Self-exclusion as a strategy of inclusion: the case of Shas

Among the many paradoxes of Israeli politics, there are the strategies of political inclusion used by organizations and parties representing groups that reject the universalism which Israeli democracy is heir to. This paper develops a model of ‘political inclusion Israeli-style’, illustrated by one party, Shas, which since 1984 proclaims itself the voice of the socially and culturally excluded Sephardi population of north African and Middle Eastern Jews, who represent over 40% of the Jewish population. Shas is also a movement of religious and ethnic revival which, by adopting a social strategy of self-exclusion grounded in strict religious observance, and of independence vis-à-vis established Ashkenazi ultra-Orthodox politics, has gained 11 out of 120 Knesset seats, inclusion in government, and control over a share of educational and welfare expenditure. The paper raises the issue whether such less-than-perfectly universalistic practices are not a variety of corporatism and possibly, for the parties concerned, a more effective strategy of incorporation than the classic social democratic path.     

Procedural unfairness and managers surviving layoffs: Self-threat and coping in the context of organizational change

The affective and cognitive responses of managers who survive layoffs are explored. Evidence from two field studies suggests that managers who perceive that their organization was procedurally unfair exhibited greater anxiety than their nonmanagerial counterparts. Also, managers who perceived that the organization was unfair were more likely to withdraw from the organization, as measured by reduced organizational identification. Evidence that managers’ degree of identification with their managerial role moderated this relationship provides evidence of the psychological process driving these reactions to unfairness. Implications for the research and practice of organizational change are offered.     

Non-Contingent Success Reduces People’s Desire for Processes that Adhere to Principles of Fairness

A central tenet of justice theory and research is that people prefer decisions to be made with processes that adhere to principles of fairness. The present research identified a boundary condition for this general tendency. Across three studies, we found that people who experienced non-contingent success had less of a desire for fair processes relative to their counterparts who experienced contingent success. Furthermore, results attributable to other independent variables, namely regulatory focus in Study 2 and self-affirmation in Study 3, shed light on the underlying mechanism: people experience non-contingent success as self-threatening and lower their desire for processes that adhere to fairness in the service of protecting themselves against the threat. Theoretical implications are discussed as are limitations of the studies and suggestions for future research.