Richa Saxena

Bio: Richa Saxena is an academic researcher from Institute of Management Technology, Ghaziabad. The author has contributed to research in topics: Organizational studies & Multinational corporation. The author has an hindex of 4, co-authored 12 publications receiving 67 citations. Previous affiliations of Richa Saxena include Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad.

Muddling Through the Passage of Qualitative Research: Experiences of a Novice Researcher:

Abstract: The article is written as a travelogue by the author while exploring the passage of qualitative research in her maiden independent research work—her dissertation. The author describes in the articl...

Careers in context: An international study of career goals as mesostructure between societies' career‐related human potential and proactive career behaviour

Abstract: Careers exist in a societal context that offers both constraints and opportunities for career actors. Whereas most studies focus on proximal individual and/or organisational‐level variables, we provide insights into how career goals and behaviours are understood and embedded in the more distal societal context. More specifically, we operationalise societal context using the career‐related human potential composite and aim to understand if and why career goals and behaviours vary between countries. Drawing on a model of career structuration and using multilevel mediation modelling, we draw on a survey of 17,986 employees from 27 countries, covering nine of GLOBE's 10 cultural clusters, and national statistical data to examine the relationship between societal context (macrostructure building the career‐opportunity structure) and actors' career goals (career mesostructure) and career behaviour (actions). We show that societal context in terms of societies' career‐related human potential composite is negatively associated with the importance given to financial achievements as a specific career mesostructure in a society that is positively related to individuals' proactive career behaviour. Our career mesostructure fully mediates the relationship between societal context and individuals' proactive career behaviour. In this way, we expand career theory's scope beyond occupation‐ and organisation‐related factors.

Career success schemas and their contextual embeddedness: A comparative configurational perspective

Abstract: We introduce career success schemas as critical for understanding how people in different contexts perceive and understand career success. Using a comparative configurational approach, we show, in a study of thirteen countries, that two structural characteristics of career success schemas—complexity and convergence—differ across country contexts and are embedded in specific configurations of institutional factors. Adopting complexity and convergence as primary dimensions, we propose a taxonomy of career success schemas at the country level. Based on this taxonomy, we contribute to the understanding of subjective career success across countries, discuss the importance of schemas for organizational career systems in MNEs, and propose specific guidelines for future comparative careers research.

Gender and Workplace Experience

Abstract: “Men are dominant, women are subservient;” “Men are aggressive, women are passive;” “Men are agentic, women are communal;” “Men are power-centric, women are person-centric;” “Men are single-focused, women are multi-focused;” “Men are bread winners, women are home makers.” The list of differences identified by researchers is seamless. Similarities have, rarely if ever, been recorded or found their space in research journals. Questions that readily come to the mind are: Does biological difference transcend all boundaries and get reflected in attitudes and behaviours clubbed under binary heads as “male” and “female?” Or is it that when the “difference” hypothesis yields null results, interest in the research topic wanes?

human Development Index

Abstract: How many countries are included in the 2013 HDI? The 2013 HDI covers 187 countries, the same number as in 2012 and 2011. Maintaining the same number of is the result of intensified efforts by the Human Development Report Office (HDRO) to work with international data providers and national statistical agencies to obtain required development indicators for the HDI which had been unavailable for some countries in previous years. For a full explanation of the results and methodology of the 2013HDI and other indexes in the 2014 Human Development Report, please see the Technical Notes 1-5. What does the HDI tell us? The HDI was created to emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone. The HDI can also be used to question national policy choices, asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with different human development outcomes. For example, Malaysia has GNI per capita higher than Chile but life expectancy at birth is about 5 years shorter, mean years of schooling is shorter and expected years of schooling is 2.5 years shorter resulting in Chile having a much higher HDI value than the Malaysia. These striking contrasts can stimulate debate about government policy priorities. Did the HDI rankings change for many countries in 2013? Based on the consistent data series that were available on 15 November 2013, there are few countries with changed ranks between 2012 and 2013. The HDI values for 2012 and 2013 are given in Table 1 of Statistical Annex. The HDI trends since 1980 are given in Table 2. In this table we also provide the change in ranks between 2008 and 2013. We advise users of the HDR not to compare the results from different Reports, but to use the consistent data given in Table 2 of the latest report. The consistent data are based on the latest data revisions and are obtained using the same methodology. The effect of change in achievements (improvement or declining) in human development indicators of

Income Inequality : Understanding the Needs of Economically Disadvantaged Children and Families

Abstract: Between 1947 and 1974, income growth was distributed fairly evenly among households in various income groups. However, income inequality has increased over the past 30 or so years. Since the mid-1970s, real income growth for households at the 95th percentile of the distribution has grown at a pace nearly 3/2 times that of households at the 20th percentile. A similar pattern holds between men and women. The Gini coefficient (lower-left chart), a more complete measure of income inequality, considers the entire income distribution. It indicates that income inequality is rising overall. One explanation holds that the increasing disparity of income in the U.S. over the past 30 years results from skill-biased technological change that has benefited higher-skilled workers. The skill-biased hypothesis asserts that technology improvements boost the productivity (and hence the income) of skilled labor by more than it does the unskilled. Since the 1980s, demand for skilled labor has kept pace with the relatively greater supply of skilled workers (as estimated by the rising proportion of college-educated workers), exerting upward pressure on wages for higher-skilled workers. Since the early 1980s, the average real wage has risen roughly 30% for male college graduates and nearly 50% for males with a postgraduate degree. 0 25 50 75 100 125