Search results

The use of sequence and structure databanks is examined in relation to their application in some of the main branches of protein studies. Also the question of availability is addressed by means of presenting some information on current sequence and structure databanks. Increasingly research in molecular science requires joint access to both sequence and structure databases, and the reasons for this development, together with some of the methods for integrated access, are analysed.

Although management scholars have embraced grand challenges research, in many cases, grand challenges have been treated as merely a context for exploring extant theoretical perspectives. By comparison, our approach – robust action – provides a novel theoretical framework for tackling grand challenges. In this invited article, we revisit our 2015 model, clarifying and elaborating its key elements and taking stock of subsequent developments. We then identify three promising directions for future research: scaffolding, future imaginaries, and distributed actorhood. Ultimately, our core message is remarkably simple: robust action strategies – participatory architecture, multivocal inscription and distributed experimentation – jointly provide a means for tackling grand challenges that is well matched to their complexities, uncertainties, and evaluativities.

The current method of information retrieval used for bibliographic and full‐text databases of journal articles assumes a semantic representation together with stemming, Boolean connectives and so on. This requires searchers to have a well‐defined idea of what it is that they are searching for. This is unhelpful for many categories of searcher, in particular expert browsers and non‐expert searchers. An alternative method is developed in this paper, based on the idea that articles advance an argument and that this argumentation can be represented in a manner which enables flexible and robust searching to be carried out.

Scholars have primarily focused on how language represents categories. We move beyond this conception to develop a discursive perspective of market categorization focused on how categories are constructed through communicative exchanges. The discursive perspective points to three under-researched mechanisms of category evolution: (1) the interaction between market participants, (2) the power dynamics among market participants and within the discourse, and (3) the cultural and material context in which categories are constructed. In this theoretical paper, we discuss how each of these mechanisms shed light on different phases of category evolution and the methods that could be used to study them.

This chapter explores how “discourse,” as a process concerned with the production and consumption of talk and text, has been embraced within the field of organizational change and development (OCD). We present six ways of thinking about the role of discourse in OCD (namely: “discourse as component,” “discourse as process,” “discourse as analysis,” “discourse as method,” “discourse as mindset,” and “discourse as style”). Although the advent of dialogic OD has raised awareness of discourse, we demonstrate that it remains a marginal and under-utilized area of interest. We conclude by making a case for a more expansive role for discursive modes of analysis and engagement within OCD.

This paper aims to recount the genesis of a successful innovation cluster among Irish-based divisions of multinational enterprises (MNEs) and Irish universities in the pharmaceutical industry. This cluster was actively “narrativized” through the language of obligation, desire, competence and know-how. As such, it is typical of the “hero’s quest” literary genre in which challenges are faced, obstacles are overcome and victory is ultimately won. Importantly, in this story, the cluster was morally and pragmatically charged with dealing with significant challenges faced by the Irish pharmaceutical industry. Broader societal discourses operated as a resource for actors to use in proposing collaboration and innovation as the appropriate response to such challenges. Specifically, through narrative and discourse, actors created the necessary conditions conducive for a cluster to develop. These created a discursively constituted shared purpose which ultimately ensured successful innovation collaboration. Essentially, through narrative and discourse, the key actors identified the collaboration a protagonist in pursuit of a quest. By linking theoretical and empirical insights, the paper offers a conceptual framework that can be used in future studies to understand the emergence of clusters.

Adopting Wengraf’s (2001) structured approach to narrative interviewing, 18 key actors shared their understanding of how the cluster came into being. Each interview began with a single question intended to induce narrative, in this case “tell me the story of the cluster as you see it.” This allowed participants to be in control of their own story (Wengraf, 2001). Each interview was transcribed in full and appended to notes taken at the time of the interview. Each narrative offered a “purposeful account” (Jovchelovitch and Bauer, 2000) of how and why the cluster was formed and the centrality of the participants’ roles. In line with recognised protocols, in the authors analysis of data, they paid specific attention to how stories were told, the roles assigned to key protagonists, as well as how events and actors were linked in stories (see Czarniawska, 1997).

This paper further demonstrates how language, metaphor and narrative and discourse (Hatch, 1997) becomes a strategic resource on which actors can draw to create desired realities (Hardy et al., 2000) particularly in terms of collaboration and innovation. Further, this case highlights how dialogue was encouraged throughout the process of establishing the cluster and has continued to be an important element. Rather than imposing some grand design, the SSPC cluster is and always will be emergent. In this sense, in the early stages of collaboration, detecting and supporting existing and emergent communities is essential to success, and shared identity which is the outcome of members’ discursive practices appears to be a powerful driver of collaboration.

There are important insights for cluster and innovation theory development that can be extrapolated from this study. First, context-specific narrative accounts provided in this study further extend the authors’ understanding of the process through which fundamental changes (innovation) in organisational activities are enacted (Ettlie and Subramaniam, 2004). Second, the authors’ understanding of how new ventures are attributed organisational legitimacy through language and story is augmented (Gollant and Sillince, 2007; Pentland, 1999). Third, the authors have articulated how different discourses are mobilised by actors at different stages of development and for different audiences to create desired innovation outcomes, illustrating that innovations can result from advances in knowledge (McAdam et al., 1998). Finally, the authors see how discourse and practice are dynamic as participants articulate their intention to exert further influence on innovation discourse through their lobbying activities.

By focusing on the specific problem of crystallisation, and using the discourse of collaboration, particularised ties emerged around SSPC and this inspired synergistic action. When seeking approval from host organisations, they spoke in terms of return on investment and the potential to add value, part of the discourse of organisational effectiveness. Consequently, the authors stress the benefits of understanding audiences and adjusting discursive approaches on this basis. As such, this study provides evidence that tailored discursive approaches can be used as a resource for managers and practitioners that are seeking to inspire innovation through collaboration.

The discourse of collaboration also became a resource upon which actors could draw to articulate how they might respond to the context and realise the vision. Because this discourse is promoted in government reports and embodied in government strategy, the protagonists were able to borrow from the discourse to secure the necessary resources (in this case funding) that would enhance the possibilities of more effective collaboration. This is because different stakeholders engage with discourse in ways that help to create the outcomes they desire. It was noticeable that the leaders within the Solid State Pharmaceutical Cluster recognised the importance of discourse to innovation collaboration, and on this basis, they successfully adjusted the use of terminology in relation to the exchange partners they were addressing. When addressing potential partners within industry and academia, they utilised both the “burning platform” and “Ireland Inc.” metaphors to create generalised membership ties around the need for innovation and action.

First, context-specific narrative accounts provided in this study further extend the authors’ understanding of the process through which fundamental changes (innovation) in organisational activities are enacted (Ettlie and Subramaniam, 2004). Second, the authors have articulated how different discourses are mobilised by actors at different stages of development and for different audiences to create desired innovation outcomes, illustrating that innovations can result from advances in knowledge (McAdam et al., 1998). Finally, the authors see how discourse and practice are dynamic as participants articulate their intention to exert further influence on innovation discourse through their lobbying activities.

This double volume presents the state of the art in research on the microfoundations of institutions. In this introductory chapter, we develop an overview of where the emerging microfoundational agenda in institutional theory stands and in which direction it is moving. We discuss the questions of what microfoundations of institutions are, what the “micro” in microfoundations represents, why we use the plural form (microfoundations vs microfoundation), why microfoundations of institutions are needed, and how microfoundations can be studied. Specifically, we highlight that there are several traditions of microfoundational research, and we outline a cognitive, a communicative and a behavioral perspective. In addition, we explain that scholars tend to think of microfoundations in terms of an agency, levels, or mechanisms argument. We delineate key challenges and opportunities for future research and explain why we believe that the debate on microfoundations will become a defining element in the further development of institutional theory.

The purpose of this paper is to show a real experience of how a scheme of continuous improvement has been gradually transformed, from a very unsuccessful start, passing through different phases and finally delivering results for the firm.

The authors analyse the evolution of the formal programs of continuous improvement of a firm in a traditional sector (food). The data for the research were gathered by means of participatory observation over the course of 18 months spent in the firm attending the meetings of the improvement teams.

Both programs (individual and group) have proved to be very profitable for the company. However, there is no magic formula for the correct operation of the system of continuous improvement. The existing system has to be continually improved, correcting faults and trying always to contribute something new to re‐launch the system regularly.

This study has also permitted the authors to highlight the importance of continuous improvement in the firm from both the economic point of view and that of worker development.

The investigation aims to help to cover the lack of longitudinal case studies of continuous improvement.

Describes both MRPII and JIT, reviews their strengths and weaknesses, and investigates their potential complementary nature. Suggests a step‐by‐step implementation of MRPII/JIT integration. Shows that several technical problems are solvable, and that MRPII and JIT are suitable in many similar environments. Analyses justification of change using current and alternative accounting methods, and studies the implications of integration for methods of performance measurement. Suggests that JIT undermines traditional management accounting methods and demands non‐financial methods such as Activity‐Based Costing (ABC). However, also suggests that integrated schemes require major organizational and political change.

The ability to act in a purposeful and effective way amid institutional tensions and paradoxes is, right now, a highly prized quality in public leadership. The purpose of this chapter is to qualify moderately brave acts as a learning format that combines the analytical and performative skills implied in this kind of agency.

The chapter explores the engagement with paradoxes as a narrative praxis. From existing literature, it sums up an understanding of agency as a social process of mediating paradoxes in order to make action possible. Drawing on Northrop Frye’s theory of modes, the chapter explains this praxis as a narrative endeavour balancing the dynamics of tragedy (disintegration) and comedy (integration). Moderately brave acts are formed as a kind of low-mimetic synthesis – very much akin to comedy and realistic fiction. The narrative dynamics of low-mimetic synthesis are pursued in the case story of Christian, a Master of Public Administration (MPA) student from Copenhagen.

Moderately brave acts appear as a learning format that can inspire a less idealised, but not entirely ironic approach to the paradoxes of management. In this way, they can foster a nuanced and pragmatic agency that combines analytical reflexivity with the ability to take practical action in problematic situations.

The chapter may inspire teachers to use narrative techniques to allow students to deal with real problems of daily praxis in a way that embraces the tension between idealisation and deconstructive irony.