Search results1 – 4 of 4
This paper aims to examine how and why finance is represented in cultural products. Focussing on an illustration by Norman Rockwell for the cover of The Saturday Evening…
This paper aims to examine how and why finance is represented in cultural products. Focussing on an illustration by Norman Rockwell for the cover of The Saturday Evening Post, this analysis suggests that financialization is represented through the technique of visually incongruent humour. Humour relays the cultural value of the separation of work and play, and financialization is a tool to make sense of play as work. Addressing why certain financial representations are produced highlights the influence of finance in determining how and what messages about financialization are made public. This analysis of a single illustration suggests a need for further research into comparative and contextual studies of culture and finance.
This paper is a qualitative analysis of The Expense Account (1957), a cover illustration for The Saturday Evening Post.
In analysing the visually incongruent humour of the illustration, the cultural value of the separation of work and play is muddied by the lack of supervision and undefined organizational space. Freedom of travel and lack of managerial presence suggest that travelling salesmen face anxiety and uncertainty in having to account for their fun activities as work. Accounting is one tool of financialization used to interpret play as work by employees. This illustration was produced in a for-profit context and was therefore influenced by the financial decisions of magazine editors and customers.
Interdisciplinary qualitative analysis of finance and humorous popular cultural images suggests that accounting is a financial tool for making sense of play as work outside fixed organizational spaces. Additional support is given for studying popular culture and finance together, as popular culture is produced within a financial system in which financial decisions determine humorous representations of financialization.
This paper adopts a financial perspective in examining a Norman Rockwell illustration and makes the case for examining how representations of financialization are made by humour and financial influence.
Gender, race, and class-based meanings inform longstanding divisions and status hierarchies within the culinary profession, such as those between public and private and…
Gender, race, and class-based meanings inform longstanding divisions and status hierarchies within the culinary profession, such as those between public and private and amateur and professional cooking. Private and personal chefs’ work in homes disrupts these divisions and hierarchies. Given their precarious position, how do these chefs negotiate their standing within the profession?
This chapter draws on interviews with 41 private/personal chefs. Eight were primarily private household employees, while all others were primarily self-employed.
The chefs negotiated their status by making distinctions between themselves and commercial chefs, along with other private/personal chefs. The chefs both challenge and reinforce the dichotomies and criteria shaping status evaluations within the culinary profession. Similarly, they both contest and reinforce gender, race, and class hierarchies.
The chefs’ conceptual distinctions can potentially (re)produce or challenge material inequalities. Moreover, while the fields of private/personal cheffing create opportunities for more adults to cook for a living, the traditional status hierarchies remain largely the same. It is likely that as long as those hierarchies persist, the chefs’ conceptual distinctions will continue to challenge and reinforce them.
Research on private/personal chefs has been minimal, so this chapter fills this gap. It also adds to scholarship connecting workers’ status struggles and gender, race, and class inequalities. The case of private and personal chefs sheds new light on how gender, race, and class intersect to inform status evaluations within the culinary profession.
The purpose of this paper is to develop, test, and validate a model in a specialty retail environment to assess the influence of a salesperson’s sales- or…
The purpose of this paper is to develop, test, and validate a model in a specialty retail environment to assess the influence of a salesperson’s sales- or customer-orientation and customer characteristics related to buy/no-buy decisions.
Backward stepwise discriminant analysis was used to identify variables that most differentiated buyers from non-buyers. The discriminant model was estimated with survey data provided by a judgment sample of consumers asked to recall details about a recent in-store purchase experience (n=240). One significant discriminant function emerged. The model correctly classified 87.5 percent of buy/no-buy decisions by consumers in a separate validation sample (n=40).
Customers who believe a salesperson is sales oriented (i.e. only interested in closing) are more likely to make a no-buy decision even when retailer-related attributes – such as positive prior experience with the retailer, susceptibility to normative interpersonal influence, and positive attitude toward retailing – suggest otherwise. Surprisingly, neither customer orientation nor susceptibility to interpersonal informational influence relates significantly to making a buy/no-buy decision.
Specialty retailers should avoid a sales-outcome-based orientation. To add value in a competitive marketplace where buyers can avoid salespeople, the focus of a sales interaction should be on identifying customer needs and characteristics.
Adaptations of sales people’s personas and selling efforts – fostered by new managerial training practices – and the need for specialty retailers to adopt behavior-based control systems are suggested. In addition, sales or customer orientation typically is reported by the salesperson. Here, customers’ belief – which is more germane to modeling buy/no-buy decisions – designates the salesperson’s orientation.