No / This study sought to investigate the characteristics of 'nearby' leaders by eliciting the constructs of male and female top, senior, and middle-level managers and professionals working in organizations in two large UK public sectors (local government and the National Health Service). An instrument, the Transformational Leadership Questionnaire (TLQ-LGV), was developed and piloted on a national sample of 1464 managers working for local government organizations. Analysis of the data, presented here, revealed the existence of nine highly robust scales with high reliabilities (.85) and with convergent validity (range r = .46 to .85). These findings are discussed, together with suggestions for subsequent research.

輪船招商局是清季自強運動中最早有關民生經濟的事業，也是中國炙N化一個重要的里程碑。然而從創辦到被政府收歸國營，該局體制變化分W繁，在中國近代企業史上可說是無出其右者；而其體制之改組，往往遠礄优F治的變動緊緊相扣，是以招商局的發展直可說是中國近代化歷程兢g滄桑的一個縮影。前輩學者雖已有多篇論文發表，惜多集中於清季，弘磪H後的研究則付諸闕如，因此筆者嘗試作一縱剖面之探討，希望能以妒齯[的時期、更廣泛的角度來了解政治環境與企業成長之關聯性，此乃奶戭膍s之動機。本文除第六章結論外，正文共為五章：第一章敘述輪船招商局之草創，先對當時中國航運界作一回顧，比蒂銴頝s式輪船與中國舊式沙船之興衰，爾後再說明國人欲建立新式航運楨狳□妙嬪憿A最後言及輪船招商局之創辦及其改組之原因。第二章探討中法戰爭前後官督商辦體制在該局之經營運作情況；戰咿菾荍膝扆茪H主導經營，官方力為維持，然中法戰爭所引發之一些問題’p金融風潮與外人代營，使政府不再放心將經營權交給商人，官派督辦麂□N了商人總辦，官商關係因中法戰爭而起一明顯之變化。第三章說明辛亥革命前後該局與清政府、臨時政府和北洋政府之關哄F由於清末政府將一些重要企業收歸國營，招商局股東為免該局為官所飽A故積極爭取商辦，爾後民國建立，該局再進行籌組新公司活動，惜未祕言\，招商局管理機構因此日趨僵化。第四章解釋國民政府所以介入該局整頓的原由；先說明商辦時期該坐孛g營績效，再比較北洋政府與南方廣州政府對航業的態度，並將民國爬~政局與招商局發展做一對照，最後則述及官督整理不易見效之因。第五章則分析招商局被收歸國營原因；由於內政不安與列強侵擾，陞蟀F府在推動航業政策上顯得有心無力，復因九一八事變和一二八戰役兮v響，中國航業備受衝擊，招商局又於此時驚傳借款弊案，國人交相指雩荍膝D事者盜賣航權，為整頓航業故，政府於是撥鉅款收買商股，將該圻玲k國營。

The commons is a concept increasingly used by practitioners and social activists with the promise of creating new collective wealth (Bollier & Helfrich, 2014; De Angelis, 2003; Hardt & Negri, 2009; Klein, 2001). In recent years, a variety of scholarly research explained the different ways of organizing commons (Van Laerhoven & Ostrom, 2007). To that end, many streams of inquiry have emerged in various areas: organization theory (Ansari et al. 2013; Fournier, 2013; Tedmanson et al. 2015), institutional economics (Hess, C. & Ostrom, 2011; Ostrom, 1990, 2005, 2010), political philosophy and legal studies (Dardot & Laval, 2014; Holder and Flessas, 2008; Hardt & Negri, 2009), nonprofit studies (Aligica, 2016; Bushouse et al. 2016; Lohmann, 2014, 2016) and business ethics (Argandoña, 1998; Melé, 2009, 2012; O’Brien, 2009; Sison & Fontrodona, 2012; Solomon, 2004). However, these different theories are usually conceived and used separately. Empirical research on commons has mainly focused on natural resources at local and global levels (Ansari et al. 2013; Cody et al. 2015; Cox & Ross, 2011; Galaz et al. 2012; Ostrom, 1990, 2010; Poteete et al. 2010), and also on digital and scientific resources (Benkler, 2006; Boyle, 2008; Cook‐Deegan & Dedeurwaerdere, 2006; Coriat, 2015; Hess & Ostrom, 2011). Despite a long research tradition in local community organizations, there is little empirical scientific knowledge that uses the lens of the commons to study shared resources that are neither natural nor informational in nature. This dissertation aims to fill these gaps by analyzing social finance services and organizations from an interdisciplinary perspective. The aim is to understand whether communities can create financial commons. By analyzing the processes involved, the dissertation sheds light on the social and institutional components enabling the creation of human-made commons. We focus on community organizations linked to the solidarity economy movement in Brazil. Such movement aims to promote socio-economic alternative organizations, especially for poverty alleviation and inequality reduction.More specifically, the dissertation identifies the nature of two kinds of shared financial resources––microcredit services and complementary currencies––and looks at the functioning of community arrangements that provide them, the community components mobilized for creating commons organizations, and the institutional work strategies developed by intermediary organizations to adjust the scale of these social finance services.The dissertation is structured in four chapters, each of which addresses different research questions and uses different methods and units of analysis. The first chapter is conceptual and based on a literature review on complementary currencies in order to identify the commons dimensions of seven complementary currency systems. The second chapter is an in-depth single case study of Banco Palmas, a Brazilian community bank. This chapter analyzes the transformative power of governance on private goods when managed by self-governed grassroots organizations. Chapter three is a comparative case study of five community banks that focuses on the community components involved in creating commons as a grassroots response to contested market and state institutions. The final chapter focuses on the diffusion and institutionalization of social finance in Brazil and the role played by five intermediary organizations in this process.Starting from the observation that there is no definition of financial commons, Chapter 1 – Money and the Commons: Lessons from Complementary Currencies – proposes to assess the commons dimensions of monetary systems created and managed by local organizations. Specifically, we investigate the organizational features of seven complementary currency systems by making use of two main theoretical frameworks that are usually separate: the new commons in organization studies and the common good in business ethics. The findings show that these alternative monetary systems and organizations promote the common interest through the creation of new communities and can therefore be considered as commons according to the common good framework. Nevertheless, only systems relying on collective action and self-management fulfill the new commons framework. This allows us to suggest two new categories of commons: “social commons”, which fulfills both the new commons and the common good frameworks, and the “commercial commons”, which that fulfill the common good but not the new commons framework. Building on this, we define an ethos of the commons as a principle that consists in organizing commons practices through both collective organization and ethical concern for human flourishing.Chapter 2 - A Case Study of Microfinance and Community Development Banks (CDBs) in Brazil: Private or Common Goods? - looks at how governance mechanisms of self-managed community organizations affect the characteristics of microcredit services. Based on field research in Brazil, this chapter uses Elinor Ostrom’s design principles of successful self-governing common-pool resource organizations to analyze community banks’ microcredit systems. Our results suggest that private goods could be altered when governed by community self-managed enterprises. They become hybrid goods because they mix the characteristics of private and common goods. This change is facilitated by specific organizational arrangements, such as self-governance, that emerge from grassroots dynamics and the creation of collective-choice arenas. These arrangements help strengthen the inclusion properties of nonprofit microcredit services.In order to identify what components enable commons creation, we conduct a comparative case study of five Brazilian community banks in Chapter 3 – Building Commons in Community Enterprise: The Case of Self-Managed Microfinance Organizations. We analyze how community enterprises create commons whereas market and state institutions reproduce exclusion and inequalities. Our results suggest that four components are required to establish a new organization of commons: collective decision-making, community social control, servant leadership, and desire for social change. Building on this, we develop a model of commons organization and explain why these organizations are substitutes for existing marginalizing institutions. This study contributes to the literature by examining new elements for commons creation and shedding light on the emergence of new institutional arrangements for social change. Finally, after looking at commons institutional arrangements at local level in communities, we examine how commons organizations diffuse, institutionalize and organize in networks for consolidating their activities. Chapter 4 - Institutional Change and Diffusion in Institutional Plurality: The Case of Brazil’s Solidarity Finance Sector – explains how intermediary organizations help in this process. More precisely, we analyze the institutional work strategies deployed by five intermediary organizations in the Brazilian plural institutional context, where autonomous local state agencies and banks influence community banks' activities. We show how intermediary organizations support the institutionalization of community development banks (CDBs) through diffusing these organizations in different communities, performing external institutional work with governments and public banks at national and local levels, and accomplishing internal institutional work through structuring CDBs and CDB networks. / Doctorat en Sciences économiques et de gestion / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished