Search results

Significant advances have been made in using applied methodological approaches. These approaches facilitate critical and creative ways to generate new knowledge, encouraging researchers to explore novel research questions which could not be sufficiently addressed using traditional “branded” methodologies. It is important that, in addition to design, researchers consider the most appropriate methods to collect data. The purpose of this paper is to explore the use of the draw and tell method in the context of an interpretive descriptive study.

Given the challenges associated with eliciting responses from adolescent populations, in addition to the use of a semi-structured interview guide, the authors encouraged adolescent participants to produce drawings as part of an interpretive descriptive study.

Despite the fact that drawings are seldom used with adolescents during research interviews, the authors found this method promoted conversation and facilitated deep exploration into adolescents' perspectives.

The authors argue that this creative approach to data collection should be embraced by researchers engaging in applied methodological research, particularly with participants who may be challenging to engage. Drawings, although seldom used with adolescent research participants, can stimulate engagement and facilitate conversations.

First, this paper aims to identify and discuss the paradoxical relationship between theology and technology. Second, it also demonstrates the urgency of the digitalization of the Church ministry. Third, this paper offers an understanding of technology and theology through the missional perspective of the Church. Fourth, this paper asks the following questions: (1) Can the Church innovate ways of using technology while maintaining the social aspect of the organism? (2) Can organizations migrate to digital technology with adequate technology/human interface to engage innovations? (3) How can organizations renew their products via technological platforms? (4) From a socio-technical perspective on the digital era, can the Church keep abreast of its workforce in a way that provides adequate participative opportunities? and finally, this paper further interacts with views on the paradigm shift of practical theology and techno-theological practice and possible inclusion in the theology vocabularies of the Church.

A thorough search on the subject of techno-theology (TTheo) reveals that there are no scholarly works that offer a conceptual understanding of TTheo. However, TTheo derives an interdisciplinary definition from innovative leadership, socio-religious transformation, transformational leadership, anthropological studies, strategic leadership (and authentic leader AL), scenario thinking/planning, technological disruptions, digital transformation and Church sustainability. There are multiple inferences in the literature on the advantages and disadvantages of technology in human relations (Banks et al., 2016; Dyer, 2011).

Innovation is open-ended. It can take place anywhere and anytime. All it requires are human entities who are creative enough to respond appropriately. The author agrees with Goldsmith that innovation is not limited to a single aspect of any system (Goldsmith et al., 2010, p. xxiv). Innovation can occur anywhere, and there is no limit to it. The only hindrance to innovation is the lack of creative leaders, creative agents of change and an enabling environment to foster change (Teece, 2018, 2010; Bounfour, 2016; Hanna, 2016). While technological innovation is a good development, other factors drive innovation. Technological innovation is not an end by itself. It is a means to an end. And it cannot stand in isolation from other factors that support it. It competes with some external factors which can sustain it or obstruct it.

This paper used the traditional (or narrative), meta-analysis and meta-synthesis methods of literature reviews to study scenario thinking, system thinking, planning and TTheo principles to find a suitable space to redefine and reconstruct the Church’s ministry engagement in a technologically avowed age. This paper is not a technology text, nor does it pose to answer technology questions. Instead, it focuses on the role of technology in Christian ministry.

This paper recommended that the Church redefines its digital transformation perspective by adopting a TTheo that embraces digital materials and hybrid technology in its ministry engagement across the board. This paper further interacts with views on the paradigm shift of practical theology and techno-theological practice and possible inclusion in the theology vocabularies of the Church.

Technology shapes human interactions in a sociopolitical, socioreligious and sociocultural environment (Dyer, 2011; Postman, 2021; McLauhan, 1994, p. 7). As a community of faith, the Church is a segment of the broader cultural environment with a cross-section of people from various works of life and opinions. Language, customs and practice differ significantly from others in every environment. Hence, each setting is unique in multiple ways (Teece, 2018, 2010). The world continues to experience developments in many areas. Due to the symbiotic nature of humans and the environment, cross-breeding and cross-fertilization of ideas are inevitable. As one organization reacts to its unique existence, it indirectly or directly affects another. Hence, while growth may be relative, its impacts are overtly universal.

The term “Techno-theology” is a newcomer in the theological circle. Hence, there are practically little or minimal literature on this subject area. In this paper, the author has written the original concept of the subject matter (TTheo). This paper is part of the ground-breaking research the author is conducting on “Techno-theology.” The author’s PhD research proposal was approved in December 2022. The author’s research focuses on the subject matter of this paper (TTheo). The author also looks forward to leading a deeper conversation among scholars.

As public awareness of the concept of sustainable development has increased, a new investor market has appeared. These investors will only make investments in sustainable financial instruments. Yet, how corporate managers can effectively exploit this new financing concept to make their companies risk resilient remains unaddressed. This study, a conceptual research, aims to examine the impact of sustainable finance (SF) on business risk resilience (BR) and the impact of SF on risk management infrastructure (RI). It also addresses the impact of RI on BR and the mediating effect of the former between SF and BR in the corporate world. Finally, this research explores the moderating effect of managerial capability (MC) and firm technology-focused innovation capability (IC) between SF and RI.

This study incorporates both theoretical and empirical works in the sustainability, innovation, risk management and HRM fields. Afterwards, it constructs a conceptual model alongside suppositions that can be tested in further studies.

This study proposes that SF will enhance BR and RI. Moreover, RI will promote BR and positively intervene between SF and BR. Furthermore, MC and IC will reinforce the SF–RI impact such that the SF–RI impact will be strengthened for companies whose MCs and ICs are high than low.

This research affords suggestions for researchers in multidisciplinary fields. It reinforces BR and RI by introducing SF, MC and IC as tactical devices. It also serves as a reference point for forthcoming academics to investigate this conceptual model, empirically, in diverse industries worldwide.

Practical lessons for finance, investment and risk managers, as well as corporate investors are discussed.

This study provides a new research model that demonstrates how SF can be exploited to promote BR and build RI. It also shows how RI can bolster BR and how RI can connect SF to BR. This new model also exhibits how MC and IC moderate the impacts of SF and RI. Thus, it attempts to advance existing knowledge and theoretical frameworks.

While known by many names, qualifying exams function as gatekeepers to graduate student advancement to PhD candidacy, yet there has been little formal study on best qualifying exam practices particularly in biomedical and related STEM PhD programs. The purpose of this study is to examine the current state of qualifying exams through an examination of the literature and exploration of university-wide policies.

The authors conducted a literature review of studies on qualifying exams and completed an external evaluation of peer institutions’ and internal institutional qualifying exam requirements to inform our discussion of qualifying exams practices in PhD training at a research-intensive US institutions.

This study identified the need for more research on qualifying exams to establish evidence-based best practices. The authors found a wide variety of qualifying exam formats, with little evidence in support for specific formats. The authors also found little evidence that student expectations are made clear. The lack of evidence-based best practices coupled with insufficient clarity for students has a real potential to disadvantage PhD students, particularly first generation, underrepresented minority, international and/or other trainees who are not privileged or socialized to navigate training environments with vague landmarks such as the qualifying exams.

There are very few studies that evaluate qualifying exams in US doctoral education, particularly in STEM fields, and to the authors’ knowledge, there has been no analysis of campus-wide policies on qualifying exams reported. The lack of evidence for best practices and the need for to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of qualifying exams are discussed.