Industrial districts, inward foreign investment and regional development

This article compares the importance of agglomerations of local firms, and inward FDI as drivers of regional development. The empirical analysis exploits a unique panel dataset of the Italian manufacturing sector at the regional and industry levels. We explore whether FDI and firm agglomeration can be drivers of total factor productivity (separately and jointly), with this effect being robust to different estimators, and different assumptions about inter-regional effects. In particular, we isolate one form of firm agglomeration that is especially relevant in the Italian context, industrial districts, in order to ascertain their impact on productivity. In so doing, we distinguish standard agglomeration and localization economies from industrial districts to understand what additional impact the latter has on standard agglomeration effects. Interaction effects between FDI spillovers and different types of agglomeration economies shed some light on the heterogeneity of regional development patterns as well as on the opportunity to fine tune policy measures to specific regional contexts.

Industrial land development and manufacturing deconcentration in Greater Jakarta

Industrial land development has become a key feature of urbanization in Greater Jakarta, one of the largest metropolitan areas in Southeast Asia. Following Suharto’s marketoriented policy measures in the late 1980s, private developers have dominated the land development projects in Greater Jakarta. The article investigates the extent to which these private industrial centers have effectively reduced the domination of Jakarta in shaping the entire metropolitan structure. The analysis indicates that major suburban industrial centers have captured most of the manufacturing employment that has dispersed from Jakarta. The industrial centers have now increasingly specialized and diversified. It is likely that a polycentric metropolitan structure will emerge in the future.

The need for dialogue between the vocational psychological and organisational perspectives on career

As editors of the recently published Vocational psychological and organisational perspectives on career: Towards a multidisciplinary dialogue (Collin & Patton, 2009), we have considerable interest in this particular issue of the Australian Journal of Career Development. This short piece will first present the purpose and thesis of that book and, in the light of them, will then comment on the four papers. The book suggests that to understand the multidimensional and multilayered nature of career, “it has to be studied in a similarly multilayered and multi-perspectival way, and, indeed, it has been” (p. 3). Scholars have pointed out that there is a wide array of disciplines including economics, sociology, anthropology, geography, political science, various branches of psychology (e.g. industrial/organisational (I/O), vocational, counselling), psychiatry, education, organisation studies, organisational behaviour, personnel/human resource management, industrial relations, and more, all of which have something to say about career. Of these, the most influential, according to Peiperl and Arthur (2000), have been psychology, sociology, education and management. These many disciplinary perspectives on career constitute the rich field of career studies.

An activity theory framework for industrial design

Ethnography has gained wide acceptance in the industrial design profession and curriculum as a means of understanding the user. However, there is considerable confusion about the particularities of its practice accompanied by the absence of an interoperable vocabulary. The consequent interdisciplinary effort is a power play between disciplines whereby the methodological view of ethnography marginalises its theoretical and analytical components. In doing so, it restricts the potential of ethnography suggesting the need for alternative methods of informing the design process. This article suggests that activity theory, with an emphasis on human activity as the fundamental unit of study, is an appropriate methodology for the generation of user requirements. The process is illustrated through the adaptation of an ethnographic case study, for the design of classroom furniture in India.

Discrepancy between human resource research and practice : comparison of industrial/organisational psychologists and human resource practitioners' beliefs

There is a large and growing body of research to show that human resource (HR) practices affect individual performance, organisational productivity and organisational performance. Academic findings about effective HR practices, however, have not readily been adopted by practitioners. A variety of theoretical and practical explanations have been advanced about the research-practice gap. Research by Rynes, Colbert, and Brown (2002) suggested that the research-practice gap is due to a lack of knowledge, but the extent to which these findings apply to the Australian context is unknown. The sample consisted of 102 industrial/organisational (I/O) psychologists and 89 HR practitioners. The main aim of the present study was to replicate and extend the work of Rynes et al. by examining and comparing the knowledge of I/O psychologists and HR practitioners. It was found that overall I/O psychologists were better informed about HR research than HR practitioners; in particular, they were more knowledgeable about management practices and recruitment and selection. In both groups, of the five content areas examined (Management Practices; General Employment Practices; Training and Development; Recruitment and Selection; and Compensation and Benefits), the greatest gaps were in Recruitment and Selection.