Search results

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, it evaluates the impossibility proposition, called the “Arrow impossibility theorem” (AIT), which is widely attributed to Arrow’s social choice theory. This theorem denies the possibility of arriving at any collective majority resolution in any group voting system if the social choice function must satisfy “certain natural conditions”. Second, it intends to show the reasons behind the proliferation of this impossibility impression.

Theoretical and philosophical.

Arrow’s mathematical model does not seem to suggest or support his impossibility thesis. He has considered only one voting outcome, well known by the phrase “the Condorcet paradox”. However, other voting results are equally likely from his model, which might suggest unambiguous majority choice. This logical dilemma has been created by Arrow’s excessive dependence on the language of mathematics and symbolic logic.

The languages of mathematics and symbolic logic – numbers, letters and signs – have definite advantages in scientific argumentation and reasoning. These numbers and letters being invented however do not have any behavioural characteristics, which suggests that conclusions drawn from the model merely reflect the author’s opinions. The AIT is a good example of this logical dilemma.

The modern social choice theory, which is founded on the AIT, seems to be an academic assault to the system of democratic governance that is dominating current global village. By highlighting weaknesses in the AIT, this paper attempts to discredit this intellectual omission.

The paper offers a counter example to show that the impossibility of social choice is not necessarily implied by the Arrow’s model. Second, it uses Locke’s theory of human understanding to explain why the concerned social scientists are missing this point. This approach is probably entirely novel in this area of research.

A core premise of the paper is that participative, democratic organizational forms have a direct effect on openness. A key proposition is that organizational forms that promote inclusion, transparency and shared decision-making more broadly as part of their structure and culture would enhance greater openness. However, democratic forms are not a panacea when it comes to openness, there are inherent paradoxes, leading to inevitable tradeoffs that democratic organizations must manage.

The theoretical framework in the study explores the interaction between open strategy making and organizational democracy. This paper reviews the literature on open strategy and organizational democracy and presents propositions linking openness and elements of democratic organizations.

Open strategy requires a level of inclusion and transparency not typically associated with hierarchical organizations. This paper proposed that an organizational context where there are institutionalized processes that promote both transparency and inclusiveness, shared decision-making and a supportive organizational culture would promote openness. At the same time, these organizations need to manage key paradoxes associated with organizational democracy to benefit from its positive effect on openness. The idea is not that hierarchies cannot be open; they may simply need to be more creative and work harder at providing the scaffolding for participation.

This is a conceptual paper and we cannot make any claims of causality. It is also possible to refine the framework by adding or eliminating some of the conceptual variables.

Opening up the strategy process to non-traditional stakeholders can improve the strategy formation process. Non-traditional stakeholders can bring new insight, and be motivated and prepared for strategy implementation when they are part of the strategy formation process. Organizations need to focus on creating a climate that supports openness by emphasizing structural forms that promote openness. Sharing decision-making, profits and creating a democratic culture are important for successful openness. In addition, organizations need to manage the tradeoffs that arise as they link organizational democracy to openness.

This paper discusses the link between open strategy and organizational democracy. The research sheds light on how organizational forms, specifically structure affects openness, as well as the limits to structure and openness.

We explore a case example of hybridity between a large worker-owned cooperative and a union through three lenses: organizational forms, multiple institutional logics, and organizational identity. We delineate three types of organizational hybridity: (1) stretching an existing organizational form; (2) creating a new organizational form; and (3) and retaining multiple discrete organizational forms in a common venture. The cooperative–union hybrid shares members from the two contributing organizations, and so can be classified as a matrix sub-form of multi-organizational hybridity. This study describes how the coop-union hybrid manages the multiple logics and identities retained from both contributing organizations. It considers the hazards of combining these logics and identities, and offers some suggestions on how to avoid potential difficulties. Finally, given the complexity and inefficiencies of the matrix form, we explore whether matrix hybridity is a transitional or permanent form in this particular instance of a cooperative–union venture.

Thinking and deciding about the future of the city as a combination of complex and uncertain systems is extremely difficult. This complexity, uncertainty and difficulty will be increased when our thoughts and decisions address the city’s long-term future. Considering these issues, the need for future thinking and alternate thinking in the process of urban management and planning becomes even more necessary. The purpose of this paper is to identify and explain the alternate futures of Tehran.

For this purpose, this study have tried to study alternate future images of Tehran in an archetypal form of “growth, collapse, disciplined society and transformed society” using “Dator’s Four Generic Alternate Futures” method.

These alternate futures, after identifying their key trends and drivers, have been narrated in the form of four scenarios called: “capital business center,” “crossing the fate of ray,” “Tehran family” and “Tehran investigators.” Increasing the authority and responsibility of the local governance, modification of Tehran urban management model and development of voluntary cooperation and democratic participation, are among the policy recommendations made on the basis of these images.

Achieving these images in parallel with identifying the most important challenges and opportunities in alternate futures will provide the basis for policy-making in Tehran’s future urban governance. It can be a creative model for developing future images for other cities.

This study aims to present the perspectives of heterodox economics and Islamic economics on environmental economics, as an alternative to mainstream economics, which takes economic growth as its main objective and argues that environmental problems will largely disappear when economic growth is achieved.

In this study, there was no intention to conduct a detailed analysis of heterodox economic models and Islamic economics. Instead, the approaches to the “environment,” which can be considered as an urgent need of the planet, were evaluated, and the inadequate proposals of the mainstream economics’ environmental approach were theoretically criticized and heterodox economics and Islamic economics were proposed as an alternative model.

Heterodox and Islamic economics offer alternative models of development prioritizing social and ecological justice to address environmental problems, which is in contrast to mainstream economics’ narrow focus on market mechanisms and individual rationality. Thus, engaging in more dialogue in the context of the environment is inevitable for both schools, considering the vast geography inhabited by Muslims and the proposed heterodox economic policies, and moreover, these approaches are modeled for the first time.

This article presents a synthesis of Islamic economics and heterodox thinking in contrast to mainstream economic policy, highlighting their similarities and differences and providing a more comprehensive understanding of the complexities and potential solutions of environmental problems. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this approach has not been previously explored, making it an original contribution to the literature.

This research examines environmental negotiations in two countries, Mexico and Ecuador, currently undergoing democratic transition. We examine the ability of democratizing political systems to respond to the pressures intrinsic to emerging pluralism. Using a comparative case study approach we examine environmental policy making for conservation. Mexico and Ecuador are at different stages in the democratization process with Mexico being more advanced than Ecuador. We conclude that Mexico’s approach to communicative forums and its management of environmental decision making in a pluralist context is more systematized and less prone to corruption given the stronger set of democratic institutions. In comparison we find that Ecuador’s political institutions remain weak and subject to informal pressures from emerging environmental groups as well as from established interests from the pre-democracy era.

Increasing demographic diversity within societies and workforces causes challenges with regard to the innovation performance of companies. By definition, innovation communities nowadays are composed of members with diverse function background and age diversity. The challenging question is how to manage diverse corporate innovation communities. The purpose of this paper is to find out which factors determine the success of corporate innovation communities in times of demographic shifts.

The empirical field to answer the research question are three corporate innovation communities in companies of different industries and size. Multiple case study methodology is applied to gather and analyse the data.

The study presents an empirically derived framework to structure success factors of diverse corporate innovation communities chronologically in the three phases of preparation, execution and finalization of a community work process. The success factors are described in detail and finally a time sequential guideline for those who are responsible for community management in demographic change is provided.

It is contributed to the literature on innovation communities and it is shown that innovation communities are not only an instrument to solve innovation tasks but are also a promising means to tackle other challenges of recent demographic changes. As limitation must be considered, that the analysed innovation communities only received corporate support for a short period of time and the supporting organizations operate in manufacturing industries in Germany only.

The paper highlights that managers need to be aware that diversity in corporate innovation communities per se does not lead to success. Furthermore, a guideline of success factors for managers of diverse corporate innovation communities is presented which highlights important aspects that managers need to consider during the community work process.

Due to demographic shifts in Germany and other European countries, societies in general and workforces in particular have modified. Most pervasive shifts take place with regard to age structures and diversity. Implications how manager could handle diversity successfully are therefore of high relevance for societies.

This study provides a theoretical understanding of the implications of organizational and age diversity on corporate innovation community management. Extant authors have already focussed on success factors in innovation communities and diverse settings isolated, but have not merged these issues.

Describes the practices, thoughts, and feelings of shared‐governance principals as they confront the challenges of school restructuring. The focus is on the principals’ perspective on shared governance and democratic schooling; the challenges of becoming involved in collaborative decision making with teachers, parents, and students; and the principals’ own professional growth as they strove to become “one among equals” with their colleagues. The data discussed here were drawn from a qualitative study of principals in nine schools affiliated with Glickman’s League of Professional Schools in Georgia. A protocol of open‐ended interview questions designed by the researchers, according to general guidelines for grounded theory inquiry, provided principals with the opportunity to identify and describe in detail their perspective on shared governance leadership in schools. Inductive analysis of the data generated a description of the implementation of shared governance that includes five salient themes: meanings, becoming involved, letting go of power, supportive processes, and supportive structures. Discusses findings in terms of the relevant empirical and theoretical literature.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the theory and practice of stakeholder democracy. After examining the liberal notion of representative democracy, the paper seeks to identify the democratic deficit associated with the shareholder and stakeholder approaches to corporate governance. Investigating stakeholder democracy in nationalized industries in both market‐ and state‐capitalist societies, the argument presented is that neither type of society has significantly increased stakeholder involvement in decision making.

The paper uses a Hegelian dialectical approach to stakeholder democracy; relying on such modes of analysis as identifying internal contradictions.

The paper concludes that stakeholder democracy is both real and nominal in the political sphere, but restricted and contested in the private and public sectors in the economic sphere.

The paper calls for the setting‐up of democratic structures to oversee the production and distribution of the goods and services necessary for human wellbeing.

The paper investigates the relatively neglected topic of stakeholder democracy, using a Hegelian dialectical methodology. In the context of the 2007/2008 financial crisis and its recessionary aftermath, the paper calls for a radical re‐evaluation of corporate governance.