Search results

This chapter argues that Deliberative Dialogues (DDs) are a form of Education for Sustainable Development, whose design, process focus, wide-tent approach, and interdisciplinarity align with best democratic practices. DDs are an effective method for bridging seemingly opposing forces in academia and the larger society: Narrow expertise versus interdisciplinarity, individual orientation versus collaboration, polarization and prioritization of majority/privileged voice versus inclusivity and search for common ground. This chapter will define and describe deliberation and DDs as useful for a wide range of disciplines, offer models, explore basic components, and analyze the author’s participant researcher experience in crafting and facilitating DDs in 35 classes across multiple disciplines in a small private university. The chapter will look at the planning process, the logistics of running the DD, post-DD outcomes, and provide questions and suggestions for future enhancements. A particular kind of DD will be explored, the Syllabus Deliberation method (also known as the negotiated or process syllabus). Finally, the chapter will articulate findings related to the process of preparing for the deliberations, ways in which scaffolded activities improved, relationship between the dialogues and course curriculum, evolution of faculty and researcher-facilitator roles, challenges, and successes. Students’ and faculty’s perceptions of some outcomes are also included.

This paper aims to use the writings of Mikhail Bakhtin to reveal new insights into the role and impact of social media in health-care settings.

With the help of Bakhtin’s constructs of dialogism, polyphony, heteroglossia and carnival, the power and influences of the social media phenomenon in health-care settings, are explored.

It is apparent from the in-depth analysis conducted that there is a delicate balance between the need to increase dialogue and the need to safeguard public health, in the use of social media for health-related communication. Bakhtin‘s constructs elucidate this delicate balance and highlight the need for health-care providers that use social media to find the right balance between these competing communicational priorities.

This paper advances a nascent theoretical approach to social media research. By applying Bakhtinian ideas to consumer health informatics, this paper has the potential to open a new approach to theorizing the role of social software in health-care settings. Stakeholders in digital health will find this paper useful, as it opens up dialogue to further discuss the role of social media in health care.

The authors aim to review a five‐year multi‐study research programme on the role of public dialogue in the social and cultural sustainability of biotechnology developments in New Zealand.

The authors conducted a critical review of all the published research products from a five‐year government‐funded study of the cultural and social aspects of sustainable biotechnology in New Zealand.

The review research highlights how New Zealand Government policies on biotechnology, which motivated the research programme, were fore‐grounded on economic progress and competitive positioning. Thus, debate on sustainable biotechnology issues became cast in economic and technical terms, while public dialogue became seen as diversionary and unsubstantiated. The analysis concludes that the programme was ineffective in influencing government policy and fell victim to the very problem of science governance that its purpose was designed to address.

The research develops implications regarding the ability of government‐funded sustainability research to influence policy.

The review focuses on the purpose, content, outcomes, and context of the research programme and identifies a number of key themes that arose from the programme that are useful for other sustainability policy researchers. The reviewers conclude that this case demonstrates that the marketization of the public sphere depoliticises the social and cultural construction of the nation's future.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) (UN, 2006) obliges its signatory states to establish inclusive school systems. Germany ratified the document in 2008. This international steering impulse triggered a real “inclusion shock” (Heinrich, 2015, p. 235) when it came into force, because hardly any other country in Europe has worse conditions for implementing the convention than Germany. The school structure with up to nine special schools was called upon to fundamentally changes or adaptations by the CRPD. Since 2008, it has been observed that the various federal states in Germany react very differently to this impulse according to their own development. From an empirical point of view, this raises the question of the concrete “steering” of these inclusion-oriented transformations. The chapter examines the question of how the actors in the school system of the federal state Schleswig-Holstein reacted to this challenge between 2008 and 2014. The focus of the research interest is above all on the collective coordination of action by state and non-state actors in the multi-level system, the intentions of regulatory impulses and the effects of steering efforts in the process of implementing the CRPD. With regard to the implementation of Art. 24 of the CRPD, the “Governance-perspective“ makes it possible to conceive state activities and hierarchical forms of coordination as an integrative component of political regulatory processes, so that the complex mechanisms of influence, the intention to change, steering decisions and steering effects can be examined from an overarching perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how blockchain and triple-entry accounting technologies may improve non-governmental organisation (NGO) accountability by amplifying the social and economic outcomes of aid. It also provides a critique of these technologies from an accountability perspective.

An in-depth case study of a large NGO, relying on semi-structured interviews, document analysis and non-participant observation, provides an understanding of current issues in existing NGO accountability and reporting systems. A novel case-conceptual critical analysis is then used to explore how blockchain and triple-entry accounting systems may potentially address some of the challenges identified with NGO accountability.

An empirical case study outlines the current processes which discharge accountability to a range of stakeholders, emphasising how “upward” accountability is privileged over other forms. This provides a foundation to illustrate how new technology can improve upward accountability to donors by enabling more efficient, accurate and auditable record-keeping and reporting, creating space for an NGO to focus on horizontal accountability to partner organisations and downward accountability to beneficiaries. Greater accountability exposes NGOs to diverse views from partner organisations and beneficiaries, potentially enhancing opportunities for learning and growth, i.e. greater impact. However, blockchain and triple-entry accounting can also create “over-accounting” and further entrench the power of upward stakeholders, such as donors, if not implemented carefully.

A novel case-conceptual critical analysis furnishes new insights into how existing NGO accountability systems can be improved with technology. Despite the growing excitement about the possibilities of blockchain and triple-entry accounting systems, this paper offers a critical reflection on the limitations of these technologies and suggests avenues for future research.

Examples of how blockchain and triple-entry accounting systems can be integrated into NGO systems are presented. This research also raises the importance of creating a strong nexus between humans and technology, which ensures that “socialising” forms of accountability that empower vulnerable stakeholders, are embedded into international aid.

This research provides insight into present challenges with NGO accountability, using empirical evidence, furnishing potential solutions using novel blockchain and triple-entry accounting systems. Greater accountability to partner organisations and beneficiaries is important, as it potentially enables NGOs to learn how to be more impactful. Therefore, this paper introduces rich, contextually embedded perspectives on how NGO managers can exploit such technologies to enhance accountability and impact.

This paper aims to examine the planning and policy processes in relation to the pollution in Lake Taupo. This paper describes and explains the manifestation of the tenets of deliberative democracy and the impediments of mobilising the tenets in the planning and policy-making processes.

This interpretive case study makes sense of interview transcripts, minutes of meetings, media reports and public documents and adopts deliberative democratic theory as the theoretical framework for the interpretive analysis.

Some factors fostered and others challenged the mobilization of the tenets of deliberative democracy. Local government processes facilitated the expression of multiple views in relation to the impacts of human activities on the Lake. Confrontations and tensions were inevitable elements of the deliberative processes. Pre-determined outcomes and domination of local authorities, aiming for environmental sustainability of Lake Taupo, posed as challenges to the operation of deliberative democracy. Some stakeholders need to sacrifice more than others, but recognition of pluralism, conflicts and differences is an essential part of deliberative democracy.

There is scarcity of research that empirically examines local government processes in light of deliberative democratic principles. The study also extends environmental and social studies that have explored the arena approach to accountability and decision-making.

The purpose of this paper is to offer critical reflection on the role played by the concept of dialogue in public relations theory, pedagogy, and practice.

This paper is theoretical and therefore focused on the elucidation of the history, meaning, and application of “dialogue” in public relations in comparison with two other academic disciplines and professional fields: political science and organizational communication.

The paper argues that, despite the key normative position occupied by the concept of dialogue in much mainstream public relations scholarship, public relations as an academic discipline has not engaged extensively with the theory of dialogue. While other academic and expert practitioner fields have developed much theoretical reflection, a range of dialogical tools, and created spaces in which the expertise is applied, public relations' normative interest in dialogue seems not to have translated into developing expert dialogic tools or spaces in which public relations experts routinely use such tools.

The paper introduces literature and debates about dialogue largely ignored in the mainstream public relations scholarship and aims to stimulate fresh discussion about the nature of public relations knowledge and practice.

This study operationalizes risks in stakeholder dialog (SD). It conceptualizes SD as co-produced organizational discourse and examines the capacities of organizers' and stakeholders' practices to create a shared understanding of an organization’s risks to their mutual benefit. The meetings and online forum of a German public service media (PSM) organization were used as a case study.

The authors applied corpus-driven linguistic discourse analysis (topic modeling) to analyze citizens' (n = 2,452) forum posts (n = 14,744). Conversation analysis was used to examine video-recorded online meetings.

Organizers suspended actors' reciprocity in meetings. In the forums, topics emerged autonomously. Citizens' articulation of their identities was more diverse than the categories the organizer provided, and organizers did not respond to the autonomous emergence of contextualizations of citizens' perceptions of PSM performance in relation to their identities. The results suggest that risks arise from interactionally achieved occasions that prevent reasoned agreement and from actors' practices, which constituted autonomous discursive formations of topics and identities in the forums.

This study disentangles actors' practices, mutuality orientation and risk enactment during SD. It advances the methodological knowledge of strategic communication research on SD, utilizing social constructivist research methods to examine the contingencies of organization-stakeholder interaction in SD.

The era of globalization has increased the challenges for multinational corporations (MNCs) to retain legitimacy. In striving for legitimacy, MNCs increasingly engage in dialogue processes with their stakeholders. However, the era of globalization and the parallel rise of the Internet and the new “Web 2.0” have dramatically widened the range of options for such dialogue processes. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in particular make use of “social media” (e.g., Facebook, Weblogs, Twitter) which enable them to quickly generate attention regarding socially and environmentally harmful business practices by MNCs. In response, MNCs have started applying social media technologies for corporate communication purposes. However, given the novelty of these activities, we lack knowledge on how these organizations make use of social media. Therefore, in this chapter, we examine how MNCs and NGOs utilize one particular social media application, that is, Twitter, for dialogic stakeholder communication.

In our empirical study, we examine current practices of Twitter usage by MNCs and NGOs. We investigate a dataset of more than 3,000 Twitter articles from 30 MNCs and 30 NGOs in the German-speaking world. Our analysis is based on the “conceptual orality or literality” scale by Koch and Oesterreicher (1994).

The comparative analysis shows that on average MNCs and NGOs exhibit a surprisingly similar profile on Twitter. Both tend toward conceptual literality. However, the analysis of Tweets per organization reveals a much larger variance. At the extreme poles, while some NGOs (like Greenpeace Youth) make extensive use of the medium’s potential for conceptual orality, some MNCs (like Deutsche Börse) almost entirely adhere to conceptual literality. In other words, these MNCs promote a classical one-way model of communication and fail to make use of the dialogue-like qualities of the medium.

We analyzed a small number of organizations and we restricted our study to MNCs and NGOs in the German-speaking world. Furthermore, Twitter only allows for short messages with a maximum of 140 letters or signs. This, in turn, renders questionable whether the medium is suited to establish deliberative dialogues between MNCs and NGOs that are based on more elaborate arguments which can be expressed in the short format.

Our study addresses the lack of research regarding new possibilities for stakeholder communication in the age of social media. Moreover, the study methodologically contributes to the study of social media in the context of corporate communication by applying the scale of “conceptual orality or literality” to MNCs’ and NGOs’ Twitter usage.

The purpose of this paper is to make the case, firstly, that democratic leadership, referred to as “leaderful practice,” should be the fundamental form of leadership that characterizes participatory organizational change. The parties affected by change are those engaged who seek to reflect upon their own tacit collective practices. Their mode of communication is a dialogue or deliberation that involves the responsible parties to decision making without privileging particular stakeholders because of their status or authority. Thus, it is purported, secondly, that the three practice elements of democratic leadership, dialogue, and deliberation should be included among the bedrock principles of participatory organizational change.

A critical conceptual examination is undertaken of the contribution of three alternative literature streams – leaderful practice, dialogue, deliberation – to participatory organizational change.

Dialogue, an authentic exchange between people, and its decision‐making cousin, deliberation, can become the communication modes associated with participatory organizational change. They are each characterized by equality of participation; thus they are inherently democratic processes that should substitute for top‐down or monologic discourses, which are inimical to participatory practice.

If organization development and comparable participatory change processes claim at their core to be democratic processes, their exponents would endorse a leadership and communication that would preferably match their value system. There would be a shared communication by all those who are involved in the change activity, wherever they may sit within the organizational bureaucracy. The communication would become a multiple‐party reflective conversation that is captured in the mode called dialogue.

By focusing on critical reflection, the dialogic perspective with its emancipatory interest challenges common sense assumptions that are likely to be historical and cultural as psychological. Ultimately, dialogue supports democratic leadership at a core interpersonal level in which participants learn to engage through a reflective practice that allows them to observe and experiment with their own collective tacit processes in action.