Search results

Although there has been some attention to how notions of entrepreneurship and family intersect in the life of family businesses, analysis of these issues in relation to inter‐generational and organisational emergence in small family firms is underdeveloped. In order to redress this imbalance, it is important to undertake analysis of entrepreneurial issues alongside those of family, ownership, management and inter‐generational emergence. A fourth entrepreneurial axis is added to Gersick's developmental life cycle framework to facilitate this. This is then applied to aid interpretive analysis of two second generation owner‐managers and sons‐in‐law of the original founders of a small manufacturing company in the UK. Working with his younger brother‐in‐law, the two family members are responsible for taking a small steeplejack company into its third generation and a new electrical engineering market. As the younger brother‐in‐law takes on an entrepreneurial role within the company and endeavours to develop new opportunities, the chairman gives an account of the struggles involved in achieving a balance between ownership, management and family tensions. The notion of “interpreneurship” whereby family members are interacting and creating new possibilities for themselves, their lives, their organizations whilst drawing upon past events, happenings, experiences and conversations that have gone before, is also considered.

Outlines some of the resources that transactional analysis has to offer counsellors. Discusses the origin of TA′s over‐simplified popular image, the central idea of the ego‐state model, application of the ego‐state model, the “I′m OK, you′re OK” phrase, and the counselling relationship. Surmises that TA offers counsellors the opportunity to recognise different manager/employee relationships and their chances of success.

The aim of this paper is to illustrate the social aspects of supervising students’ research of accounting practice. It attempts to demonstrate that accounting practice and accounting research share a common characteristic – they are both forms of social practice.

The paper is written as a personal reflection and confession. It follows a tradition in the social science literature of academics engaging in auto-ethnographic self-reflection. It is presented as a series of dialogues between the academic and the students.

The tensions between the experienced teacher and the students raise questions about the extent of involvement of the academic in the students’ work. Each project involves social interactions which affect the nature of the supervision required and provided. Positivistic approaches may give strict guidance in the form of accepted rules and conventions, but for social scientists who recognise that research, like practice, is socially constructed, outcomes are often uncertain.

It is a personal reflection on specific research projects, and so there are no conclusions about supervision in general.

The intent is to capture the uncertain development and outcome of research projects. The uncertainty may be typical of supervisor/student experiences.

Though examples of auto-ethnographic self-reflection may be found in the social science literature, there are few, if any, in the accounting literature.

Rice’s Theorem is a notorious stumbling block in Computer Science. We review some previous work of us that shows that we can extend Rice’s result to large segments of everyday mathematics, so that similar stumbling blocks appear in many areas of mathematics, as well as applied areas such as mathematical economics; one of its applications (Koppl’s conjecture) is discussed in some detail. Note: this paper has been written in an informal style.

To summarize and evaluate John Levi Marin’s recent book, The Explanation of Social Action (2011), the central thesis of which is that the actions of other people cannot be explained without first understanding those actions from the point of view of the actors themselves. Martin thus endeavors to reorient social science toward concrete experience and away from purportedly useless abstractions.

This review chapter employs close scrutiny of and applies immanent critique to Martin’s argumentative claims, warrants, and the polemical style in which these arguments are presented.

This chapter arrives at the following conclusions: (1) Martin unnecessarily truncates the scope of sociological investigation; (2) he fails to define the key concepts within his argument, including “explanation,” “social action,” and “understanding,” among others; (3) he overemphasizes the external or “environmental” causes of action; (4) rather than inducing actions, the so-called “action-fields” induce experiences, and are therefore incapable of explaining actions; (5) Martin rejects counterfactual definitions of causality while defining his own notion of causality in terms of counterfactuals; (6) most of his critiques of other philosophical accounts of causality are really critiques of their potential misapplication; (7) the separation of experience and language (i.e., propositions about experience) in order to secure the validity of the former does not secure the validity of sociological inquiry, since experiences are invariably reported in language; and, finally, (8) Martin’s argument that people are neurologically incapable of providing accurate, retrospective accounts of the motivations behind their own actions is based on the kind of third-person social science he elsewhere repudiates; that he acknowledges the veracity of these studies demonstrates the potential utility of the “third-person” perspectives and the implausibility of any social science that abandons them.

To date Martin’s book has received much praise but little critical attention. This review chapter seeks to fill this lacuna in the literature in order to better elucidate Martin’s central arguments and the conclusions that can be reasonably inferred from the logical and empirical evidence presented.

This chapter investigates the trends in international and European legal and policy regulation of the process related to carbon capture and storage (CCS). The global endeavor that seeks to limit carbon dioxide emissions has come to recognize CCS as an indispensable ally. This chapter offers an up-to-date and comprehensive commentary to the relatively new and developing area of international regulation of the process of CCS, a dimension that might yield significant effects on the environment and, overall, sustainable development. It reveals a constantly growing trend of an enhanced awareness about the indispensable role and effects of the CCS on wider climate aspirations and, to that effect, also a need for a stable and effective international regulatory framework. The key barriers that are preventing the wider implementation of CCS projects, however, relate primarily to two extra-regulatory processes, which is the policy uncertainty at national levels and financial shortcomings. This background presents a window of opportunity for entrepreneurship and policy invention.

The 150th anniversary of Thomas Hardy′s birth is briefly noted and a number of recent publications on the author and his work are noted in the context of his corpus of critical material on him.