Search results

This study aims to explore the use of a double diamond design method to engage the industry in a sector-wide response to the issues of food waste as constructed by consumers. This particular design method is achieved by an exploration of a collective intelligence-participatory design (CIPD) project to engage industry participants in understanding and responding to consumers’ perceptions of the role of packaging in reducing food waste.

Using the UK Design Council’s double diamond design method as a guiding conceptual principle, the project recruited industry participants from medium to large food businesses across various food categories. Two scoping workshops with industry were held prior to the initiation of a 12-stage project (n = 57), and then two industry workshops were held (n = 4 and 14). Eighty participants completed an online qualitative survey, and 23 industry participants took part in a Think Tank Sprint Series. The Think Tanks used participatory design approaches to understand barriers and opportunities for change within food industry sub-sectors and test the feasibility and acceptability of package designs to reduce consumer waste.

For CIPD to work for complex problems involving industry, it is vital that stakeholders across macro- and micro-subsystems are involved and that adequate time is allowed to address that complexity. Using both the right tools for engagement and the involvement of the right mix of representatives across various sectors of industry is critical to reducing blame shift. The process of divergence and convergence allowed clear insight into the long-term multi-pronged approach needed for the complex problem.

Participatory design has been useful within various behaviour change settings. This paper has demonstrated the application of the double diamond model in a social marketing setting, adding value to an industry-wide project that included government, peak bodies, manufacturing and production and retailers.

Traditional purchasing best practices primarily follow a commercial logic and may not necessarily be applicable for social enterprises (SEs) supplier selection. This study examines how SEs focused on poverty alleviation select suppliers amidst competing institutional logics to achieve both social impact and economic performance.

A grounded theory methodology is applied to guide semi-structured interviews with 18 fair trade verified SEs. Constant comparison methods aided in determining the point of data saturation was reached.

The results of this study indicate that SEs select marginalized suppliers based on implicit criteria that is initially based on social-welfare logic and then through a blend of commercial and social-welfare logic based on company structure.

This study is the first to reveal that SEs addressing social issues do not follow the traditional criteria for supplier selection but have their own unique selection criteria when selecting suppliers.

The authors revisit the notion of co-production, highlight more critical and re-politicized forms of co-production and introduce three principles for its operationalization. The paper’s viewpoint aims to find entry points for enabling more equitable disaster research and actions via co-production.

The authors draw insights from the authors’ reflections as climate and disaster researchers and literature on knowledge politics in the context of disaster and climate change, especially within critical disaster studies and feminist political ecology.

Disaster studies can better contribute to disaster risk reduction via political co-production and situating local and Indigenous knowledge at the center through three principles, i.e. ensuring knowledge plurality, surfacing norms and assumptions in knowledge production and driving actions that tackle existing knowledge (and broader sociopolitical) structures.

The authors draw out three principles to enable the political function of co-production based on firsthand experiences of working with local and Indigenous peoples and insights from a diverse set of co-production, feminist political ecology and critical disaster studies literature. Future research can observe how it can utilize these principles in its respective contexts.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on doctoral education. Pandemics throughout history have generated new educational theories and practices, accelerated some trends and signalled the abrupt end of others. The unpredictable effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have particularly impacted upon First Nations and transcultural communities and People of Colour throughout the globe. A second significant recent global trend that occurred at the height of the pandemic was the reignited #BlackLivesMatter (#BLM) protest campaign. This campaign drew attention to the vast inequities faced by black, transcultural (migrant, refugee, culturally diverse and international) and Indigenous peoples and triggered rapid action in higher education institutions against racism and unconscious bias.

This conceptual paper draws upon postcolonial/decolonial theory to demonstrate how the COVID pandemic and #BLM movement prompts us to revitalise doctoral education.

These two issues have created renewed urgency around the need to decolonise higher education and a desire to transform the “business-as-usual” geopolitical power dynamics that continue to privilege Northern knowledge over culturally diverse knowledge systems from First Nations and transcultural contexts. A key site where special opportunities exist to effect this transformation lies in doctoral education. Doctoral education is a significant location of new knowledge creation and the development of the world’s future researchers.

Applying post/decolonial theory enables one to rethink how doctoral education should be changed to work towards greater decolonisation.

This study applies Santos’ ideas about “the sociologies of emergence” in the global South to think about how doctoral education should be reconstructed as a liberated zone of decolonisation and epistemic justice.

This paper aims to design, develop and validate an instrument to measure employer branding by considering existing employee perceptions.

In this systematic research, the predominant factors of employer branding are identified through Pareto analysis; using structured questionnaire information and data collected from 423 employees. The number of items and dimensions was reduced by conducting exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and validated extracted dimensions using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using statistical software (SPSS-21). The designed scale was verified by applying relevant statistical techniques, including a multicollinearity test, construct validity, content validity, divergent validity, convergent validity and reliability test. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was performed using AMOS, to explore the interrelationship between the dimensions of the scale.

Considering the perception of existing employees, seven factors along with 24 items scale were designed and developed to measure the employer branding. The identified seven factors are; career development opportunities; compensation and benefits; corporate social responsibility; training and development; work environment; organizational culture; and work-life balance. The proposed model explains a total variance of 70.35% and the model fit indices are within the acceptable range, validity and statistical reliability are established for seven dimensions of employer branding.

Employer branding is studied from existing employee perspective by collecting responses from the employees of the IT sector only.

This validated scale is valuable for practitioners and academicians. The proposed dimensions in the scale may help practitioners explore the impact on the outcomes of organizations such as employee commitment, employee retention, employee satisfaction and total productivity. This novel instrument helps to measure employees' perception of their employers. Further, the authors identify the gaps and accordingly plan strategies to attract and retain the talented workforce.

The authors believe that this novel measuring instrument is comprehensive and the first of its kind. Employer branding has been modeled using SEM analysis by considering the perceptions of the present employees.

Practitioners and management researchers have chorused the salvific tendencies of spiritual intelligence. Whilst the emergence of spirituality and its derivatives in the workplace is widely acclaimed, the conflict that exists between spiritual ideals and the capitalist ethos of modern organisations raises questions about dark manifestations. This incongruence necessitates the consideration of the misuse of spiritual intelligence.

This paper adopts conceptual lens and theoretical arguments to interrogate the assumption of absolute constructiveness that is accorded spiritual intelligence in its framing and discusses the potential of a dark side.

The dark side of spiritual intelligence is its deployment to achieve self-serving purposes, to harm, rather than to help others. More practitioners and management researchers must acknowledge that spiritual intelligence and workplace spirituality may have dark manifestations and incorporate this reality in the assessment of organisations and the individuals within them.

This exploratory article joins the sparse extant literature on the dark side of spiritual intelligence and workplace spirituality. It contributes to the literature by offering critical insights into spiritual intelligence and the need to integrate the potential for misuse in the existing models.