Search results

Using Lundy's model (2007), this chapter adopts a child-centred approach to discuss decision-making in relation to designing a study which aimed to amplify childhood voices of parental separation (Kay-Flowers, 2019). It examines the role of young people in designing and co-producing the research tools, specifically designed to give voice to childhood experiences of parental separation and divorce. It explains how the research findings were shared with different audiences and reflects on the effectiveness of the approaches taken.

The chapter starts by outlining the four elements of ‘space’, ‘voice’, ‘audience’ and ‘influence’ in Lundy's model (2007) before going on to identify the gap in existing research on children's experience of parental separation and divorce, explaining why their voices need to be heard.

A focus group of young people were involved in designing the study. Finding current methods unsuitable for addressing the research question, they co-produced new research tools specifically designed for the study, alongside the researcher, in a process known as bricolage. The chapter explains the processes involved in creating the bricolage and describes the newly created research tools which were an online questionnaire and Prompt Simulation Video (PSV).

The last part of the chapter explains how ‘audience’ and ‘influence’ informed decision-making about how the study's findings could be presented to amplify childhood voices of parental separation and divorce, to ensure they were heard by different audiences of academics, practitioners, parents, public and children. It concludes with consideration of the effectiveness of this approach.

This chapter explores the roles that library leaders have in ensuring libraries demonstrate innovation and creativity in their services, systems and facilities. This is grounded in the pressures for innovation resulting from the ‘disruptive technologies’ identified by Christensen (1997). ‘Obliquity’ (Kay, 2011) is inter-related around how innovation can be used to meet the challenges. The areas proposed where library leadership can contribute to innovation are leading by example, shaping organisational culture/values, ensuring appropriate training/development takes place, helping develop appropriate organisational structures and establishing appropriate reward and recognition.

Both theoretical insight and practical experience are used to inform the chapter. Management and leadership theories/research provide the context within which library leadership and innovation is explored. This is complemented by the authors between them have experience in developing innovation in libraries and also in delivering leadership training on innovation.

For any library looking to demonstrate innovation and creativity, the chapter identifies some clear responsibilities for leaders. The five specific roles for the leader are crucial in libraries being innovative. A further element of the work is that it explores some of the challenges a library leader will face in moving in this direction.

Having joint authorship by people from different backgrounds ensures that the chapter is based on a blended insight of theoretical understanding and practical experience.

Purpose – The financial crisis has exposed a behavioral paradox: although asset managers are putting significant effort into meeting institutional pressures to demonstrate transparency and responsible behavior, their actual investment behaviors seem to remain inconsistent with responsible ownership. We seek to understand asset managers’ motivations to use externally defined environment, social, and governance (ESG) information to engage in sustainable investment.

Methodology/approach – We draw on insights from the sensemaking literature, as well as institutional, behavioral, and cognitive theories to shed new light on asset managers’ motivations to demonstrate conformance with ESG criteria.

Findings – The more asset managers demonstrate conformance, the less likely they are to make an effort to integrate sustainability and long-term, return-making concerns in their investment behaviors. As a result of the organization’s decoupling strategy, asset managers who are obliged to justify responsible behavior tend to have a limited sense of responsibility for encouraging long-term changes in corporate behavior.

Practical implications – We argue that calls for greater transparency in investment decisions under the guise of demonstrating conformance to ESG information requirements will not lead to more sustainable investment behavior.

Originality/value – This chapter challenges the assumption in the sustainable investment literature that the common use of ESG criteria enables investors to pressure and empower companies in the long term.