zwar eine Lücke in den Haushalt der Europäischen Union reißt, aber auch neue Chancen eröffnet. Der Wegfall des Britenrabatts vereinfache das Finanzierungssystem und ermögliche es, komplizierte Verfahren zu ersetzen. Carsten Hefeker, Universität Siegen, sieht Möglichkeiten, über neue und zukunftsträchtige Wege einer engen Kooperation mit Drittstaaten wie dem UK, der Schweiz und anderen Ländern in der engeren Nachbarschaft nachzudenken. Das EWR-Modell habe sich überholt, weil viele der aktuellen Mitgliedsländer und auch der Drittstaaten kein Interesse mehr an Personenfreizügigkeit haben. Steffen Hindelang, Freie Universität Berlin, hält als Ergebnis fest, dass kein Anspruch Großbritanniens auf einen Anteil an den Vermögensgütern der EU bei Austritt bestehe, dagegen müsse das Land seine in der Vergangenheit eingegangenen Zahlungsverpflichtungen gegenüber der Union auch nach Austritt erfüllen. Eberhard Eichenhofer, Universität Jena, unterstreicht, dass mit dem Ende der Mitgliedschaft eines Staates sämtliche sich aus dem Europäischen koordinierenden Sozialrecht ergebenden Bindungen entfallen. EU-Bürger werden gegenüber dem vorherrschenden Rechtszustand zahlreiche Nachteile zu gewärtigen haben. Und auch Christian Tietje, Universität Halle-Wittenberg, betont, dass es zur Neuregelung der Statusrechte von Unionsbürgern und juristischen Personen der EU-Mitgliedstaaten einer völkervertraglichen Festlegung zwischen der EU und Großbritannien bedarf. Nach Einschätzung von Susanne Wixforth, DGB, lassen die gesteckten Verhandlungspositionen nur eine geringe gemeinsame Schnittmenge erkennen. Nicolai von Ondarza, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, Berlin, sieht die Verhandlungen zwischen der EU und Großbritannien über ihre zukünftigen Beziehungen nach dem Brexit unter einem politischen Primat, so dass trotz enger wirtschaftlicher Verpflichtungen beide Seiten auf eine harte Verhandlungsposition zusteuern. René Repasi, EURO-CEFG, skizziert die Rechte, die bei dem Brexit wegfallen würden, und diskutiert die Möglichkeiten, den Fortbestand dieser Rechte zu sichern. Klaus Günter Deutsch und Stefan Mair, BDI, rechnen mit massiven Störungen im Wirtschaftsverkehr. Der Brexit könne per se kein wirtschaftlicher Erfolg werden. Nach den Berechnungen von Gabriel Felbermayr, ifo Institut, werden für beide Seiten, gleichgültig wie die zukünftigen wirtschaftlichen Beziehungen zwischen der EU 27 und Großbritannien geregelt werden, ökonomische Kosten entstehen, wobei im Durchschnitt die verbleibenden EU-Mitglieder weniger als das Vereinigte Königreich verlieren werden
Prepare for the worst - How to make Europe’s bank crisis management framework fit for purpose
No full textAmid a severe health, social and economic crisis, banks again take centre stage on the political agenda. This policy paper explains why decisionmakers are worried about a looming banking crisis, sets out the existing
European bank crisis management framework and makes proposals for addressing its shortcomings in readiness for a possibly systemic banking crisis. Instead of taking the supposedly easy way out and bailing out banks again, now is the right time to prepare for the worst in Europe’s bank crisis management framework
Operationalizing algorithmic explainability in the context of risk profiling done by robo financial advisory apps
No full textRobo Advisors are financial advisory apps that profile users into risk classes before providing financial advice. This risk profiling of users is of functional importance and is legally mandatory. Irregularities at this primary step will lead to incorrect recommenda- tions for the users. Further, lack of transparency and explanations for these automated decisions makes it tougher for users and regulators to understand the rationale behind the advice given by these apps, leading to a trust deficit. Regulators monitor this pro- filing but possess no independent toolkit to “demystify” the black box or adequately explain the decision-making process of the robo financial advisor.
Our paper proposes an approach towards developing a ‘RegTech tool’ that can explain the robo advisors decision making. We use machine learning models to reverse engi- neer the importance of features in the black-box algorithm used by the robo advisor for risk profiling and provide three levels of explanation. First, we find the importance of inputs used in the risk profiling algorithm. Second, we infer relationships between inputs and with the assigned risk classes. Third, we allow regulators to explain decisions for any given user profile, in order to ‘spot check’ a random data point. With these three explanation methods, we provide regulators, who lack the technical knowledge to understand algorithmic decisions, a method to understand it and ensure that the risk-profiling done by robo advisory applications comply with the regulations they are subjected to
Organizational Imprints under Pressure: The Role of Value Systems in Engaging with External Institutional Demands
No full textOrganizations are under constant pressure from changing institutions (such as laws, public opinion, or societal norms) to react and perform in certain ways. However, these external institutional demands can sometimes run contrary to the organization’s declared value system. Between 1949 and 2016, successive changes in Germany’s social sector transformed the institutional external environment for German welfare associations, calling into question the legitimacy of their dominance in civil society in general and especially in the context of welfare provision. This comparative case study traces the development of the respective value systems of two of the main German welfare associations during that period. The two cases – Deutscher Caritas-verband (Caritas) and Deutscher Paritätischer Wohlfahrtsverband Gesamtverband (the Paritätischer) – were selected for their contrasting value systems within the spectrum of German welfare associations.
For the purposes of this study, value systems are understood as consistent imprinted perceptual frameworks that normatively shape and influence behavior, and external institutional demands are defined as implicit or explicit requests made from outside an organization towards the organizations by integrated systems of formal and informal rules and patterns, which structure social interactions and constitute the social environment an organization operates in. The analysis explores how such seemingly persistent value systems change over time, and how the demands made by external institutions increase or diminish explicit reference to that value system.
Drawing on the membership magazines and newspapers (or “corpus”) of the two selected associations, the analysis indicates that the value system of Catholicism initially shielded Caritas from external institutional demands until the observed level of Catholic and religious language diminished and the organization became more ex-posed to episodic change within the sector. In contrast, pluralism enabled the Paritätischer to engage more readily with the four episodes of self-help, German reunification, privatization, and social innovation, from the beginning of the study period.
In tracing how the two associations engaged with these episodes, the findings con-firm that the language associated with an organization’s imprinted value system changes over time. Here, two distinct types of imprinted value system – resisting and diaphanous – respectively shielded or enabled engagement with external institutional demands, and a framework is proposed to model the consequences of these differences