Search results

Widespread news coverage, politicised debate and social media commentary have given prominence to COVID-19 as an unparalleled threat to global health and mortality, intensifying panic and insecurity worldwide. In response, the endorsement and amplification of false claims about the pandemic has proliferated, in many cases, by public figures in the online ‘wellness’ realm. Using COVID-19 as a case study, this chapter interrogates observed connections between digital wellness cultures and informational disorders in times of crisis. The authors discuss the bourgeois liberal-individualist ideals that increasingly underpin much of this communication, exemplified through the co-option of social justice rhetoric and narratives of the ‘persecuted hero’. The authors also recognise the growing number of wellness influencers openly resisting pandemic-related mis/disinformation, and note the forms of anti-individualist, mutual care demonstrated in these ‘debunking’ efforts. The authors argue that these practices reflect a form of networked solidarity – enacted alongside a discursive distancing from individualist modes of thinking – that can be understood by applying a social ecological framework for understanding ‘resilience’.

Using bibliometric techniques, the author analyzes a dataset of 276 articles on cross-border mergers and acquisitions (CBMAs) published in 13 management and international business journals. The author assesses the scientific impact and visualizes the intellectual landscape of research on CBMAs by analyzing publication and citation data and interconnections between publications. First, the author assesses annual publication trends and identifies highly cited articles and productive journals in the dataset that have significantly contributed to our understanding of CBMAs. Second, the author identifies main themes in recent research on CBMAs by focusing on frequently used keywords in publications. Third, the author identifies clusters of related research and explores their interrelationships to outline emerging trends, new perspectives, and directions for future research on CBMAs. Overall, this chapter contributes to the understanding of CBMAs by documenting the progress made to date and providing important insights for future research.

In times of crisis, such as the Covid-19 global pandemic, journalists who write about biomedical information must have the strategic aim to be clearly and easily understood by everyone. In this study, we assume that journalistic discourse could benefit from language redundancy to improve clarity and simplicity aimed at science popularization. The concept of language redundancy is theoretically discussed with the support of discourse analysis and information theory. The methodology adopted is a corpus-based qualitative approach. Two corpora samples with Brazilian Portuguese (BP) texts on Covid-19 were collected. One with texts from a monthly science digital magazine called Pesquisa FAPESP aimed at students and researchers for scientific information dissemination and the other with popular language texts from a news Portal G1 (Rede Globo) aimed at unspecified and/or non-specialized readers. The materials were filtered with two descriptors: “vaccine” and “test.” Preliminary analysis of examples from these materials revealed two categories of redundancy: paraphrastic and polysemic. Paraphrastic redundancy is based on concomitant language reformulation of words, sentences, text excerpts, or even larger units. Polysemic redundancy does not easily show material evidence, but is based on cognitively predictable semantic association in socio-cultural domains. Both kinds of redundancy contribute, each in their own way, to improving text readability for science popularization in Brazil.

Over the past two decades, the study of team resilience has evolved from focusing primarily on team performance to recognizing its importance in various aspects of team functioning, including psychological health, teamwork, and overall Well-Being. This evolution underscores the need for a broader, more inclusive understanding of team resilience, advocating for a shift from a narrow performance-centric view to a holistic perspective that encompasses the multifaceted impact of resilience on teams.

In advocating for this holistic perspective, this chapter reviews the extant literature, highlighting that resilience is not merely about sustaining performance but also about fostering a supportive, adaptive, and psychologically safe environment for team members. Significant areas for further exploration, including the nuanced nature of adversities teams face, the processes underpinning resilient behaviors, and the broad spectrum of outcomes resilience can influence beyond task performance are also discussed.

The chapter serves as a call to action for a more inclusive examination of how resilience manifests and benefits teams in organizational settings. The proposed shift in perspective aims to deepen understanding of team resilience, promoting strategies for building resilient teams that thrive not only in performance but in all aspects of their functioning.

We call the attention of management scholars to the methodological traps inherent to data collected using self-reported emotional experience in the context of integration after mergers and acquisitions (M&A). In a systematic review, we identified 15 peer-reviewed empirical articles where authors discuss the impact of emotions in post-merger situations based on interview data. We found that the authors of 12 studies appear to have been unaware of the problems of the interview method or implicitly accepted the inherent and unavoidable distortions and biases of self-reported emotions over time. We argue that these distortions and biases represent threats to data validity and reliability. In support of this position, we cite literature suggesting it is difficult for researchers to reconstruct emotions experienced based on interviews conducted a few weeks after the events, so results based on this method may not be valid. The authors of these articles all relied on data collected several months or years after M&A integration events. Then, they sought to assess the impact of emotions at the time of the integration process. As a consequence, conclusions based on these data may be unreliable. We conclude with recommendations for overcoming this potential source of invalid data in post-merger integration (PMI) studies.

The contemporary dialog surrounding social and environmental crises has strengthened the call for a reconsideration of the capitalist economic system, prompting a reimagining of businesses’ societal roles. This chapter explores the shifting terrain of corporate purpose as a driving force for positive societal change, challenging the traditional shareholder primacy doctrine.

After examining influential theoretical frameworks shaping the discourse on corporate purpose, this research unveils the results of an empirical investigation inspired by the 2019 American Business Roundtable’s (BRT) statement on corporate purpose, where numerous prominent American CEOs advocated for a shift toward a stakeholder-oriented approach. In our exercise, the authors employ semantic and cognitive linguistic analyses to measure the coherence between the language in the BRT statement and the content of sustainability reports. This approach aims to offer insights into the alignment or divergence between corporate declarations and actual practices concerning corporate purpose.

Empirical findings reveal that corporations emphasizing their purpose in sustainability reports using language resembling that of the BRT statement tend to demonstrate lower implementation scores. Conversely, implementors lean toward using language in sustainability reports that diverges from the BRT statement. These findings suggest a potential disconnection between stated purpose and actual implementation in companies emphasizing corporate purpose in their reports.

The study research contributes theoretical insights by exploring how corporations can incorporate purpose-driven practices to promote sustainable growth and societal well-being. It underscores the potential for businesses to play a pivotal role in reshaping the economic landscape and advocates for ongoing research in humanistic management models.

All four propositions, assumptions (A), presumptions (P), suppositions (S), and presuppositions (PS), are, in general, part of human language and its usage, usually studied under the domain of linguistics. Critical thinking, as we understand in these volumes, is critical analysis of human language and its linguistics and narratives and arguments, which freely or spontaneously use A, P, S, and PS. These in turn are composed of signs, symbols (e.g., the alphabet) that bear meanings (semantics), messages and information (informatics), and motivation and persuasion via argumentation (pragmatics). We elaborate on these in this appendix.

Our major thesis here is the epistemological quasi necessity of A, P, S, and PS, which we freely and spontaneously use in linguistics, informatics, semantics, semeiotics, and pragmatics in our day-to day discussions, dialog, research, teaching, conversations, and conventional rationalizations. These can be both good from the viewpoint of transparency and honesty, opacity, and human exchange information asymmetry. They are dangerous since such A, P, S, and PS could be based on false dichotomies of man/Nature, male/female, truth/falsehood, objectivity/subjectivity, riches/poverty, equality/inequality, and the like; most of the negative aspects of such dichotomies are being used for self-serving, profit-maximizing, wealth-accumulating, poverty-perpetuating, and socially polarizing purposes. Human Anthropocene history is dotted with them, especially in the developmental context of industrialization and economic infrastructure development.

Hence, the vital necessity of critical thinking for critical self-examination, especially in current MBA curricula. All the three volumes of this book on critical thinking are expressly designed for this purpose.