Search results

This study aims to identify the political alignment and political activity of the 11 Presidents of Britain’s most important scientific organisation, the Royal Society of London, in its early years 1662–1703, to determine whether or not the institution was politically aligned.

There is almost no information addressing the political alignment of the Royal Society or its Presidents available in the institution’s archives, or in the writings of historians specialising in its administration. Even reliable biographical sources, such as the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography provide very limited information. However, as 10 Presidents were elected Member of Parliament (MP), The History of Parliament: British Political, Social and Local History provides a wealth of accurate, in-depth data, revealing the alignment of both.

All Presidents held senior government offices, the first was a Royalist aristocrat; of the remaining 10, 8 were Royalist or Tory MPs, 2 of whom were falsely imprisoned by the House of Commons, 2 were Whig MPs, while 4 were elevated to the Lords. The institution was Royalist aligned 1662–1680, Tory aligned 1680–1695 and Whig aligned 1695–1703, which reflects changes in Parliament and State.

This study establishes that the early Royal Society was not an apolitical institution and that the political alignment of Presidents and institution continued in later eras. Furthermore, it demonstrates how the election or appointment of an organisation’s most senior officer can be used to signal its political alignment with government and other organisations to serve various ends.

The purpose of this study is to investigate managers’ decision-making processes when evaluating suggestions provided by human collaborators or artificial intelligence (AI) systems. We employed the framework of Social Comparison Theory (SCT) in the business context to examine the influence of varying social comparison orientation levels on managers’ willingness to accept advice in their organization.

A survey was conducted on a sample of 192 US managers, in which we carried out an experiment manipulating the source type (human vs AI) and assessing the potential moderating role of social comparison orientation. Results were analyzed using a moderation model by Hayes (2013).

Despite the growing consideration gained by AI systems, results showed a discernible preference for human-generated advice over those originating from Artificial Intelligence (AI) sources. Moreover, the moderation analysis indicated how low levels of social comparison orientation may lead managers to be more willing to accept advice from AI.

This study contributes to the current understanding of the interplay between social comparison orientation and managerial decision-making. Based on the results of this preliminary study that used a scenario-based experiment, future research could try to expand these findings by examining managerial behavior in a natural context using field experiments, or multiple case studies.

This is among the first studies that examine AI adoption in the organizational context, showing how AI may be used by managers to evade comparison among peers or other experts, thereby illuminating the role of individual factors in affecting managers’ decision-making.

This paper aims to explore the importance of tailored faculty development for neurodiverse business educators. It focuses on how specialized support can enhance research output, teaching effectiveness and service contributions within the academic community.

This paper’s conceptual approach uses elements of autoethnography to inform and support prior theoretical and empirical work. An explication of how neurodiversity can be integrated into faculty development efforts is presented with emphasis on individualized support systems, empathetic mentorship and customized teaching and research support strategies to leverage often unrecognized abilities.

The research identifies that neuroatypical faculty possess certain strengths such as heightened problem-solving skills and attention to detail, which, when supported, can significantly enrich the academic environment. However, there is a lack of targeted support mechanisms for, and general awareness of, these faculty. The paper proposes modifications to existing faculty development activities, emphasizing general and individualized approaches to better harness the talents of neurodiverse educators.

Implementing the proposed strategies will foster an inclusive educational atmosphere while enhancing academic creativity, innovation and productivity. This approach also aligns with important trends in diversity and inclusion, promoting a more equitable and dynamic academic environment.

This research contributes to the field by extending the discourse on neurodiversity in higher education beyond student-focused initiatives to include faculty development. It provides actionable strategies to create inclusive environments that leverage the cognitive strengths of neurodiverse faculty, a relatively unexplored area in business education.