Search results

This paper aims to improve the knowledge of the way business relationships end by using a triadic analysis. Triadic analysis is used as a tool, permitting the examination of a dyadic business relationship in relation to a third actor(s). The triadic approach has been chosen for two reasons: first, because a triad is the smallest possible network and so offers a network perspective on the phenomenon. Second, the triadic approach exposes the process of forming internal and external coalitions, which affects the course of events and, thus, offers a different perspective from the traditional dyadic one on the dissolution of business relationships.

As adopting a triadic perspective on the ending of business relationships and the field of research are relatively new, data gathering and empirical findings play an important role in producing understanding of the phenomenon. This qualitative research uses the abductive approach, in which empirical findings are systematically combined with the theoretical literature related to the topic. The research also draws from the theoretical literature of ending dyadic business relationships and uses a body of literature from the field of sociology where triadic analysis has long been used.

As the result, this paper presents a model describing the end of a triadic business relationship and details the characteristics that derive from a triadic perspective. The study answers questions on what kind of process takes place when a triadic business relationship is ending; what kinds of sub-processes can be identified; and also adds information on what kinds of coalitions companies may form during the ending process of a triadic business relationship. The findings suggest that triadic analysis is an appropriate tool when studying a dyadic business relationship in relation to third actors.

The research offers a new insight into the phenomenon of ending business relationships by using a triadic perspective.

Comprises the first stage of a two‐part study on emerging paradigms of human resource management in the Czech Republic. Conceptualises the process by means of appropriate HRM models and stakeholder analysis in order to link the external environment to the organisation. Predicts that influence of external stakeholders will shape a paradigm characterised by government intervention and an insider model of corporate governance. Forecasts major historical and cultural problems in the emerging HRM function. Differentiates between enduring and evolving cultural influences on the development of this role.

This chapter reviews the challenges facing educational research and knowledge production, in the independent post-Soviet Central Asia through examination of the case of Tajikistan. The chapter revisits issues discussed in Niyozov and Bahry (2006) on the need for research-based approaches to with these challenges, taking up Tlostanova’s (2015) challenge to see Central Asian educational history as repeated intellectual colonization, decolonization, and recolonization leading her to question whether Central Asians can think, or must simply accept policies and practices that travel from elsewhere. The authors respond by reviewing Tajikistan as representative in many aspects, if not all particulars, of the entire region. Part one of the review describes data sources, analyses, and our positionalities. Part two reviews decolonization in comparative, international, and development education and in post-Soviet education. Part three describes education research and knowledge production types and their key features. Thereafter, the authors discuss additional challenges facing Tajikistan’s and the region’s knowledge production and link them to the possibilities of decolonization discourse. The authors conclude by suggesting realistic steps the country’s scholars and their comparative international education colleagues may take to move toward developing both research capacity and decolonization of knowledge pursuits in Tajikistan and Central Asia.

This chapter is focused on what we can learn from oppressive governance, in this case specifically relating to university governance in terms of vice chancellors and presidents, to the deputy vice chancellor and deputy president and down the ever-growing university hierarchy to deans and heads of schools and their deputies, from a Freirean perspective. Freire wrote at length about how leaders ‘controlled’ education and why they did so, but he also wrote at length about how governments control populations – himself being both a political prisoner and a person in exile to escape persecution. This chapter subsequently examines Freire's ideas around what techniques people employ to control populations and applies them to a higher education setting because the similarities are numerous and the tactics familiar.

Purpose – Role-taking refusal was a foundational problem in Mead's work but was ignored by subsequent interactionists who focused on the benefits of role-taking – empathy and solidarity – but failed to examine how they are destroyed or crippled from emerging as inclusionary aspects of social consciousness. Role-taking refusal constitutes both the microfoundation of dehumanization in the case of the oppressor and, in the case of the oppressed, the microfoundation of resistance. Role-taking refusal is linked to Giddens's notion of the reflective project of the self, Omi and Winant's racial formation theory, Feagin's theory of systemic racism, and the perspective of Critical Race Theory.

Methodology – I shall portray role-taking refusal by using historical, theoretical, and empirical works, especially ethnographic studies.

Social implications – The oppressed know the image their oppressors have of them. Refusing to internalize this image is the first step – the microfoundation – of resistance. Role-taking refusal in the oppressed fosters critical consciousness, which, if solidarity with others is formed, can lead to collective action and, possibly, permanent institutional change.

Originality – “The superiority delusion” is the paradigmatic ideology of all oppressors, deployed to justify their power, privilege, and prestige. This delusion is maintained by the microfoundation of dehumanization, which is a systematic refusal to role-take from those over whom oppressors oppress. All other ideologies that justify oppression are derived from some form of “the superiority delusion,” identifying for the first time role-taking refusal as paradoxically both the original sin of social relations and the foundation of social resistance.

This chapter is a response to the article by Straubhaar (2015), ‘The stark reality of the “White Saviour” complex and the need for critical consciousness: a document analysis of the early journals of a Freirean educator’. Taking up a theme developed by Noah and Eckstein (1988) in relation to dependency theory, the paper argues that a Freirean analysis is an inadequate framework for the analysis of international development and intercultural exchanges. The central argument is that, by imposing a simplistic dichotomy of oppressors and oppressed, Freirean theory blinds the researcher to the nuanced interplay and complex power relationships that are involved in even apparently simple interactions. Most importantly, a Freirean analysis focuses attention on who makes a statement, rather than on what that statement is a statement about and whether it is true or not. This argument is developed through a reanalysis of some events Straubhaar documents in his account of his fieldwork.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the role of non‐violent protest (satyagraha) in a multinational automobile plant in India that has suffered from considerable employee relations problems.

The paper employs a case study of a Japanese‐owned company using data obtained from 30 personal interviews and from internet media sources.

It is found that workers initially pursued their protests through satyagraha‐style methods before taking on a more violent posture when company management refused to accept any notion of jointly seeking a new harmony. The reasons for these developments are explored.

The paper has implications for the manner in which scholars and practitioners view the respective roles, significance, and management of satyagraha and non‐satyagraha protest in Indian companies.

The importance of satyagraha in Indian employee relations is under‐researched in comparison with other factors, and is especially significant for culturally‐unaware multinational companies in successfully understanding and managing protest in the workplace context.

This introduction sets the scene for the study by explaining the rationale for presenting a comparative analysis of five nation states’ governance systems; England, Northern Ireland, Arabs in Israel, Trinidad and Tobago and the United States, with Nigerian interests represented in the research design. The context is that of a global phenomenon of a Black–White achievement gap (Wagner, 2010). The quality is world leading in terms of originality, significance and rigour. We present a theory of colonisation between groups with different interests, which includes nation states colonising other nation states, and dominant groups within nation states colonising marginalised groups. We also explored how dominant groups within educational governance systems may colonise marginalised groups within education governance systems. We theorised colonisation using Karpman’s Triangle (1968) identifying that different groups can be oppressor, and/or victim, and/or rescuer, and these roles may shift as changes occur in power and economic influence. We present the Empowering Young Societal Innovators for Equity and Renewal Model (Taysum et al., 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017) with five principals for equity and renewal. We explain the turbulence that senior-level leaders experience and how education governance systems need to empower their autonomy as credentialed educational professionals’ with track records of school improvement. Impact strategies to optimise students’ learning and students’ outcomes, and build the community’s values of social justice, courage and prudence need to underpin social mobility. These innovations are only possible if they are informed by grass roots participatory philosophical inquiry, that is informed by and informs policy, and is carefully monitored for quality assurance against the highest of educational professional standards.

By applying Parameshwar’s (2005) ego-transcendence model to two influential business leaders, the purpose of this paper is to examine how social innovation is promoted by business leaders through spiritual leadership.

The study used research tactics available within a phenomenological framework.

Based on the analysis of the two business leader case studies, several links between spiritual leadership and social innovation were identified. The central role of a higher purpose in enacting spiritual leadership as well as bringing about social innovation was most significant.

Use of secondary data, the inherent weaknesses in analysis based on a single individual’s interpretations and the analysis of only two business leaders were key limitations. A unique overlap was found between Dawson and Daniel’s (2010) social innovation model and Parameshwar’s (2005) ego-transcendence model.

As higher purpose was a key element in enacting spiritual leadership, leaders could look for the seeds of a higher purpose within the challenging circumstances of a situation. By shaping one’s behaviour to a higher purpose-related social cause than merely following rules and procedures or social conventions, leaders are more likely to develop their own personal decision-making style. By highlighting the importance of paying attention to the suffering of others rather one’s own suffering, the study also have implications for reducing the ego-based practices in day to day leadership in organisations.

Ego-transcendence model explains the link between social innovation and spiritual leadership in a non-organisational setting. The current study applies this link to the leadership context in business.