Purpose: This study investigates the implicit factors driving business success and longevity within the context of a dynamic and turbulent economic environment. Methodology: Employing a quantitative research design with a descriptive correlational approach, the study analysed data from 347 employees across eleven Colombian companies recognised by the Mariposa de Lorenz Award for their financial solidity and social responsibility. The methodology utilised a non-probability purposive sampling technique to apply a durability factors questionnaire, originally comprising 47 items, and the data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics software. Findings: Exploratory factor analysis simplified the theoretical framework from thirteen previously identified components into two primary factors: «Responsible Culture» (encompassing organisational culture, social responsibility, and knowledge management) and «Strategic Management» (comprising corporate governance and business strategy). Results indicate a significant positive correlation between these two components, suggesting they are interdependent drivers of success. Furthermore, the analysis revealed that whilst perceptions of «Responsible Culture» vary primarily by hierarchical position, the appreciation of «Strategic Management» is sensitive to the employee’s position, age, and experience, with senior management placing greater emphasis on the latter. Originality / Value: Grounded in the Knowledge-Based View (KBV) of the firm, the research aims to identify the underlying elements that enable companies to maintain sustainable competitive advantages. The study concludes that the harmonious development of both strategic alignment and a «Responsible Culture» is essential for achieving corporate longevity and superior performance, offering practical insights for management in complex markets.
Purpose: This article analyses how value is distributed among stakeholders in the Spanish financial system from a post-growth perspective. It focuses not only on how much value is created, but on how it is allocated across main stakeholders, in order to assess financial institutions by their distributive orientation and its alignment with broader wellbeing goals. Design/methodology/approach: The article adopts a quantitative compositional approach to stakeholder value shares expressed as percentages that sum to 100%. To compare these “closed” data without distortion, it uses Aitchison’s distance, which is designed for compositional vectors and avoids the biases produced by the constant-sum constraint. The analysis estimates how far each institution’s distributive profile departs from the sectoral centre and then orders these distances to identify dominant orientations. On this basis, the article proposes a five-type classification of distributive profiles: social, legacy, extractive, neutral, and detractive, enabling systematic comparisons across different institutional forms within the Spanish financial system. Findings: The analysis identifies clear differences in stakeholder value distribution across institutions, indicating structured heterogeneity rather than random variation. The proposed five-type typology captures distinct distributive orientations: some profiles prioritise value allocation to labour and the public sector, others concentrate value toward investors, while neutral and detractive profiles reflect more balanced or weaker/negative distributive contributions. Overall, the results show that institutional diversity in Spanish finance is reflected not only in business models and governance, but also in the relative structure of stakeholder value allocation. Originality/value:Using distribution alongside profit changes how financial performance is understood. Profit shows how much value is retained, but not who benefits from it. A distributive approach based on Aitchison distance helps researchers, regulators, and managers assess how value is shared among stakeholders, and it can also help policy makers design rules based not only on profit, but on distribution. From a post-growth perspective, this matter because improving collective wellbeing depends not only on creating value, but also on how that value is allocated.
Purpose: This study examines the impact of human resources management (HRM) systems on attitudinal outcomes in Spain, comparing the predictive capacity of two alternative individual-level models (additive and multiplicative) with a focus on job satisfaction. Design/methodology/approach: The analysis draws on data from the Spanish sample of the OECD's Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC). Partial least squares regression (PLS) is applied, along with complementary tests of observed and unobserved heterogeneity and out-of-sample predictive power. Findings: The models account for up to 10% of the variance in job satisfaction across the whole sample. Ability-enhancing practices have the greatest effect, followed by opportunity-related practices, while motivation contributes minimally. The multiplicative model performs slightly better than the additive one, revealing significant interaction effects among ability, motivation, and opportunity, whose practical relevance future research should further examine. The explanatory power increases slightly when focusing on employees in managerial positions. Accounting for unobserved heterogeneity identifies five employee segments, for which the multiplicative model achieves R² values ranging from 0.42 to 0.76. Research limitations/implications: PIAAC is a secondary, cross-sectional dataset, limiting analytical flexibility and preventing causal inference. Practical implications: Understanding how AMO dimensions interact may help HR managers design more effective practice configurations to foster job satisfaction. Originality/value: Empirical comparisons between additive and multiplicative applications of the AMO model remain scarce. Most prior research focuses on extrinsic motivation practices (such as pay-for-performance) and shows weak links with job satisfaction, while intrinsic motivation is rarely addressed. This study contributes to closing that gap and identifies five employee groups that differ in how they weigh the factors driving job satisfaction.
Purpose: Although experiencing a calling is often assumed to enhance employee performance, empirical evidence remains mixed, and the mechanisms underlying this relationship are not well understood. Drawing on research on meaningful work, this study examines whether and how calling translates into employee performance by proposing meaningful work as a mediating mechanism linking calling to in-role performance and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Design/methodology: We tested our hypotheses using multi-source data from 548 employees and 119 supervisors. Employees reported their sense of calling and experienced meaningful work, while supervisors evaluated employee performance (in-role and OCB). Structural equation modeling, path analysis, and bootstrapping procedures were used to assess the proposed mediation model. Findings: Calling is positively related to both in-role performance and OCB through the experience of meaningful work. Meaningful work mediates these relationships, indicating that perceiving work as meaningful is the mechanism through which calling translates into higher performance. In the absence of meaningful work, calling alone does not significantly enhance performance. Practical implications: Organizations that foster meaningful work can leverage employees’ sense of calling to enhance both in-role performance and extra-role contributions. This approach benefits companies through higher productivity and discretionary effort, while employees also benefit through improved performance and a stronger sense of purpose and fulfilment in their roles. Originality/value: This study advances theory on calling and work outcomes by identifying meaningful work as the central mechanism linking calling to performance. By demonstrating that calling does not directly enhance performance in the absence of experienced meaningfulness, the findings help reconcile inconsistent prior results and refine theoretical assumptions about the performance implications of calling.
Purpose: This article critically examines the relationship between teleworking and burnout during the period 2020–2025, emphasizing the intensity of telework as a key variable. It argues that remote work can operate either as a source of resilience or as a driver of emotional strain, depending on how its emotional, subjective, and relational dimensions are managed.Design/methodology/approach: A critical review of recent literature was conducted, drawing on high impact indexed academic databases, through a reflective approach that combines theoretical and comparative analysis.Findings: The article proposes a relational explanatory framework that expands on traditional burnout models and explicitly integrates six key concepts for understanding the risks and potentialities of intensive telework: digital recognition, asynchronous reciprocity, meaningful connectivity, forced hyperconnectivity, digital relational erosion, and subjective self-exploitation. These constructs allow for a more accurate interpretation of how the intensity of teleworking modifies psychosocial well-being, showing that such intensity is a decisive factor in explaining trajectories of resilience or emotional exhaustion in virtual environments.Limitations:The lack of direct empirical data is acknowledged, and future research is encouraged to develop more robust explanatory models, specific measurement scales, studies on empathetic remote leadership, intersectional approaches, and longitudinal analyses in hybrid environments.Practical implications: The findings underline the importance of regulating the intensity of remote work, fostering empathetic leadership, and redesigning spaces for recognition and emotional support in digital environments.Social implications: The study stresses the urgency of implementing public policies that ensure the right to disconnect and address the psychosocial risks associated with intensive telework, from an inclusive and context-sensitive perspective.Originality/value: The main contribution of the article lies in offering an innovative perspective that articulates classical theories with emerging phenomena, proposing original explanatory categories for understanding burnout in the digital age and outlining a research agenda focused on its study in hybrid and remote environments.
