Search results

Based on the assumption of the service-dominant logic (S-D logic) that every exchange is service-for-service and on the relevance of the beneficiary’s role in the co-creation of value, this paper aims to investigate the effects of engagement in the context of social marketing, where the value proposition is an invitation to practice mindfulness.

A field experiment was carried out with 72 volunteers, using a pre-test/post-test control group design. The treatment applied was a set of strategies to increase the engagement of the participants to attain a better result in five dependent variables associated mainly with the benefits of mindfulness practice. Measurements were made from a profile analysis, and submitted to Mann-Whitney and t-tests.

A large effect of group and time factors were observed in the multivariate test, as well as differences in the co-creation of value between groups.

This study can contribute to stimulate experimental transdisciplinary research in humans, using concepts from S-D logic and social marketing to promote positive behavioral change. This approach is probably more efficient at explaining and improving human behavior, given its complex nature.

The paper debunks Peter P. Li’s assertion that Yin-Yang is superior to any other cognitive frames or logical systems for paradox research. The purpose of this paper is to alert the Chinese indigenous management researchers to the danger of Chinese exceptionalism and over-confidence.

To show that Peter P. Li’s assertion is doubtful, the authors identify the flaws in his analysis.

The authors find that there are three serious flaws in Peter P. Li’s analysis. First, there are four defects in the typology of cognitive frames he built in order to compare Yin-Yang with the others. Second, his understanding of dialectics in general and Hegelian dialectics in particular is flawed. And finally, without resorting to Yin-Yang, many scholars can develop theories that are equivalent to those derived from Yin-Yang.

Due to the page limit, this paper only focuses on arguing that Yin-Yang is not superior to other cognitive frames or logical systems without going one step further to explain in which situations Yin-Yang are valuable and might be more suitable than others for helping us understand some research issues.

This paper implies that we should not blindly believe that the Chinese way of thinking and acting is superior to other people’s. Chinese people should be open-minded in the globalized era, not only promoting their own culture but also appreciating and learning from other cultures.

The reduction of cultural exceptionalism and ethnocentrism can make cross-cultural communication and interaction smoother.

This paper is a rigorous critique on the “Yin-Yang being superior” assertion of Peter P. Li.