Corporations and economic inequality around the world: The paradox of hierarchy☆

By Jerry Davis, A. Cobb. 2010

111 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract Using time-series data from the US since 1950 and from 53 countries around the world in 2006, this chapter documents a strong negative relation between an economy's employment concentration (that is, the proportion of the labor force employed by the largest 10, 25, or 50 firms) and its level of income inequality. Within the US, we find that trends in the relative size of the largest employers (up in the 1960s and 1970s, down in the 1980s and 1990s, up in the 2000s) are directly linked to changes in inequality, and that corporate size is a proximal cause of the extravagant increase in social inequality over the past generation. We conclude that organization theory can provide a distinctive contribution to understanding societal outcomes.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3dc30ce50d9ed8f4f2b79d2010f115679e022020

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

Understanding the Social Role of Entrepreneurship (2016, unknown): “Measured by the portion of national wealth controlled by the top 10% of the population, the highest level of concentration is in Switzerland, the US, Denmark, France and Sweden, where 10% of the population control 60-70% or more of the national wealth (Davis and Cobb, 2010).”
The Employment Relationship and Inequality: How and Why Changes in Employment Practices are Reshaping Rewards in Organizations (2013, background): “…ve rs ity ], [ Fo rr es t B ri sc oe ] at 1 0: 49 2 9 Ja nu ar y 20 13 evidence that the average size of organizations has declined (Brynjolfsson, Malone, Gurbaxani, & Kambil, 1994; Davis & Cobb, 2010; Zenger & Hesterly, 1997), which may reflect in part the breakup of diversified conglomerates.”
Minding the Gap (2016, background): “The story goes that while top managers continue to enjoy large monetary rewards, lower-level employees suffer from stagnated pay and job losses (Davis & Cobb, 2010; Hoskisson, Castleton, & Withers, 2009).”
Financialization and U.S. Income Inequality, 1970–20081 (2011, unknown): “Although perhaps counterintuitive, this finding resonates with a recent cross-national finding that employment concentration is negatively associated with the level of income inequality ðDavis and Cobb 2010Þ.”
Organizations and Societal Economic Inequality: A Review and Way Forward (2020, background): “Accordingly, income inequality is lower in countries and states where large firms employ more people (Cobb & Stevens, 2017; Davis & Cobb, 2010).”
How Firms Shape Income Inequality: Stakeholder Power, Executive Decision Making, and the Structuring of Employment Relationships (2015, methodology): “In fact, in countries like Japan, the UK, and the US, income inequality was at its lowest levels when ILMs predominated, and the breakdown of ILMs coincided with rising income inequality in a number of countries (Cappelli, 2001; Davis & Cobb, 2010).”
How social class shapes thoughts and actions in organizations (2011, background): “All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.riob.2011.09.004 There are considerable differences in the amount of material resources that individuals possess in most countries (Davis & Cobb, 2010; Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009).”
Individuals, interactions and institutions: How economic inequality affects organizations (2015, background): “In some cases, researchers have also examined how organizations contribute to economic inequality in a society (Cobb, 2015; Davis and Cobb, 2010).”