Search results

Organizational members responded to four open‐ended questions about the organization’s culture at two times, six years apart. Results of a content analysis of the responses indicated that organizational values remained stable, despite extensive changes in the top leadership of the organization coupled with environmental forces that were pushing for change in the organization’s culture. The categories of responses that emerged from the survey were explored and discussed as depictions of the organization’s culture.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether self‐defeating behaviors are correlated with leader derailment, and to compare self‐defeating behaviors to the previously identified derailment theme “Problems with Interpersonal Relationships”.

Deans at AACSB International‐accredited business schools were surveyed about “Problems with Interpersonal Relationships” and self‐defeating behaviors (SDBs) that one to two of their derailed direct reports may have portrayed. SDBs were analyzed for their strength of association with derailment and compared to the derailment theme “Problems with Interpersonal Relationships.”

Results indicated that SDBs are multi‐dimensional and those behaviors that involve interaction with others were significantly associated with leader derailment. Further, the results suggest that SDBs were significantly more indicative of derailment than were “Problems with Interpersonal Relationships”.

The small sample size may limit the ability to generalize the results of the study. Further, the lack of a comparison group of non‐derailed leaders does not rule out the possibility that they may also exhibit SDBs.

As the baby‐boomer generation leaves the workforce over the coming years, the demand for competent leadership will increase dramatically. Companies need to understand the underlying causes of derailment and take appropriate steps to minimize its impact.

Previous research on self‐defeating behaviors has focused on an individual's potential to derail. This study is unique in that it links SDBs to practicing leaders and relies on supervisor ratings (rather than self‐reports) of SDBs.

This paper examines the relationship among leadership skills, management skills and individual success and failure in formal organizations.

A model is presented depicting the interactive relationship among the three variables and explaining why some high potential employees suffer derailment while other individuals with similar skills continue to develop and achieve organizational success.

The model indicates that there is not one combination of management and leadership skills related to individual success.

Developmental activities should be ongoing regardless of the individual's level in the organization.

This paper synthesizes several streams of research into a coherent model that can be used as a guide for leadership development activities.

The purpose of this paper is to present a holistic intra‐individual perspective on leaders, which focuses on four components of the inner person of the leader; Being, Cognition, Spirituality, and Emotion, and on the observable components of Behavior and Relationships.

Existing leadership literature is appraised within the context of the model. Previously‐proposed interrelationships among the components are enumerated. The paper suggests implications of the model regarding research content and methodology as well as leader development.

The model implies that all components should be included in research and that interrelationships among components should be explored. Also implied is the use of methodological pluralism.

Leaders should attend to all components in the model in their self‐development efforts.

The paper takes an unusual approach to understanding leadership: an individual‐level holistic perspective.

This introduction provides an overview of the discourse on alternative agrifood movements (AAMs) to (1) ascertain the degree of convergence and divergence around a common ethos of alterity and (2) context the chapters of the book. AAMs have increased in recent years in response to the growing legitimation crisis of the conventional agrifood system. Some agrifood researchers argue that AAMs represent the vanguard movement of our time, a formidable counter movement to global capitalism. Other authors note a pattern of blunting of the transformative qualities of AAMs due to conventionalization and mainstreaming in the market. The literature on AAMs is organized following a Four Questions in Agrifood Studies (Constance, 2008) framework. The section for each Question ends with a case study to better illustrate the historical dynamics of an AAM. The literature review ends with a summary of the discourse applied to the research question of the book: Are AAMs the vanguard social movement of our time? The last section of this introduction provides a short description of each contributing chapter of the book, which is divided into five sections: Introduction; Theoretical and Conceptual Framings; Food Sovereignty Movements; Alternative Movements in the Global North; and Conclusions.

Entitlement is a remote research topic in South Africa. Even further remote is the idea of teacher educator entitlement being a topic of academic inquiry. In this chapter, we report a self-study of a teacher educator's experiences and interactions with her students, in which the construct of entitlement was used as an interpretative lens. The data consist of narratives constructed from journal entries based on teacher educators' experiences collected over 12 years. Findings from this case study point to the prevalence of teacher educator entitlement, which manifests itself in different forms. Investigations need to be broadened to establish its reach and the underlying causes of entitled attitudes and behaviours among teacher educators, and how such behaviours impact professional practice and professional growth.

In this chapter we discuss the dynamics of convergence-divergence between organic and non-organic farming systems. We are specifically interested in how and in what ways organic systems emerge into a new system that synthesizes the diverse qualities of competing systems. Or, will these systems continue to diverge because of their path dependencies and contradictory, unresolvable logics? Alternatively, are we confronted with conversion? Following a discussion of the origin of organic agriculture and the IFOAM Principles, we explore differentiation of two agricultural paradigms that was developed more than 20 years ago before the rise of GMOs. This comparison identifies the key features of both systems and a first interpretation on the potential of convergence-divergence. Third, we take a macro-look at agro-food chain that offers insights on the convergence-divergence potential in the context of global, economic, market, political, and societal dynamics. Fourth, we discuss convergence-divergence at the production level comparing the four agricultural systems. Finally, we reflect and assess on the explanatory potential of our study for the future development of organic and non-organic agriculture/farming. We conclude that there is more evidence for conversion than for convergence.

The following is an annotated list of materials dealing with orientation to library facilities and services, instruction in the use of information resources, and research and computer skills that are related to retrieving and using information. This is the fourteenth review to be published in Reference Services Review and lists items in English published in 1987. A few items are not annotated because the compiler could not obtain copies of them for this review.

Through a categorisation of the convergence/divergence frame of this book into conceptual, organisational and analytical, and following a ‘corporate environmental’ and ‘corporate food’ regimes theoretical basis, in this chapter we sum up the findings of this collective work and develop some future research needs. The results presented show that at the conceptual level we can outline two different trends regarding alternative agrifood movements and their social transformation potential. In the global South the movements have a more radical/oppositional focus while in the global North the focus is more alternative/progressive. The context in the latter, where the movements are generally consumers leaded and political consumerism plays an important role, is a serious threat for the movements, leading to a loss of the transformative ideal as mainstreaming and conventionalisation occurs. We wonder if it is possible to build a common fighting strategy with a model perspective that allows global North movements to stay radical/oppositional. At the organisational level we conclude that novel tools are required to build common views promoting oppositional strategies. Experiences from the Diálogo de Saberes suggest that this tool built on different principles and values such as horizontalisation, learning, respect or gender perspective, among others, can be useful in this matter. In this regard, further research is needed to look at how alternative agrifood movements deal with gender and whether ecofeminist theories can help in the process of building a common global oppositional strategy. Finally, the analytical level centred in the production system shows that even at this very pragmatic level the food regime applies and that it is the values underlying each production system what defines the options for convergence and divergence.