Search results

This paper aims to examine the interaction between gatekeeping and trust in a public sector organization, where employees at lower hierarchical levels are expected to autonomously translate and transform directives into public services. This requires them to have access to operational steering information, i.e. information about directives and how to interpret and apply them. This study focuses on how gatekeeping structures regulate flows of operational steering information and how the gatekeeping structures affect the development of trust.

The research design is qualitative. The data material consisted of semi-structured interviews with 26 employees in home care and schools and of eight complementary nonparticipant observations. Thematic analysis revealed the presence of static and dynamic gatekeeping structures, which are characterized by fixed and variable arrangements of information sources and channels, respectively.

In static gatekeeping structures, managers or domain experts typically act as gatekeepers, and employees also perform gatekeeping activities collectively. Gatekeeping structures allow employees to switch between acting as gatekeepers and being gated, depending on the situation. The results show that gatekeeping structures for intermediation of operational steering information may support or impede employees' work, thus affecting their trust in their peers and their work organization.

Although the present study included both interviews and observations, these primarily occurred within scheduled and prearranged activities rather than capturing the nuances of the typical daily work of teachers and home care employees. As a result, certain perspectives may have been unintentionally omitted.

The participants were recruited through the City of Oslo contact people, which may have impacted their status or perception in some way. Moreover, the study was conducted in the City of Oslo, a specific organization with its own unique set of values, norms and processes. The trust-based management in the City of Oslo is likely not representative of all public sector organizations.

This study contributes conceptually by introducing gatekeeping structures and operational steering information and empirically by providing evidence of their relationship to trust development in public service delivery. Thus, it contributes to the research fields of information management and public administration.

From an ethical point of view, the inclusion of children and young people in research is problematic due to their inability to give informed consent and meaningfully express their views. The ethical aspects of research are multiplied if the research participant might have experienced child abuse, neglect, exploitation, or other forms of violence or assisted in such acts. Talking about victimization might be difficult and generate a sense of betrayal of attachment figures. On the other hand, the usual ethical procedure of asking parents or other caretakers to give consent for their children to discuss issues of maltreatment gives them the power to act as gatekeepers to stop children from participating in research. Therefore, researchers should contemplate if parental consent should be waived and how research can be developed to mobilise children's agency and ensure their meaningful cooperation in researching different aspects of violence that affect them. This chapter presents and critically analyses different research examples and discusses their ethical dimensions from a children's rights perspective. The research questions start with discussing the utility of consulting children in research on maltreatment; the gatekeeping role of caregivers; the distress and harm eventually caused to children and young people by participation in research and the benefits of participation for children. The survey examples discussed lead to the conclusions that research on maltreatment might sometimes cause distress; caregivers' power to refuse consent for their children's participation in research on maltreatment can alter epidemiologic data and impede children's right to express their opinion on issues that are central to their lives and therefore, it should be waived; consulting children is essential for collecting data on and improving responses to child maltreatment; and children's contribution to research on maltreatment depends on the adopted methodologies of the research, more advanced forms of participation, and training children to express their opinions, thus enriching scientific knowledge and promoting change.

In prior literature, online endorsement system allowing the users to “like” or “dislike” shared information is found very useful in information filtering and trust elicitation in most social networks. This paper shows that such systems could fail in the context of investment communities due to several psychological biases.

This study develops a series of regression analyses to model the “like”/“dislike” voting process and whether or not such endorsement distinguishes between valuable information and noise. Trading simulations are also used to validate the practical implications of the findings.

The main findings of this research are twofold: (1) in the context of investment communities, online endorsement system fails to signify value-relevant information and (2) bullish information and “wisdom over the past event” information receive more “likes” and fewer “dislikes” on average, but they underperform in stock market price discovery.

This study demonstrates that biased endorsement may lead to the failure of the online endorsement system as information gatekeeper in investment communities. Two underlying mechanisms are proposed and tested. This study opens up new research opportunities to investigate the causes of biased endorsement in online environment and motivates the development of alternative information filtering systems.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become increasingly important and influential in reading and writing. The influx of social media digital spaces, like TikTok, has also shifted the ways multimodal composition takes place alongside AI. This study aims to argue that within spaces like TikTok, human composers must attend to the ways they write for, with and against the AI-powered algorithm.

Data collection was drawn from a larger study on #BookTok (the TikTok subcommunity for readers) that included semi-structured interviews including watching and reflecting on a TikTok they created. The authors grounded this study in critical posthumanist literacies to analyze and open code five #BookTok content creators’ interview transcripts. Using axial coding, authors collaboratively determined three overarching and entangled themes: writing for, with and against.

Findings highlight the nuanced ways #BookTokers consider the AI algorithm in their compositional choices, namely, in the ways how they want to disseminate their videos to a larger audience or more niche-focused community. Throughout the interviews, participants revealed how the AI algorithm was situated differently as both audience member, co-author and censor.

This study is grounded in critical posthumanist literacies and explores composition as a joint accomplishment between humans and machines. The authors argued that it is necessary to expand our human-centered notions of what it means to write for an audience, to co-author and to resist censorship or gatekeeping.

The attempt to establish a common European framework for core platforms' duties and responsibilities toward other actors in the digital environment is at the core of the recent scholarly debate surrounding the Digital Markets Act (DMA) proposal. In particular, the everlasting juxtaposition between the “data power” – as emerging from recent cases (Section 2) – that dominant tech companies enjoy and the concept of consumer sovereignty (Section 3) lies at the core of the proposal's attempt to identify digital core platforms as market gatekeepers. Accordingly, this chapter critically investigates the divide between power imbalance and consumer sovereignty in light of the architecture designed by the DMA, with a specific focus on its effectiveness in identifying gatekeepers' power drivers (Section 4). After highlighting the main critical aspects of the pertinent rules, opportunities for fruitful developments are then identified through the reframing of some of the notions considered in the proposal, and namely the role of “lock-in” effects and “data accumulation” (Section 5). Lastly, this chapter suggests that the DMA advancements – while desirable – are bound to be fragmentary in the absence of a wider appraisal of the nature of data power imbalance dynamics in the modern digital markets (Section 6).

This chapter examines strategies deployed at individual and institutional levels to combat fake news in two media houses in Uganda. Grounded in the hierarchy of influences model, we examine journalists' and editors' perspectives on how Vision Group and Nation Media Group newsrooms respond to fake news. Journalists' and editors' responses, obtained through semi-structured interviews as well as document review enabled us to underscore the centrality of professional standards, training and technology in combating fake news. We found that technology plays a key role in fact-checking, although newsrooms are yet to adopt advanced digital tools such as artificial intelligence (AI) and algorithms. The newsrooms under investigation deploy conventional hardware and software to detect, flag and debunk fake news. We posit that for the strategies adopted at the organisational level to succeed, they ought to appeal to individual reporters' goals and interests. Further, discourses on adoption of newer technology ought to reflect the contexts in which the news organisations operate in addition to their financial standing.

The complex world in which we reside is calling for more critical approaches to address the precarity experienced by the most marginalized in social systems. However, human resource development (HRD) lacks empirical data to describe, define and project the objectives and future directions of Critical HRD in today’s turbulent and volatile times. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine the historical and contemporary progression of Critical HRD, as described by nine of its most well-known scholars.

Data were collected through semistructured interviews, and a constructivist grounded theory coding approach was applied during analysis to identify themes and patterns.

The findings of this study highlight the persistent scholarship versus practice divide among Critical HRD scholars, suggesting that Critical HRD may merely be an academic undertaking and something not practiced within the public domain. The authors call for an evolution of Critical HRD toward more practice- and action-oriented approaches to scholarship and teaching so that meaningful changes can take place in actual organizations and workplaces.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study was the first to empirically show that there is a real research–practice gap, particularly among Critical HRD scholars. Critical HRD scholars need to take these findings seriously as an opportunity to reflect on how they can take Critical HRD to the next level beyond academic discourse.

Megaprojects are seen as vehicles for delivering significant social value. However, megaproject decision-making, which is deeply embedded in networks comprising formal and informal practices involving the exercise of power, can facilitate or hinder social value delivery. Moreover, these decision-making practices are often intentionally designed and executed to remain hidden and so are not easily identifiable but have implications for maximising social value. This paper aims to identify the hidden barriers to social value delivery on megaprojects resulting from the decision-making environment.

Governmentality theory was used to deconstruct the megaproject decision-making environment. The critical realism philosophy was merged with a narrative inquiry approach to analyse the everyday, taken-for-granted practices that resulted in the decision-making outcomes. Data were collected through 22 in-depth semi-structured interviews to uncover stories highlighting the nature of power relations underpinning the decision-making environment of one megaproject in the Asia Pacific region.

Governmentality theory as a lens showed that emergent, informal governing practices blend with formal governance mechanisms, creating a complex mix of overt and covert power dynamics. The findings suggest that the exercise of covert power by project team members through deviant tactics hinders social value delivery. Therefore, understanding the power dynamics that influence the decision-making of project team members is key for maximising social value delivery.

Originality stems from the use of governmentality theory and critical realism to deconstruct and explain the megaproject decision-making environment, enabling observation of otherwise challenging-to-understand, complex and hidden barriers to the delivery of social value. This paper offers a novel way of explaining social value delivery through megaproject decision-making.