Search results

This paper aims to outline the role that serendipity can play in providing a complementary and previously unrepresented vector in deliberate and emergent strategies within organizations.

The paper is conceptual in nature and draws upon the serendipity pattern in sociological theory and serendipitous relations in developmental sciences to provide a framework for executives to consider when examining the process of strategy formation. Two case vignettes are used to illustrate the difference between luck and serendipity and the paper also traces key micro foundations of serendipity by returning to the original serendipity fable and a famed science experiment producing “floppy-eared” rabbits.

The notion of chance favoring the “prepared firm” is espoused where the prepared organizational mind is positioned as an antecedent of serendipitous strategy formation. This is based on Louis Pasteur’s famous aphorism, “chance favors the prepared mind.” Components of the prepared firm include deep domain knowledge, anticipatory mindset, noticing, abductive reasoning, elaboration and relations development.

The paper is a conceptual articulation of a novel concept that now requires deeper empirical case development and ultimately statistical validation. The paper suggests linkages between serendipity and theories of absorptive capacity and the attention-based view of the firm.

Several mindsets, capabilities and relations for architecting organizational serendipity are suggested for executives using a stylized framework.

From a strategy process perspective, the Mintzberg and Waters seminal article “Of strategies deliberate and emergent” is complemented by considering “floppy-eared” strategy characterized by unexpected, anomalous and strategic datum.

Higher education institutions (HEIs) are increasingly recognizing that their unique functions and expertise in research, education, and community leadership make them essential societal partners for helping achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, the sector is not reaching its full potential, or acting fast enough, given the dire state of global progress on the SDGs. There has been a growing recognition that higher education’s (HE) ability to scale up action on the SDGs is hampered by a range of systemic and structural barriers within institutions, the HE sector, and the local and global contexts more broadly. However, many of these barriers and the potential solutions for overcoming them have been known for years, and a key challenge HE now faces is how to put these changes into practice. In this chapter, we build on insights from the work of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) and others on system transformations for sustainable development, as well as our own work on HE engagement with the SDGs, to propose several ‘meta’ reasons that might be hampering efforts to scale up HE action on the SDGs, as well as some suggested approaches for addressing them. These approaches include treating HE as a system, defining better the outcomes we are aiming for, employing adaptive leadership approaches, and investing in genuine partnerships. While a detailed treatment of these approaches is beyond the scope of this chapter, we hope to encourage the HE community to look at this old problem in new ways.

This chapter employs critical discourse analysis (CDA) to examine three key policy documents related to international education in New Zealand: The International Student Wellbeing Strategy (ISW), The New Zealand’s International Education Strategy 2018–2020 (IES), and The New Zealand’s Strategic Recovery Plan (SRP) for the International Education Sector. It asks, “How are discourses of international student wellbeing deployed in New Zealand’s international education policy documents?” The findings suggest that the actual targets of wellbeing in New Zealand international education policies were less the international students than New Zealand itself. I argue that discourses of international student wellbeing are instrumentalized in policy discourses to position New Zealand as a progressive and inclusive society and feed the competitive market dynamics driving the global international education market.

The paper draws extensively from Aristotle’s Poetics, a classical work on the aesthetics of drama. Drawing from symbolic and thematic elements from folklore and mythology, this paper aims to illustrate how the Poetics can be referenced as an allegorical device in the design of culture-building strategies and interventions.

This exploratory paper examines Aristotle’s “Poetics” and the range of creative expression this literature provides as a conceptual design framework for the development of a culture map in creating a distinctive organisational mythology. The Poetics articulates an Aristotelian perspective on theatre which infuses itself as a new language in offering structural and archetypical plot devices in the development of an organisational narrative.

Findings from this explorative study can provide a creative roadmap to culture practitioners and leaders, to be used as a determining reference point in developing culture maps and change management interventions.

Poetics has its detractors, notably Bertolt Brecht and Augusto Boal. Boal examines how Poetics promotes a narrative that suppresses free thinking and encourages a cult of feudal personality, therefore encouraging industrial and cultural oppression, which he rebelled against through the development of his “Theatre of the Oppressed”. This new kind of theatre discarded the Aristotelian model of thinking. Ideas proposed in the Poetics may also lend verisimilitude to the propagation of obsessive consumerism through the definitive symbolism it offers in the development of institutionalised personality cults.

The Poetics as a creatively driven reflexive study provides a forward movement in the study of culture design templates. Its definitive allegorical devices and metaphors act as action principles through which an enterprise culture and its value system can be examined and developed.

Celebrate Michael Buckland's impressive legacy to LIS by showing his humanity, generosity and versatility.

This article is walk through a scientific career in LIS. Through personal anecdotes and life history and building upon Michael Buckland's legacy, it summarises the author’s own work seen through the prism of her interactions with Buckland, leading to scholarly contributions articulating significant statements about the field of LIS as well as pointers to past relevant publications.

Michael Buckland has a unique way of putting an end to thorny LIS issues as well as being a documentator extraordinaire.

It is a personal account, as such cannot be evaluated through the classical norms of empirical research as there is no ground truth. This account shows how chance encounters with fellow scholars can have a lasting influence on one's academic career as well as wider impact in a field.

This study aims to reveal the potential dark side of servant leadership by exploring its differential impact on followers with varying degrees of Machiavellianism and to uncover the role of leader negative feedback as an intervention mechanism in attenuating this negative impact.

A three-wave survey with one-month intervals was conducted with 344 participants from different industries.

The results suggest that servant leadership triggered psychological entitlement among followers with high Machiavellianism, leading to organizational and interpersonal deviance, but only when negative feedback from the leader was weak.

When leaders implement servant leadership, they should beware of breeding psychological entitlement among highly Machiavellian followers, as this can activate their deviant behavior, and should make full use of negative feedback as an intervention mechanism.

This study is one of the first to use the self-evaluation perspective to examine the negative impact of servant leadership on follower behavior via attitude and to explore boundary conditions to overcome this effect.

The process of elaboration of the symbolic universe leads to important insights into the role of symbols in understanding human reasoning. Symbols become explanatory axes of universal global realities. Myths were constructed on these explanatory paths forming a superstructure of all belief systems with paraconsistent logic for the symbolism and a symbolic syntax. Myths and symbols are to be found in all cultures. Some of the most powerful and influential ones occur in popular culture since these often have the greatest immediate social impact.

Semiotic and logical development of the symbols is in mythical systems. The dissolution of the myth and the degradation of the myth's symbols constitute a long-drawn-out process in modern Western society and wherever s influence reaches. Myth is a story that may contain symbolic elements, but compared to the symbols or images of the exceptional, myth is characterized by a “story.”

Starting from a minimal definition to define myths and propose the following definition: Myth is a traditional tale that relates memorable and exemplary actions of extraordinary personages in prestigious and distant times, and myths have various forms and functions, perhaps some more clearly defined with a signifier than others, and different approaches can be combined for a better understanding of the myths. Dispensing with such simplistic assertions, and starting from a minimal definition to define myth, myth is a traditional tale that relates memorable and exemplary actions of extraordinary personages in prestigious and distant times.

Any symbol F originates in a unit that has two aspects and functions when the unit is restored. Thus, the symbol is rather “for something” than “of something” and the symbolic objects express the objects' correspondence in one unit or hendiadys. One semantic characteristic of symbols is “recognition”. The symbol F reveals a reality by means of the homogenous association of the signifier and significance in the symbol's constitution; although reality is separate, there is a homogeneous relation between the symbolizing and symbolized in symbolization.

The China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI, hereafter) has reenergized the Silk Road concept, with most literature focusing on the political and economic effects of the BRI. While certain aspects of the Digital Silk Road (DSR), digital component of BRI, have been researched, much less focus has been placed on the technological development, tech transfer and information diffusion aspects of the BRI. The aim of this study is to investigate the opportunities, issues and critiques that have arisen as a result of the Belt and Road Initiative’s implications on innovation, knowledge transfer and dissemination.

Research in its nature is descriptive. Literature reviews are a significant part of the development of a field. Therefore, secondary sources were considered.

The literature and the study have highlighted several opportunities, problems and criticism that decision-makers and the relevant agencies and institutions should take into account when deciding how to move forward with BRI and its digital component DSR.

This paper contributes to the research literature on BRI and its subset DSR’s impacts on innovation, knowledge transfer and information diffusion. In fact, the DSR’s primary aim is to strengthen international cooperation in the digital economy. Furthermore, digital platforms now play a significant role in global trade, emphasizing the necessity of DSR.

This chapter demonstrates a parallel between the presidential campaigns of Jair Bolsonaro (Brazil, 2018) and Donald Trump (United States, 2016) regarding their use of social media. Specifically, tweets from the former candidates on the social network sites were analyzed during a one-month timeframe before their respective presidential elections. Tweets were selected for analysis based on the fact that Twitter was the main platform used by both former presidential candidates. The analysis of the data reveals considerable similarities between the communication strategies of the two candidates. This research enlists McCombs and Shaw (1972) agenda setting theory based on their study of media during North American presidential campaigns in 1968 and Lippmann’s (2008) concept of public opinion. The methodology employed is based on Bardin (2011).