Suchergebnisse

El artículo reflexiona acerca de la real efectividad del discurso de los derechos, según el cual éstos permiten lograr la inclusión social y el reconocimiento político de los grupos históricamente marginados. Desde Marx pueden ser realizadas a este discurso dos críticas fundamentales: a) despolitiza (oculta y legitima) las fuerzas de dominación que existen en la sociedad, y b) convierte en paradigma de lo humano al ser egoísta, aislado de la sociedad (el burgués) e instrumentaliza la sociedad política con el fin de defender y mantener ese modelo de humanidad capitalista. Estas críticas se encuentran justamente en la base de la teoría habermasiana del derecho, que trata de resolverlas a partir de su idea de indisolubilidad de la autonomía pública y la autonomía privada, dentro de una teoría de los derechos "bien entendida", sin que, de todas formas, la perspectiva de Marx pueda considerarse superada. ; This paper examines the real effectivity of the Discourse on Rights, according to which rights achieve social inclusion and the political recognition of the historically marginalized groups. From Marx's point of view, there are two fundamental critics which can be raised against this Discourse: a) it depoliticizes (it hides and legitimizes) the dominating forces that exist in society, and b) it turns into a paradigm of the human the egoistic and isolated human being (the bourgeois), and instrumentalizes political society with the purpose of defending and maintaining such a model of capitalist humanity. These criticisms are exactly in the base of the Habermasian theory of Law. In fact, he tries to answer them through his idea of inseparability of the public autonomy and the private autonomy, within a theory of Rights "correctly understood". However, the article suggests that by no means Marx's perspective can be considered surpassed.

Evidence suggests that citizens evaluate government performance differently when equivalent performance information is presented with either a positive or negative framing-but do experienced public managers also suffer from this framing effect? To address this question, we conducted an experiment with 191 public service professionals in the U.S. in which we experimentally varied the framing of performance information about customer satisfaction, job satisfaction and goal achievement for various federal government agencies. Our findings show that public service professionals-just like ordinary citizens-are susceptible to framing effects. Specifically, they tend to evaluate federal agency performance more negatively when percentages of "job dissatisfaction" and "targets not met" were presented, as opposed to logically equivalent percentages of "job satisfaction" and "targets met." The pattern is the same for "customer dissatisfaction" versus "customer satisfaction" rates, although the results are not statistically significant. These findings provide a deeper understanding about the use of government performance information, as well as how such information is comprehended and perhaps misunderstood by decision makers. ; Center for Research in Inclusive Education (PIA-Conicyt) CIE 160009

We review the literature on people management and performance in organizations across a range of disciplines, identifying aspects of management where there is clear evidence about what works as well as aspects where the evidence is mixed or does not yet exist. We organize our discussion by four lenses, or levels of analysis, through which people management can be viewed: (i) individual extrinsic, intrinsic, and psychological factors; (ii) organizational people management, operational management, and culture; (iii) team mechanisms, composition and structural features; and (iv) relationships, including networks, leadership. and individuals' relationships to their job and tasks. Each of these four lenses corresponds not only to a body of literature but also to a set of management tools and approaches to improving public employees' performance; articulating the connections across these perspectives is an essential frontier for research. We find that existing people management evidence and practice have overemphasized formal management tools and financial motivations at the expense of understanding how to leverage a broader range of motivations, build organizational culture, and use informal and relational management practices. We suggest that foregrounding the role of relationships in linking people and performance-relational public management-may prove a fertile and interdisciplinary frontier for research and practices. ; People in Government Lab at the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford ; Versión publicada - versión final del editor