Search results

This chapter delineates the interactional structure of flirtation. Refining Simmel's analysis, I show flirtation as a way in which two time frames are continuously maintained within the same interaction. Rather than moving into a future interaction by using what I term “actualization practices” – actions which thrust the present interaction into a future – interactants simultaneously use practices from both time frames, careful not to irrevocably shift the situation. The management of interactional ambiguity in flirtation is then analyzed as a key to examine other ambiguous or “suspended” interactions, where interactants must work to keep different potential future possibilities open.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the early stages of change and the way that stories can open up forms of collaborative dialogue and creative thinking among divergent stakeholders on known but “intractable” problems by enabling multiple voices to be heard in the co-construction of future possibilities for change. The empirical focus is on a project undertaken by two organizations located in Australia. The organizations – AAC, a large aged care provider and Southern Disability Services, a disability support service – collaborated with the researchers in identifying and re-characterizing the nature of the problem in the process of storying new pathways for tackling the transitioning needs of people with intellectual disabilities into aged care services.

An action research approach was used in conducting interviews in the case organizations to ascertain the key dimensions of the presenting problem and to identify change options, this was followed by an ethnographic study of a Pilot Project used to trial the provision of disability day service programmes within an aged care setting.

A key finding of the study centres on the importance of stories at the early stages of change in widening the arena of innovative opportunities, in facilitating collective acceptance of new ideas and in initiating action to resolve problems. The paper demonstrates how stories are used not only in retrospective sensemaking of existing problems but also in giving prospective sense to the possibilities for resolving protracted problems through innovative solutions that in turn facilitates a level of collective acceptance and commitment to opening up new pathways for change.

The paper focuses on problem characterization during the early stages of change and bring to the fore the often hidden notion of time in utilizing concepts from a range of literatures in examining temporality, stories and sensemaking in a context in which future possibilities are made sense of in the present through restorying experiences and events from the past. On a practical and policy front, the paper demonstrates the power of stories to mobilize commitment and action and presents material for rethinking change possibilities in the delivery of aged and disability care.

Succession in family firms may determine the survival or the failure of the business itself. Management accounting literature has added little to this issue, mainly focusing on the process of succession and change (Songini et al., 2013; Giovannoni and Maraghini, 2013; Giovannoni et al., 2011). This study aims to deal with new management accounting (MA) practices that the junior generation may introduce during the process of succession. The aim of the study is to show that the introduction of new MA practices can contribute to constructing the leadership profile of the junior generation.

Drawing on the perspective of actor-reality construction (ARC), the authors conducted a case study at a small-sized family firm producing solar shading systems. The authors examined how the construction of the successor’s leadership derives from the integration of four dimensions of reality: facts, possibilities, values and communication. Such an integration is facilitated by the introduction of a new accounting information system and cost reporting.

The case evidence highlights that the construction of the new generation leadership may emerge as a consequence of the introduction of new MA practices. Moreover, the field evidence highlights that the construction of a new generation leadership is a process that integrates the four dimensions of reality.

From the emergent perspective of ARC, the paper highlights how new MA practices play an active role in constructing the new generation leadership.

The focus of this chapter is quantum dialectical storytelling and its contribution to generate anticipatory knowledge of the future through the intra-play between the ante-narrative and the anti-narrative. The theoretical framework on quantum dialectical storytelling is based upon Boje’s triad storytelling framework interfused with Hegelian dialectics and Baradian diffraction. Through the inspiration of Judith Butler’s performative theory, Riach, Rumens, and Tyler (2016) introduce the concept of the anti-narrative as a critical reflexive methodology. By drawing on Hegel’s work on the dialectical phenomenology of critical reflexive self-consciousness, a dialectical pre-reflexive and reflexive framework emerges as intra-weaving modes of being-in-the-world toward future.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate performance measurement practices in venture capital firms. Specifically, the author examines how two organizations make complexity and uncertainty manageable by mobilizing performance measurement. This study draws on the framework of pragmatic constructivism (PC) (Nørreklit et al., 2016; Nørreklit et al., 2006, 2010), focusing on the integration between the four dimensions of PC, namely, facts, values, possibilities and communication.

The paper adopts a comparative case study methodology.

The findings show that performance measurement practices are strongly influenced by values playing out via integration in actor-world relations, whereas Venture A mobilizes an actor-centric approach, leading to an open, holistic performance measurement system (PMS) which is based on non-financials, a close involvement in operational matters and actors’ judgement using accounting as “learning machines” (Burchell et al., 1980); and Venture B draws on an analytical approach emphasizing on the role of financial indicators and control enacting accounting as “answer machines” and as “tool for computation” (Burchell et al., 1980). These different approaches to PMS, actor-centric vs analytical, are guided by different values about actor-world relation(s).

The paper provides a context-sensitive account on the relationship between uncertainty and performance measurement practices. First, this paper contributes by providing evidence on how actors use accounting to manage uncertainty and complexity by differently integrating actor-world relation(s) (Nørreklit, et al., 2016; Nørreklit et al., 2006). Second, this study resonates with recent calls for more industry-specific and context-sensitive investigations (Messner, 2016). Finally, the author contributes to the literature asking for more research on the role accounting plays in managing uncertain conditions (Chenhall and Moers, 2015).

This volume explores an expansive array of organizational imaginaries, or understandings of organizational possibilities, with a focus on how collectivist-democratic organizations offer alternatives to conventional for-profit managerial enterprises. These include worker and consumer cooperatives and other enterprises that, to varying degrees, (1) emphasize social values over profit; (2) are owned not by shareholders but by workers, consumers, or other stakeholders; (3) employ democratic forms of managing their operations; and (4) have social ties to the organization based on moral and emotional commitments. The contributors to this volume examine how these enterprises generate solidarity among members, network with other organizations and communities, contend with market pressures, and enhance their larger organizational ecosystems. In this introductory paper, the authors put forward an inclusive organizational typology whose continuums account for four key sources of variation – values, ownership, management, and social relations – and argue that enterprises fall between these two poles of the collectivist-democratic organization and the for-profit managerial enterprise. Drawing from this volume’s empirical studies, the authors situate these market actors within fields of competition and contestation shaped not just by state action and legal frameworks, but also by the presence or absence of social movements, labor unions, and meta-organizations. This typology challenges conventional conceptualizations of for-profit managerial enterprises as ideals or norms, reconnects past models of organizing among marginalized communities with contemporary and future possibilities, and offers activists and entrepreneurs a sense of the wide range of possibilities for building enterprises that differ from dominant models.

For sociological perspectives on globalization to do justice to its many facets, they must be informed by an understanding of modern societies as simultaneously complex, contingent, and contradictory – as modern capitalist societies. As is becoming ever more apparent, such an understanding of modern societies is the necessary precondition for identifying the defining features of globalization. Yet, for the most part, the history of the social sciences did not produce research agendas, theories, and methods designed to grasp complexity, contingency, and contradiction as core dimensions of modern social life that continually reinforce each other. The social sciences did not evolve as ongoing efforts to grasp the gravity each dimension exerts on concrete forms of political, economic and cultural life, and how the force of each depends on the constant exchange of energy with the other two. To the extent that scrutinizing the impact of globalization on the future – and possible futures – of human civilization is the primary challenge for social scientists to confront today, the current condition presents a unique, and perhaps most unusual opportunity to conceive anew the promise of each and all the social sciences, as elucidating how the complex, contingent, and contradictory nature of modern societies, in the name of advancing social justice, has engendered a regime of managing “social problems.”

For perspectives on globalization to do justice to its many facets, they must be informed by an understanding of modern societies as simultaneously complex, contingent, and contradictory – as modern capitalist societies. As is becoming ever more apparent, such an understanding of modern societies is the necessary precondition for identifying the defining features of globalization. Yet, for the most part, the history of the social sciences did not produce research agendas, theories, and methods designed to grasp complexity, contingency, and contradiction as core dimensions of modern social life that continually reinforce each other. The social sciences did not evolve as ongoing efforts to grasp the gravity each dimension exerts on concrete forms of political, economic, and cultural life, and how the force of each depends on the constant exchange of energy with the other two. To the extent that scrutinizing the impact of globalization on the future – find possible futures – of human civilization is the primary challenge for social scientists to confront today, the current condition presents a unique, and perhaps most unusual opportunity to conceive anew the promise of each and all the social sciences, as elucidating how the complex, contingent, and contradictory nature of modern societies, in the name of advancing social justice, has engendered a regime of managing “social problems.”

This article seeks to reflect on the role of key concepts in foresight and futures work. The goal is to explore a set of concepts and link them to the effects they have in the world of foresight practice. It is argued that concepts order foresight practice and that though each foresight context and practitioner is unique, concepts bring a sense of order and coherence to foresight work and futures thinking. This reflection is placed in the context of a set of first principles the author acknowledges as his starting place for futures thinking and foresight practice.

The paper takes the form of conceptual analysis.

Concepts have effects and these can be assessed based on their ability to increase social and personal resilience in contexts characterised by change, complexity and uncertainty.

Foresight practitioners clarify their own values and ethics through reflection on the concepts they use and the processes they deploy when working with clients.

More reflective foresight practice; greater conceptual clarity when reflecting on and communicating/teaching foresight and futures thinking.

This paper offers a basis for orienting foresight work towards the broader social goal of resilience through a deepened appreciation of how concepts inform process and structure meaning.