Search results

This paper aims to formulate a hypothesis for the origin and position of binarism within human meaning systems. Specifically, binarism exists ineluctably as a living system's impetus toward life over death, and then – at the symbolic level within human meaning systems – as a device by which humans more efficiently dissipate the solar-energetic gradient.

Organisms composing terrestrial ecosystems acquire and degrade solar energy or its derivatives, thereby reducing the thermal gradient impressed on Earth by the Sun. Kay and Schneider call this “the thermodynamic imperative of the restated second law for open systems.” This paper connects the “thermodynamic imperative” to aspects of human meaning systems and pushes Serres' notion regarding homeostasis and the origin of communication one step further to consider such an origin in terms of a binarism born of solar-energetic gradient dissipation.

It is hypothesized that the human homoiotherm extends the ineluctable binarism of life over death for all living systems to a symbolic level – as a first, or local, “energetic order” – which serves as a foundational device of human meaning systems; humans efficiently use this binary device to produce entropy and maintain homeostasis within individual organisms and comprehensive ecosystems; and human language, and ultimately the entirety of human meaning systems, emerges from the dissipation of the solar-energetic gradient.

Modern Western philosophical concepts related to binarism – i.e. Kantian and Hegelian dialectics – are not associated with ecological imperatives. The present hypothesis proposes the co-existence of both a fundamental binarism (i.e. impetus of life over death) and more complex symbolic differentials (in a Leibnizian/Deleuzian sense) as necessary for the emergence of complex human meaning systems in consonance with thermodynamic and ecological imperatives.

Outlines the foundations for a general theoretical model of consultancy. Specifies the assumptions, domain and model criteria and then goes on to define clients and consultants as meaning‐activity systems and the essence of consultancy as uncertainty reduction.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a meaningful framework for the classification of the integrity trait in the moral context (ethics), offering an understandable conceptualization of a notion that although identified as central in the literature has is not been defined in a clear and conventional way.

Grounding ideas on the person‐situation historical debate, and drawing on the insights of Luhmann's General System Theory, this paper develops a multileveled framework that categorizes the view of integrity.

The integrity framework presents three categories (levels) of integrity: personal integrity, moral integrity and organizational integrity (OI). This classification serves as a bridging mechanism when trying to link different academic areas (e.g. psychology and ethics) since it provides some agreement on the different meanings and perspectives of the concept of integrity present in the literature.

Practical application of the framework is foreseen within the organizational context, where managers could use it for articulating some of the more intangible aspects that compose their organizational cultures, and which in turn, impact their employees' behavior. In addition, the framework is useful to detect possible/future conflicts of interests that may arise due to different personal (employees) and organizational (company) views of integrity.

This paper alerts scholars and practitioners to the need of a sound classification of the concept of integrity, plus an agreement on its meaning, scope and uses. Consequently, it develops a multileveled framework to show an understandable conceptualization of the trait, paving the road for multidisciplinary research on the topic.

Hayek favored both classical hermeneutics and science. His scientific reasoning shows the logical necessity of methodological dualism. Bruce Caldwell and Viktor Vanberg oppose hermeneutics and methodological dualism in favor of science. Their arguments depend on inappropriate interpretations of the doctrine of methodological dualism and an impoverished understanding of hermeneutics that fails to distinguish classical hermeneutics from universal hermeneutics. Hayek showed that “scientific” and “humanistic” approaches to social science can and should be compatible and complementary. Opposing (classical) hermeneutics in favor of science may cause a loss of knowledge by tending to deprive “scientific” social science of insights arising from more “humanistic” traditions.

How are institutional logics transgressed in the organizational fields of open source software and of commercial proprietary software, respectively, by developing a new practice of commercial open source software? I argue that by combining a Critique of Ideology Critique and a Critique of New Institutional Organizational Theory, we become better equipped for understanding institutional change in organizations applying concepts such as institutional entrepreneurs, discursive devices, and meaning arenas. The analysis show that many institutional entrepreneurs apply discursive devices to convince actors in the two organizational fields of the legitimacy of the new practice. This happens in many different meaning arenas such as in the market, in the public discourse, and in concrete open source projects. I advance the assumption that a relation established between institutional entrepreneurs of different legitimacy in the two original fields renders possible their institutional work.

The purpose of this paper is to explain why fractal, self‐similarity, and fractional Brownian motions are so pervasive in human systems.

The analysis involves mainly relative observation, Minkowskian observation, Euclidean observation, and fractional calculus.

It is shown that observation with informational invariance, which is a modeling of subjectivity, creates fractal, and self‐similarity.

This result could have an application to the quantitative analysis of volatility in finance, for instance.

The paper supports the use of fractional dynamics to describe human systems.

The paper provides practical arguments that may explain why fractals are so pervasive in natural science, and mainly in systems involving human factors.

The article aims to shift the basis of organisational human resource planning away from the traditional prescriptive approach to a systems based model that incorporates an emphasis on learning. A brief history of human resource planning is presented showing how it has evolved towards current needs and the specification for the new model. The new model is conceived in the context of increased environmental pressures on organisations and resultant management approaches. At the heart of the new approach is the process of transformation by which inputs to the model are processed in a way that involves all stakeholders in planning to produce viable outputs for managerial decision making.

This chapter focusses on food systems' vulnerability. In a rapidly and unpredictably changing world, vulnerability of farming and food systems becomes a key issue. The conceptual bases for food vulnerability analysis and food vulnerability assessment are discussed in a systemic perspective with an eye to the transition approach (Geels, 2004) as a perspective capable to analyze how novelties can develop and influence the system capability to fulfil societal functions, and food and nutrition security in particular. A framework for assessing people's food vulnerability is presented together with a simple vulnerability model based on the three dimensions of exposure (the degree to which a system is likely to experience environmental or sociopolitical stress), sensitivity (the degree to which a system is modified or affected by perturbations) and adaptive capacity (the ability to evolve in order to accommodate environmental hazards or change) (Adger, 2006). Then, other sections are dedicated to discuss the general questions that should be answered by a vulnerability assessment exercise, and the specific challenges emerging when the assessment concerns a food system. These elements are then used in the Annex to this chapter as a base for the development of a detailed method based on seven distinct steps for conducting participatory assessments of the vulnerability of food systems.

The purpose of this paper is to explore and discuss possible solutions to integrate the concepts of smart city (SC) and intellectual capital management, especially referring to structural capital. On the basis of this, the authors propose a theoretical framework that highlights the relevance of structural capital for strategic and operational planning of smarter cities.

Using a neuropsychological analogy, the authors assume that the development of SCs corresponds to the development of a sensorial or even a nervous system for cities based on their structural capital, and the development of city intellectual capital (CIC) corresponds to a further phase of the cities’ mind development. The authors propose a practical framework that combines the concepts of city nervous system and city mind. It can be used as an instrument for project management. In this model, sensorial data – associated with the implementation of cities’ sensorial systems – should naturally contribute with open data to the development of higher abstract functions that in turn supports the creation of CIC.

This paper highlights the interrelations between intellectual capital (IC) (especially its structural component) and SC and their synergic capability of improving both an SC’s competitiveness and sustainability, and by this illustrates the benefits of combining both concepts in a common theoretical framework.

Given the paper’s theoretical nature, the empirical validation of the proposed framework is missing. This limitation will be addressed in forthcoming empirical research.

By proposing a framework that combines the concepts of SC and IC, the paper contributes to theory development regarding the strategic management of cities and the application of IC.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the significance of recursive processes in the evolution of learning in both individuals and organisations, beginning with a clarification of the distinction between recursion and other types of feedback, drawing on insights from Humberto Maturana and George Richardson.

Further work informing this inquiry includes Gregory Bateson on learning levels, Chris Argyris and Donald Schon on double loop learning, Peter Senge on organizational learning, and James G. Miller on the processing of matter/energy and information in living systems, at different levels of organization.

The paper provides an original synthesis of insights from Miller's living systems theory, in exploring the implications of Bateson's learning levels, as well as further insights from the work of Argyris, Schon and Senge, at cellular, individual, organisational, and global levels, to reinforce the need for a higher order, global level of learning.

Value in findings outlined above.