Misleading country rankings perpetuate destructive business practices

Harald Bergsteiner, Gayle C. Avery

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Countries are ranked on many criteria, the results of which can have far-reaching ethical and practical implications, particularly for emerging nations seeking role models. One highly influential ranking, the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report (GCR), has been criticized for containing multiple methodological, conceptual, and logical flaws that bias competitiveness rankings toward countries that favor neoliberalism. Using datasets not afflicted by such flaws, we examine Bergsteiner and Avery’s (J Bus Ethics 109(4):391–410, 2012) prediction that competitiveness scores of the USA and the UK are substantially overstated. Results of re-ranking 104 countries using 29 economic, environmental, and social datasets from reputable sources support this assertion, with the USA showing the greatest discrepancy on a 100-point scale between its 2013–2014 GCR score (5) and our study’s 2013 score (57), and the UK falling from GCR score 9 to 40. We explore reasons for this discrepancy, including examining the relationship between a country’s neoliberal traditions and its rankings on the indicators.

LanguageEnglish
Pages863-881
Number of pages19
JournalJournal of Business Ethics
Volume159
Issue number3
Early online date2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2019

Fingerprint

competitiveness
ranking
role model
neoliberalism
economics
moral philosophy
Ranking
Business practices
Competitiveness
Global competitiveness
trend
Discrepancy
Economics

Bibliographical note

Copyright The Author(s) 2018. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

Keywords

  • country competitiveness rankings
  • ideology
  • methodology

Cite this

@article{db62ccd57bc84e0cab338758e41e5dcd,
title = "Misleading country rankings perpetuate destructive business practices",
abstract = "Countries are ranked on many criteria, the results of which can have far-reaching ethical and practical implications, particularly for emerging nations seeking role models. One highly influential ranking, the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report (GCR), has been criticized for containing multiple methodological, conceptual, and logical flaws that bias competitiveness rankings toward countries that favor neoliberalism. Using datasets not afflicted by such flaws, we examine Bergsteiner and Avery’s (J Bus Ethics 109(4):391–410, 2012) prediction that competitiveness scores of the USA and the UK are substantially overstated. Results of re-ranking 104 countries using 29 economic, environmental, and social datasets from reputable sources support this assertion, with the USA showing the greatest discrepancy on a 100-point scale between its 2013–2014 GCR score (5) and our study’s 2013 score (57), and the UK falling from GCR score 9 to 40. We explore reasons for this discrepancy, including examining the relationship between a country’s neoliberal traditions and its rankings on the indicators.",
keywords = "country competitiveness rankings, ideology, methodology",
author = "Harald Bergsteiner and Avery, {Gayle C.}",
note = "Copyright The Author(s) 2018. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.",
year = "2019",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1007/s10551-018-3805-6",
language = "English",
volume = "159",
pages = "863--881",
journal = "Journal of Business Ethics",
issn = "0167-4544",
publisher = "KLUWER ACADEMIC PUBL",
number = "3",

}

Misleading country rankings perpetuate destructive business practices. / Bergsteiner, Harald; Avery, Gayle C.

In: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 159, No. 3, 10.2019, p. 863-881.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Misleading country rankings perpetuate destructive business practices

AU - Bergsteiner, Harald

AU - Avery, Gayle C.

N1 - Copyright The Author(s) 2018. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

PY - 2019/10

Y1 - 2019/10

N2 - Countries are ranked on many criteria, the results of which can have far-reaching ethical and practical implications, particularly for emerging nations seeking role models. One highly influential ranking, the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report (GCR), has been criticized for containing multiple methodological, conceptual, and logical flaws that bias competitiveness rankings toward countries that favor neoliberalism. Using datasets not afflicted by such flaws, we examine Bergsteiner and Avery’s (J Bus Ethics 109(4):391–410, 2012) prediction that competitiveness scores of the USA and the UK are substantially overstated. Results of re-ranking 104 countries using 29 economic, environmental, and social datasets from reputable sources support this assertion, with the USA showing the greatest discrepancy on a 100-point scale between its 2013–2014 GCR score (5) and our study’s 2013 score (57), and the UK falling from GCR score 9 to 40. We explore reasons for this discrepancy, including examining the relationship between a country’s neoliberal traditions and its rankings on the indicators.

AB - Countries are ranked on many criteria, the results of which can have far-reaching ethical and practical implications, particularly for emerging nations seeking role models. One highly influential ranking, the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report (GCR), has been criticized for containing multiple methodological, conceptual, and logical flaws that bias competitiveness rankings toward countries that favor neoliberalism. Using datasets not afflicted by such flaws, we examine Bergsteiner and Avery’s (J Bus Ethics 109(4):391–410, 2012) prediction that competitiveness scores of the USA and the UK are substantially overstated. Results of re-ranking 104 countries using 29 economic, environmental, and social datasets from reputable sources support this assertion, with the USA showing the greatest discrepancy on a 100-point scale between its 2013–2014 GCR score (5) and our study’s 2013 score (57), and the UK falling from GCR score 9 to 40. We explore reasons for this discrepancy, including examining the relationship between a country’s neoliberal traditions and its rankings on the indicators.

KW - country competitiveness rankings

KW - ideology

KW - methodology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044034785&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10551-018-3805-6

DO - 10.1007/s10551-018-3805-6

M3 - Article

VL - 159

SP - 863

EP - 881

JO - Journal of Business Ethics

T2 - Journal of Business Ethics

JF - Journal of Business Ethics

SN - 0167-4544

IS - 3

ER -