Suchergebnisse

What kind of professional experts dominate within the European Commission—lawyers, economists or others? Driven by the notion that the role of professional experts is shaped by organizational features, the article examines how different kinds of expertise are inscribed in the Commission's recruitment system and organizational structure. The analysis shows that while economics may have overtaken law as the most common educational background in the Commission, neither the recruitment system nor the departmental structure appears to encourage the development of economic expertise. The proportion of staff hired through economics competitions has dropped markedly, and there are few specialized units for economic analysis in the organization. More generally, the Commission's hiring policies and organizational hierarchy do not seem conducive to strong expert roles. The picture that emerges is that of an organization where expert knowledge is neither tied to a particular profession nor firmly rooted in the departmental structure.

Lawyers keep the gates of public justice institutions, particularly through their roles in formal procedures like hearings and trials. Yet, it is not clear what lawyers do in such quintessentially legal settings: conclusions from past research are bedeviled by a lack of clear theory and inconsistencies in research design. Conceptualizing litigation work in terms of professional expertise, I conduct a theoretically grounded synthesis of the findings of extant studies of lawyers' impact on civil case outcomes. Using an innovative combination of statistical techniques—meta-analysis and nonparametric bounding—the present study transcends previous work to reveal a domain of consensus for lawyers' effect on case outcomes and to explore why this effect varies so greatly across past studies. For the types of cases researched to date, knowledge of substantive law explains surprisingly little of lawyers' advantage compared to lay people appearing unrepresented. Instead, lawyers' impact is greatest when they assist in navigating relatively simple (to lawyers) procedures and where their relational expertise helps courts follow their own rules. Findings for law generalize to other professions, where substantive and relational expertise may shape the conduct and consequences of professional work.

The present study describes the relationship between four organizational predictor variables and the degree of professional expertise of middle and higher level employees in three different career stages, working in small and medium-sized enterprises. Professional expertise is operationalized by means of five dimensions, i.e. knowledge, meta-cognitive knowledge, skills, social recognition and growth and flexibility. The predictors in question are: the amount of social support from one's immediate supervisor, the amount of social support from one's near colleagues, organizational facilities and attention from the direct supervisor to the employee's further career development. Hypotheses have been tested with original survey data from 233 employees and 217 direct supervisors.

AbstractIn 2019, wildfires in the Amazon renewed international concern about Brazilian environmental policy, led by Jair Bolsonaro. As one of the biggest repositories of the world's biodiversity, the Amazon Rainforest has been a source of concern in global environmental governance. Given this salience, one would expect that domestic governance would be highly permeated by professionals with international circulation and that transnational ties would be a central target of Bolsonaro's populist nationalistic perspective. In this article, I seek to understand whether and how professionals involved in policymaking in the Brazilian Ministry of the Environment are connected to national and international organizations, by analyzing the networks of career paths of high‐ranking staff in the Rousseff, Temer and Bolsonaro administrations. The data show a consistently low percentage of ties between professionals and international organizations. However, the types of international experience and knowledge that are deemed important shifted significantly under Bolsonaro.

Spricht man über die Erzieher, die in litauischen Kinderheimen mit Kindern arbeiten, so ergibt sich erst einmal ein terminologisches Problem. In verschiedenen Ländern und Sprachen gibt es unterschiedliche Bezeichnungen für diesen Beruf. In Litauen heißen sie "aukletojai". "Aukletojas" wird auch für Eltern benutzt, die ihre Kinder erziehen. Wahrscheinlich entspricht "aukletojas" dem deutschen Wort "Erzieher" und "aukleti" dem deutschen "erziehen". In Litauen versteht sich jeder Erzieher als Pädagoge, da hier alle, die berufsmäßig mit der Erziehung von Kindern zu tun haben - Erzieher, Lehrer, Sozialpädagogen und Sonderpädagogen - als Pädagogen bezeichnet werden. In diesem Zusammenhang muss darauf hingewiesen werden, dass in Litauen Erzieher und Sozialpädagogen unterschiedliche pädagogische Berufe sind und dass sich kein Erzieher als Sozialpädagoge versteht. (ICEÜbers)