This paper presents the results of a survey which aimed at exploring the perceptions of the employees of a large aviation organization regarding the punitive or preventive character of possible measures that management could take in cases of errors and violations. The analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data collected showed that the viewpoints of the staff were sufficiently aligned only for half of the measures and that all measures inflicting a short- or long-term dissociation of the end-users from their current working place and function were highly unfavourable and linked to castigation. Also, statistically significant differences were observed across groups of specialties and years of service regarding the appropriateness of specific measures especially in the case of errors. The findings of this study in combination with literature references, suggest that the establishment of a just culture structure with agreed lines between the punitive and preventive character of measures and its endorsement by the employees is achievable, but it requires a bottom-up approach and periodical revision. Similar exploratory research, complemented possibly by explanatory studies, is recommended to be carried out by organizations prior or during the development of their just culture policy andrelated measures.
Financial constraints and risk taking are two well-established determinants of firm performance, however, no research analyzes how these variables are connected in the context of a high risk environment. Using data from microfinance clients in Tanzania, we derive a novel financial constraints measure and incorporate a psychometric risk taking scale. Results confirm the importance of access to finance and risk attitudes for business development. Also, we provide preliminary evidence for an interaction between financial constraints and risk taking. Financial constraints “throw sand in the wheels” and protect risk taking entrepreneurs from the negative impact of risk taking on microenterprise performance.
Our current smart society, where problems and frictions are smoothed out with smart, often invisible technology like AI and smart sensors, calls for designers who unravel and open the smart fabric. Societies are not malleable, and moreover, a smooth society without rough edges is neither desirable nor livable. In this paper we argue for designing friction to enhance a more nuanced debate of smart cities in which conflicting values are better expressed. Based on our experiences with the Moral Design Game, an adversarial design activity, we came to understand the value of creating tangible vessels to highlight conflict and dipartite feelings surrounding smart cities.
LINK