Amid all the recent talk about reforming the global financial system to increase its “stability,” there’s been little said about extending the idea of economic security to workers.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development research group came close earlier this month. The OECD’s Financial Markets Committee—made up of officials from central banks, finance ministries and other financial authorities—issued a statement  in response to the subprime mortgage crisis and related financial turbulence of late. It called for “fundamental reform of financial markets” that “enhances stability, whilst retaining efficiency.” And, in a move rare among financial officials and bankers, the OECD acknowledged the way the global economy is becoming more chancy for individuals.

“The OECD also notes that the world is moving to a situation in which individuals bear more and more risks, without being necessarily able to cope with them,” the organization said April 15. “This concerns not only credit, including sub-prime mortgages, but also insurance or pensions.”

A big portion of the world’s individuals are workers and employees. And they also face the risk of sudden job loss, as seen by the thousands of layoffs in recent months in the United States. Unfortunately, the OECD Financial Markets Committee has a tepid solution to people’s economic precariousness: “This situation calls for a new culture of risk awareness and financial education mechanisms that the OECD promotes.”

More recently this month, the OECD proposed a more concrete measure to help with unemployment—giving local agencies and authorities more power and autonomy to adjust employment and training programs to meet local needs.

But such flexibility, while helpful, still isn’t likely to provide a strong enough fix to the problem at hand. That is, to give workers a meaningful measure of economic security while preserving a degree of freedom for businesses. Decent unemployment benefits, smart training programs, health insurance and sound retirement income—along with job opportunities—are the keys to economic security. But in many countries, one or more of these ingredients is missing.

The irony is that economic security for workers can coincide with strong economic growth. Denmark, with its “flexicurity” system, is a case in point.

As the financial crisis and credit crunch of 2007 and 2008 suggest, we have allowed for too much risk-taking on the part of some of our financial institutions. At the same time that we seek to establish a less dicey financial system, we ought to broaden this push for economic security. Including workers in the trenches can help us get to an economy that is both more stable and more prosperous.

News that HR consulting firm Mercer forged a deal with an executive search firm in Vietnam is a sign of the times.

U.S.-based firms that pitch talent-related services see strong growth in Asia even as evidence keeps pointing toward a downturn in the U.S. economy.

Mercer, a unit of professional services firm Marsh & McClennan Cos., said Thursday, March 14, that it signed an agreement with TalentNet of Vietnam to market and provide Mercer’s proprietary research, HR management tools and survey data.

Guo Xin, deputy region head of Mercer for the Asia-Pacific region, said the agreement with TalentNet further underscores Mercer’s ongoing commitment to expanding in Vietnam.

“With Vietnam experiencing such phenomenal growth in the past years, so too has demand for Mercer’s offerings, particularly with data-driven products and services from our Information Product Solutions (IPS) division,” Guo Xin said in a statement.

I met with Guo Xin last year in Beijing  and heard him say similar things about China’s rapid growth and the accompanying demand for HR-related help.

Mercer is not alone in jumping on the Asia bandwagon. Right Management, the consulting firm that’s a subsidiary of staffing giant Manpower, last month announced new positions for two executives in Asia.

And executive search specialist Korn/Ferry International saw its executive recruitment fees  in the Asia-Pacific region jump 36 percent in the three months ended January 31, to $25.3 million.

That was a much faster clip than the 21 percent growth overall in the firm’s executive recruitment fees. What’s more, those Asia-Pacific placements had a higher profit margin—21.5 percent—than Korn/Ferry’s executive recruiting gigs in North America, Europe and South America.

But how long will Asia be golden? A big question right now is whether China, Vietnam and other Asian countries can avoid catching America’s economic cold. There’s some thinking the slowdown at hand will be fairly global in nature .

If that’s the case, all the diversification in the world may not do much to help U.S.-based talent advisors weather a rough patch.

Here’s one explanation why software firm SAP has become one of the world’s leading technology companies over the years: it is a great place to work.

SAP recently was named Germany’s best workplace in the category of companies with more than 5,000 employees by the Great Place to Work Institute Germany. The award marks the fourth consecutive year the Walldorf, Germany-based firm has taken top honors in the contest. SAP, which is one of the biggest sellers of HR software in the world, also was honored as one of the 25 best companies to work for in Japan this year.

If there remain doubters that a positive work climate corresponds to sound business results, consider a recent study from a University of Pennsylvania researcher. Finance professor Alex Edmans found that companies cited as good places to work earn stock returns that are more than double those of the overall market. In particular, companies on Fortune magazine’s annual list of the 100 Best Companies to Work for in America between 1998 and 2005 returned 14 percent per year, compared to 6 percent a year for the overall market.

SAP has its critics, and it is locked in a fierce battle with Oracle in the business software market. But over the long haul, it seems to have learned how to adapt. For example, SAP’s old reputation for arrogance (as in, SAP means Shut Up and Pay) has faded and the firm has become a much humbler organization in tune with today’s business focus on collaboration.

Part of SAP’s software success involves learning from its own experience. In an interview a couple years ago, SAP HR head Claus Heinrich told me his operation acts as a lab for the firm. Heinrich has pushed SAP software product managers to include features ranging from a 360-degree feedback process to online pay stubs.

Another key, it seems, is treating its talent as a top priority. As long as SAP keeps winning prizes as a great place to work, I wouldn’t bet against it remaining in the top echelon of the tech world.

Are American or European executives more enlightened when it comes to business and workforce management priorities?

A new study from AMR Research doesn’t tackle that question head-on, but it sheds some interesting light on the issue. At first blush, the findings back the notion that U.S. firms are more focused on short-term success compared with their European counterparts.

In particular, the research suggests American managers put a higher priority on profitability and revenue growth, while European business leaders stress increasing market share and getting innovative products to market.

AMR’s study focuses on spending on “human capital management” software. It surveyed a total of 304 business executives from the United States, Germany and the United Kingdom. Among other questions, it asked about the top two business priorities associated with human capital management for the next year.

Fifty percent of U.S. respondents named “increased profitability” as their company’s first or second priority, making that the top overall choice. “Revenue growth” came in second, with 43 percent of U.S. managers listing it as their first or second priority.

In the U.K., though, “increased market share” was the top choice, slightly edging out revenue growth. In Germany, increased market share and increased profitability tied for the top spot. Getting innovative products to market was the first or second priority for 28 percent of U.K. respondents and 19 percent of German respondents but just 11 percent of U.S. managers.

To be sure, there are limits to drawing conclusions about U.S. and European business priorities from the AMR study. For one thing, it polled information technology executives, who rarely call the shots at companies. What’s more, the study examines just two European countries.

It’s also possible that the relatively low score for innovation in the United States reflects U.S. prowess in the realm: Perhaps American companies are good enough at pumping out new market-pleasers that they can focus on other goals. Conversely, perhaps European executives are so focused on market share and innovation because they’re trying to catch up with Americans in these fields.

What’s more, the European and American respondents to the study could be part of global organizations based in a different part of the world from where they work.

Still, the research raises some intriguing questions. Is the American focus on earnings efficiency wise in the long run? Could European business leaders be preparing their workforces more effectively for future success?

Seven workers died in Dubai this week in what may be a window into the seamy underside of global capitalism.

The workers were killed and 19 others were injured when a wall collapsed on a bridge construction project, according to Gulf News, a publication based in the United Arab Emirates. The U.A.E. is the federal government for Dubai and six other emirates. In an Associated Press story about the accident, the head of safety at a nearby construction site said workers on the bridge project were not properly equipped to ensure their safety because they did not have helmets, gloves, proper shoes or harnesses.

An official with the firm that employed the killed workers, Wade Adams Group, disputed those charges.

But it wouldn’t be surprising if the allegations of inadequate safety equipment are true, given Dubai’s dubious labor rights record.

Labor unions are illegal in Dubai, according to Agence France-Presse. The oil-rich, fast-growing city-state relies heavily on South Asian migrant workers, and advocacy groups have criticized Dubai for its labor rules and practices.

Despite strikes being outlawed, migrant workers at construction sites in Dubai—including the world’s tallest building, Burj Dubai—have been striking for better wages, according to Agence France-Presse. The news service reported on November 7 that the U.A.E. said it would “urgently” review wages of workers in the construction sector following the wave of strikes.

Such government intervention would be something of a reversal for Dubai. The government’s official Web site boasts that “Dubai’s economy has been kept open and free to attract investors and business. Government control and regulation of private sector activities has been kept to a minimum.”

Meanwhile, Gulf News reported that the families of the seven dead workers—all Indians—will get 10 years’ salary in compensation. According to the AP, a Wade Adams Group official estimated the workers each earned an average of $2,615 a year, for a total of $26,142 over 10 years.

I wonder whether the family members consider that “fair trade” in action.