An Examination of Global Supply Chain Security Through the Lens of Grid and Group Theory

The impact of a changing financial climate on a UK local charitable sector: voices from the front line

“…High grid cultures are strongly defined by explicit rules and structures. Risk perceptions can tend toward apathy or ignorance, as the dominant rule culture can insulate people from hazardous activities (Loffi et al, 2015). In low grid cultures, few role distinctions exist and individuals exhibit autonomy-generally these cultures are more individualistic, and behaviours self-regulating.…”

“…In low grid cultures, few role distinctions exist and individuals exhibit autonomy-generally these cultures are more individualistic, and behaviours self-regulating. Where competition and autonomy are dominant values in low grid cultures, risk can be viewed as an opportunity for gain (Loffi et al, 2015). Group, represented by the x axis, refers to the pressure to belong to a larger social unit and the extent to which the community controls and regulates membership and participation (Douglas, 1996).…”

“…High group cultures value solidarity and community. Explicit pressures influence group relationships and collective survival is viewed with higher importance than individual survival (Loffi et al, 2015). Low group cultures are individualist, and value personal entrepreneurialism.…”

“…There is little emphasis on group-focused commitments, activities, and relationships. Consequently, there can be a short-term approach and organizations/groups can experience high levels of flux (Loffi et al, 2015).…”

“…Grid/group theory (sometimes referred to as 'cultural theory') (Thompson et al, 1990;Douglas, 1992) is used as a lens to explore the complexity of socio-cultural forces influencing the individual and group action of local charities. In the context of the study grid/group theory (Douglas and Wildavsky, 1983;Wildavsky, 1987: Douglas, 1996, this rovides an explanatory framework for evaluating how individuals and charities view the financial and funding climate, and allows an examination of their consequent behaviours (Loffi et al, 2015). The results of the study contribute to the public administration field by providing a fine-grained analysis of the differing responses of charitable organizations to their funding environment.…”