Question Description
Weaver sees hypocrisy in the World Bank as a predictable feature in a large international organization especially when viewed using resource dependency (viewing the competitive environment) and sociological institutionalism (the authorising environment). The Banks emphasis on organizational survival and legitimacy shows itself in its interactions with multiple actors in its competitive and authoritarian environments. Many critics of the Bank simply see the Bank as unable to achieve the goals it sets and help its client states. Weaver however launches into an in-depth description of two "worlds"-the Worlds Bank and the Banks World. The former indicates the complex structure of the Bank including its donor states, client states, its private capital markets and the watchdog Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Weavers examination reveals the various pressures exerted on the Bank and the degree of American influence on the bank.In as much as the Bank is pressured from many sides, Weaver notes a strong degree of operational authority and autonomy in the "Banks World". This stems from the complexity of its operations, some which are not open to extensive review. Second the diversity of member states allows the Bank some autonomy and most importantly, the Bank holds a strong monopoly over development related knowledge. This control of ideas is coupled with a technocratic and economic rationality, reinforced with the influx of Western trained neo-classical economists. Bank ideological coherence is also maintained by the editing of reports to align with neoliberal beliefs. It is within these strong intellectual norms that Weaver examines World Bank reforms. Contrary to some critics, the Bank did engage in reforms in the 1990s. The Strategic Compact arose as a need to transform the Bank back as an effort to re-orientate itself as the premier development agency, after external criticism and an internal evaluation. The first aim of streamlining bureaucracy was easily reached however the aim of being more "poverty focused and accountable" came at odds with the technical, economic and apolitical rationality. New efforts such as listening to clients and conducting consultations clashed with the existing approval culture. Overall, changes occurred but still the approval culture remained strong.Similarly, the focus on good governance was not that effective with apolitical stances amongst staff.Furthermore, the dominating neo-liberal mindset resulted in governance issues framed with economic objectives in mind. Just as with the Strategic Compact, Weaver notes that governance reform challenged the Banks conventional method of conducting business.Weaver does qualify that the constant need to placate the demands of various external groups also hampered Bank reform. She however noted that the Bank deep culture will prevent any productive change. Weaver thus delves away from the normal criticism of the World Bank to explain the reasons of Bank actions and activities.She shed a new light noting that such hypocrisy is a tenet in any large international organisation. In order for any improvement to the World Bank, it is not simply the initiation of change but the need to re work the internal settings of one of the worlds most important development groups.Q. Under which environments does Weaver assess World Banks hypocrisy?a)The competitive and the accountable environments.b)The combative and the democratic environments.c)The combative and the authoritarian environments.d)The competitive and the authoritarian environments.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for Class 12 2024 is part of Class 12 preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Class 12 exam syllabus. Information about Weaver sees hypocrisy in the World Bank as a predictable feature in a large international organization especially when viewed using resource dependency (viewing the competitive environment) and sociological institutionalism (the authorising environment). The Banks emphasis on organizational survival and legitimacy shows itself in its interactions with multiple actors in its competitive and authoritarian environments. Many critics of the Bank simply see the Bank as unable to achieve the goals it sets and help its client states. Weaver however launches into an in-depth description of two "worlds"-the Worlds Bank and the Banks World. The former indicates the complex structure of the Bank including its donor states, client states, its private capital markets and the watchdog Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Weavers examination reveals the various pressures exerted on the Bank and the degree of American influence on the bank.In as much as the Bank is pressured from many sides, Weaver notes a strong degree of operational authority and autonomy in the "Banks World". This stems from the complexity of its operations, some which are not open to extensive review. Second the diversity of member states allows the Bank some autonomy and most importantly, the Bank holds a strong monopoly over development related knowledge. This control of ideas is coupled with a technocratic and economic rationality, reinforced with the influx of Western trained neo-classical economists. Bank ideological coherence is also maintained by the editing of reports to align with neoliberal beliefs. It is within these strong intellectual norms that Weaver examines World Bank reforms. Contrary to some critics, the Bank did engage in reforms in the 1990s. The Strategic Compact arose as a need to transform the Bank back as an effort to re-orientate itself as the premier development agency, after external criticism and an internal evaluation. The first aim of streamlining bureaucracy was easily reached however the aim of being more "poverty focused and accountable" came at odds with the technical, economic and apolitical rationality. New efforts such as listening to clients and conducting consultations clashed with the existing approval culture. Overall, changes occurred but still the approval culture remained strong.Similarly, the focus on good governance was not that effective with apolitical stances amongst staff.Furthermore, the dominating neo-liberal mindset resulted in governance issues framed with economic objectives in mind. Just as with the Strategic Compact, Weaver notes that governance reform challenged the Banks conventional method of conducting business.Weaver does qualify that the constant need to placate the demands of various external groups also hampered Bank reform. She however noted that the Bank deep culture will prevent any productive change. Weaver thus delves away from the normal criticism of the World Bank to explain the reasons of Bank actions and activities.She shed a new light noting that such hypocrisy is a tenet in any large international organisation. In order for any improvement to the World Bank, it is not simply the initiation of change but the need to re work the internal settings of one of the worlds most important development groups.Q. Under which environments does Weaver assess World Banks hypocrisy?a)The competitive and the accountable environments.b)The combative and the democratic environments.c)The combative and the authoritarian environments.d)The competitive and the authoritarian environments.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Class 12 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Weaver sees hypocrisy in the World Bank as a predictable feature in a large international organization especially when viewed using resource dependency (viewing the competitive environment) and sociological institutionalism (the authorising environment). The Banks emphasis on organizational survival and legitimacy shows itself in its interactions with multiple actors in its competitive and authoritarian environments. Many critics of the Bank simply see the Bank as unable to achieve the goals it sets and help its client states. Weaver however launches into an in-depth description of two "worlds"-the Worlds Bank and the Banks World. The former indicates the complex structure of the Bank including its donor states, client states, its private capital markets and the watchdog Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Weavers examination reveals the various pressures exerted on the Bank and the degree of American influence on the bank.In as much as the Bank is pressured from many sides, Weaver notes a strong degree of operational authority and autonomy in the "Banks World". This stems from the complexity of its operations, some which are not open to extensive review. Second the diversity of member states allows the Bank some autonomy and most importantly, the Bank holds a strong monopoly over development related knowledge. This control of ideas is coupled with a technocratic and economic rationality, reinforced with the influx of Western trained neo-classical economists. Bank ideological coherence is also maintained by the editing of reports to align with neoliberal beliefs. It is within these strong intellectual norms that Weaver examines World Bank reforms. Contrary to some critics, the Bank did engage in reforms in the 1990s. The Strategic Compact arose as a need to transform the Bank back as an effort to re-orientate itself as the premier development agency, after external criticism and an internal evaluation. The first aim of streamlining bureaucracy was easily reached however the aim of being more "poverty focused and accountable" came at odds with the technical, economic and apolitical rationality. New efforts such as listening to clients and conducting consultations clashed with the existing approval culture. Overall, changes occurred but still the approval culture remained strong.Similarly, the focus on good governance was not that effective with apolitical stances amongst staff.Furthermore, the dominating neo-liberal mindset resulted in governance issues framed with economic objectives in mind. Just as with the Strategic Compact, Weaver notes that governance reform challenged the Banks conventional method of conducting business.Weaver does qualify that the constant need to placate the demands of various external groups also hampered Bank reform. She however noted that the Bank deep culture will prevent any productive change. Weaver thus delves away from the normal criticism of the World Bank to explain the reasons of Bank actions and activities.She shed a new light noting that such hypocrisy is a tenet in any large international organisation. In order for any improvement to the World Bank, it is not simply the initiation of change but the need to re work the internal settings of one of the worlds most important development groups.Q. Under which environments does Weaver assess World Banks hypocrisy?a)The competitive and the accountable environments.b)The combative and the democratic environments.c)The combative and the authoritarian environments.d)The competitive and the authoritarian environments.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Weaver sees hypocrisy in the World Bank as a predictable feature in a large international organization especially when viewed using resource dependency (viewing the competitive environment) and sociological institutionalism (the authorising environment). The Banks emphasis on organizational survival and legitimacy shows itself in its interactions with multiple actors in its competitive and authoritarian environments. Many critics of the Bank simply see the Bank as unable to achieve the goals it sets and help its client states. Weaver however launches into an in-depth description of two "worlds"-the Worlds Bank and the Banks World. The former indicates the complex structure of the Bank including its donor states, client states, its private capital markets and the watchdog Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Weavers examination reveals the various pressures exerted on the Bank and the degree of American influence on the bank.In as much as the Bank is pressured from many sides, Weaver notes a strong degree of operational authority and autonomy in the "Banks World". This stems from the complexity of its operations, some which are not open to extensive review. Second the diversity of member states allows the Bank some autonomy and most importantly, the Bank holds a strong monopoly over development related knowledge. This control of ideas is coupled with a technocratic and economic rationality, reinforced with the influx of Western trained neo-classical economists. Bank ideological coherence is also maintained by the editing of reports to align with neoliberal beliefs. It is within these strong intellectual norms that Weaver examines World Bank reforms. Contrary to some critics, the Bank did engage in reforms in the 1990s. The Strategic Compact arose as a need to transform the Bank back as an effort to re-orientate itself as the premier development agency, after external criticism and an internal evaluation. The first aim of streamlining bureaucracy was easily reached however the aim of being more "poverty focused and accountable" came at odds with the technical, economic and apolitical rationality. New efforts such as listening to clients and conducting consultations clashed with the existing approval culture. Overall, changes occurred but still the approval culture remained strong.Similarly, the focus on good governance was not that effective with apolitical stances amongst staff.Furthermore, the dominating neo-liberal mindset resulted in governance issues framed with economic objectives in mind. Just as with the Strategic Compact, Weaver notes that governance reform challenged the Banks conventional method of conducting business.Weaver does qualify that the constant need to placate the demands of various external groups also hampered Bank reform. She however noted that the Bank deep culture will prevent any productive change. Weaver thus delves away from the normal criticism of the World Bank to explain the reasons of Bank actions and activities.She shed a new light noting that such hypocrisy is a tenet in any large international organisation. In order for any improvement to the World Bank, it is not simply the initiation of change but the need to re work the internal settings of one of the worlds most important development groups.Q. Under which environments does Weaver assess World Banks hypocrisy?a)The competitive and the accountable environments.b)The combative and the democratic environments.c)The combative and the authoritarian environments.d)The competitive and the authoritarian environments.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Class 12. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Class 12 Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Weaver sees hypocrisy in the World Bank as a predictable feature in a large international organization especially when viewed using resource dependency (viewing the competitive environment) and sociological institutionalism (the authorising environment). The Banks emphasis on organizational survival and legitimacy shows itself in its interactions with multiple actors in its competitive and authoritarian environments. Many critics of the Bank simply see the Bank as unable to achieve the goals it sets and help its client states. Weaver however launches into an in-depth description of two "worlds"-the Worlds Bank and the Banks World. The former indicates the complex structure of the Bank including its donor states, client states, its private capital markets and the watchdog Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Weavers examination reveals the various pressures exerted on the Bank and the degree of American influence on the bank.In as much as the Bank is pressured from many sides, Weaver notes a strong degree of operational authority and autonomy in the "Banks World". This stems from the complexity of its operations, some which are not open to extensive review. Second the diversity of member states allows the Bank some autonomy and most importantly, the Bank holds a strong monopoly over development related knowledge. This control of ideas is coupled with a technocratic and economic rationality, reinforced with the influx of Western trained neo-classical economists. Bank ideological coherence is also maintained by the editing of reports to align with neoliberal beliefs. It is within these strong intellectual norms that Weaver examines World Bank reforms. Contrary to some critics, the Bank did engage in reforms in the 1990s. The Strategic Compact arose as a need to transform the Bank back as an effort to re-orientate itself as the premier development agency, after external criticism and an internal evaluation. The first aim of streamlining bureaucracy was easily reached however the aim of being more "poverty focused and accountable" came at odds with the technical, economic and apolitical rationality. New efforts such as listening to clients and conducting consultations clashed with the existing approval culture. Overall, changes occurred but still the approval culture remained strong.Similarly, the focus on good governance was not that effective with apolitical stances amongst staff.Furthermore, the dominating neo-liberal mindset resulted in governance issues framed with economic objectives in mind. Just as with the Strategic Compact, Weaver notes that governance reform challenged the Banks conventional method of conducting business.Weaver does qualify that the constant need to placate the demands of various external groups also hampered Bank reform. She however noted that the Bank deep culture will prevent any productive change. Weaver thus delves away from the normal criticism of the World Bank to explain the reasons of Bank actions and activities.She shed a new light noting that such hypocrisy is a tenet in any large international organisation. In order for any improvement to the World Bank, it is not simply the initiation of change but the need to re work the internal settings of one of the worlds most important development groups.Q. Under which environments does Weaver assess World Banks hypocrisy?a)The competitive and the accountable environments.b)The combative and the democratic environments.c)The combative and the authoritarian environments.d)The competitive and the authoritarian environments.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Weaver sees hypocrisy in the World Bank as a predictable feature in a large international organization especially when viewed using resource dependency (viewing the competitive environment) and sociological institutionalism (the authorising environment). The Banks emphasis on organizational survival and legitimacy shows itself in its interactions with multiple actors in its competitive and authoritarian environments. Many critics of the Bank simply see the Bank as unable to achieve the goals it sets and help its client states. Weaver however launches into an in-depth description of two "worlds"-the Worlds Bank and the Banks World. The former indicates the complex structure of the Bank including its donor states, client states, its private capital markets and the watchdog Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Weavers examination reveals the various pressures exerted on the Bank and the degree of American influence on the bank.In as much as the Bank is pressured from many sides, Weaver notes a strong degree of operational authority and autonomy in the "Banks World". This stems from the complexity of its operations, some which are not open to extensive review. Second the diversity of member states allows the Bank some autonomy and most importantly, the Bank holds a strong monopoly over development related knowledge. This control of ideas is coupled with a technocratic and economic rationality, reinforced with the influx of Western trained neo-classical economists. Bank ideological coherence is also maintained by the editing of reports to align with neoliberal beliefs. It is within these strong intellectual norms that Weaver examines World Bank reforms. Contrary to some critics, the Bank did engage in reforms in the 1990s. The Strategic Compact arose as a need to transform the Bank back as an effort to re-orientate itself as the premier development agency, after external criticism and an internal evaluation. The first aim of streamlining bureaucracy was easily reached however the aim of being more "poverty focused and accountable" came at odds with the technical, economic and apolitical rationality. New efforts such as listening to clients and conducting consultations clashed with the existing approval culture. Overall, changes occurred but still the approval culture remained strong.Similarly, the focus on good governance was not that effective with apolitical stances amongst staff.Furthermore, the dominating neo-liberal mindset resulted in governance issues framed with economic objectives in mind. Just as with the Strategic Compact, Weaver notes that governance reform challenged the Banks conventional method of conducting business.Weaver does qualify that the constant need to placate the demands of various external groups also hampered Bank reform. She however noted that the Bank deep culture will prevent any productive change. Weaver thus delves away from the normal criticism of the World Bank to explain the reasons of Bank actions and activities.She shed a new light noting that such hypocrisy is a tenet in any large international organisation. In order for any improvement to the World Bank, it is not simply the initiation of change but the need to re work the internal settings of one of the worlds most important development groups.Q. Under which environments does Weaver assess World Banks hypocrisy?a)The competitive and the accountable environments.b)The combative and the democratic environments.c)The combative and the authoritarian environments.d)The competitive and the authoritarian environments.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Weaver sees hypocrisy in the World Bank as a predictable feature in a large international organization especially when viewed using resource dependency (viewing the competitive environment) and sociological institutionalism (the authorising environment). The Banks emphasis on organizational survival and legitimacy shows itself in its interactions with multiple actors in its competitive and authoritarian environments. Many critics of the Bank simply see the Bank as unable to achieve the goals it sets and help its client states. Weaver however launches into an in-depth description of two "worlds"-the Worlds Bank and the Banks World. The former indicates the complex structure of the Bank including its donor states, client states, its private capital markets and the watchdog Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Weavers examination reveals the various pressures exerted on the Bank and the degree of American influence on the bank.In as much as the Bank is pressured from many sides, Weaver notes a strong degree of operational authority and autonomy in the "Banks World". This stems from the complexity of its operations, some which are not open to extensive review. Second the diversity of member states allows the Bank some autonomy and most importantly, the Bank holds a strong monopoly over development related knowledge. This control of ideas is coupled with a technocratic and economic rationality, reinforced with the influx of Western trained neo-classical economists. Bank ideological coherence is also maintained by the editing of reports to align with neoliberal beliefs. It is within these strong intellectual norms that Weaver examines World Bank reforms. Contrary to some critics, the Bank did engage in reforms in the 1990s. The Strategic Compact arose as a need to transform the Bank back as an effort to re-orientate itself as the premier development agency, after external criticism and an internal evaluation. The first aim of streamlining bureaucracy was easily reached however the aim of being more "poverty focused and accountable" came at odds with the technical, economic and apolitical rationality. New efforts such as listening to clients and conducting consultations clashed with the existing approval culture. Overall, changes occurred but still the approval culture remained strong.Similarly, the focus on good governance was not that effective with apolitical stances amongst staff.Furthermore, the dominating neo-liberal mindset resulted in governance issues framed with economic objectives in mind. Just as with the Strategic Compact, Weaver notes that governance reform challenged the Banks conventional method of conducting business.Weaver does qualify that the constant need to placate the demands of various external groups also hampered Bank reform. She however noted that the Bank deep culture will prevent any productive change. Weaver thus delves away from the normal criticism of the World Bank to explain the reasons of Bank actions and activities.She shed a new light noting that such hypocrisy is a tenet in any large international organisation. In order for any improvement to the World Bank, it is not simply the initiation of change but the need to re work the internal settings of one of the worlds most important development groups.Q. Under which environments does Weaver assess World Banks hypocrisy?a)The competitive and the accountable environments.b)The combative and the democratic environments.c)The combative and the authoritarian environments.d)The competitive and the authoritarian environments.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Weaver sees hypocrisy in the World Bank as a predictable feature in a large international organization especially when viewed using resource dependency (viewing the competitive environment) and sociological institutionalism (the authorising environment). The Banks emphasis on organizational survival and legitimacy shows itself in its interactions with multiple actors in its competitive and authoritarian environments. Many critics of the Bank simply see the Bank as unable to achieve the goals it sets and help its client states. Weaver however launches into an in-depth description of two "worlds"-the Worlds Bank and the Banks World. The former indicates the complex structure of the Bank including its donor states, client states, its private capital markets and the watchdog Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Weavers examination reveals the various pressures exerted on the Bank and the degree of American influence on the bank.In as much as the Bank is pressured from many sides, Weaver notes a strong degree of operational authority and autonomy in the "Banks World". This stems from the complexity of its operations, some which are not open to extensive review. Second the diversity of member states allows the Bank some autonomy and most importantly, the Bank holds a strong monopoly over development related knowledge. This control of ideas is coupled with a technocratic and economic rationality, reinforced with the influx of Western trained neo-classical economists. Bank ideological coherence is also maintained by the editing of reports to align with neoliberal beliefs. It is within these strong intellectual norms that Weaver examines World Bank reforms. Contrary to some critics, the Bank did engage in reforms in the 1990s. The Strategic Compact arose as a need to transform the Bank back as an effort to re-orientate itself as the premier development agency, after external criticism and an internal evaluation. The first aim of streamlining bureaucracy was easily reached however the aim of being more "poverty focused and accountable" came at odds with the technical, economic and apolitical rationality. New efforts such as listening to clients and conducting consultations clashed with the existing approval culture. Overall, changes occurred but still the approval culture remained strong.Similarly, the focus on good governance was not that effective with apolitical stances amongst staff.Furthermore, the dominating neo-liberal mindset resulted in governance issues framed with economic objectives in mind. Just as with the Strategic Compact, Weaver notes that governance reform challenged the Banks conventional method of conducting business.Weaver does qualify that the constant need to placate the demands of various external groups also hampered Bank reform. She however noted that the Bank deep culture will prevent any productive change. Weaver thus delves away from the normal criticism of the World Bank to explain the reasons of Bank actions and activities.She shed a new light noting that such hypocrisy is a tenet in any large international organisation. In order for any improvement to the World Bank, it is not simply the initiation of change but the need to re work the internal settings of one of the worlds most important development groups.Q. Under which environments does Weaver assess World Banks hypocrisy?a)The competitive and the accountable environments.b)The combative and the democratic environments.c)The combative and the authoritarian environments.d)The competitive and the authoritarian environments.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Weaver sees hypocrisy in the World Bank as a predictable feature in a large international organization especially when viewed using resource dependency (viewing the competitive environment) and sociological institutionalism (the authorising environment). The Banks emphasis on organizational survival and legitimacy shows itself in its interactions with multiple actors in its competitive and authoritarian environments. Many critics of the Bank simply see the Bank as unable to achieve the goals it sets and help its client states. Weaver however launches into an in-depth description of two "worlds"-the Worlds Bank and the Banks World. The former indicates the complex structure of the Bank including its donor states, client states, its private capital markets and the watchdog Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Weavers examination reveals the various pressures exerted on the Bank and the degree of American influence on the bank.In as much as the Bank is pressured from many sides, Weaver notes a strong degree of operational authority and autonomy in the "Banks World". This stems from the complexity of its operations, some which are not open to extensive review. Second the diversity of member states allows the Bank some autonomy and most importantly, the Bank holds a strong monopoly over development related knowledge. This control of ideas is coupled with a technocratic and economic rationality, reinforced with the influx of Western trained neo-classical economists. Bank ideological coherence is also maintained by the editing of reports to align with neoliberal beliefs. It is within these strong intellectual norms that Weaver examines World Bank reforms. Contrary to some critics, the Bank did engage in reforms in the 1990s. The Strategic Compact arose as a need to transform the Bank back as an effort to re-orientate itself as the premier development agency, after external criticism and an internal evaluation. The first aim of streamlining bureaucracy was easily reached however the aim of being more "poverty focused and accountable" came at odds with the technical, economic and apolitical rationality. New efforts such as listening to clients and conducting consultations clashed with the existing approval culture. Overall, changes occurred but still the approval culture remained strong.Similarly, the focus on good governance was not that effective with apolitical stances amongst staff.Furthermore, the dominating neo-liberal mindset resulted in governance issues framed with economic objectives in mind. Just as with the Strategic Compact, Weaver notes that governance reform challenged the Banks conventional method of conducting business.Weaver does qualify that the constant need to placate the demands of various external groups also hampered Bank reform. She however noted that the Bank deep culture will prevent any productive change. Weaver thus delves away from the normal criticism of the World Bank to explain the reasons of Bank actions and activities.She shed a new light noting that such hypocrisy is a tenet in any large international organisation. In order for any improvement to the World Bank, it is not simply the initiation of change but the need to re work the internal settings of one of the worlds most important development groups.Q. Under which environments does Weaver assess World Banks hypocrisy?a)The competitive and the accountable environments.b)The combative and the democratic environments.c)The combative and the authoritarian environments.d)The competitive and the authoritarian environments.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Class 12 tests.