Search results

In Chapter 1, we critically reviewed the foundations of the free enterprise capital system (FECS), which has been successful primarily because of its wealth and asset accumulation potentiality and actuality. In this chapter, we critically argue that this capacity has been grounded upon the profit maximization (PM) theories, models, and paradigms of FECS. The intent of this chapter is not anti-PM. The PM models of FECS have worked and performed well for more than 200 years of the economic history of the United States and other developed countries, and this phenomenon is celebrated and featured as “market performativity.” However, market performativity has not truly benefitted the poor and the marginalized; on the contrary, market performativity has wittingly or unwittingly created gaping inequalities of wealth, income, opportunity, and prosperity. Critical thinking does not combat PM but challenges it with alternative models of profit sharing that promote social wealth, social welfare, social progress, and opportunity for all, which we explore here. Economic development without social progress breeds economic inequality and social injustice. Economic development alone is not enough; we should create a new paradigm in which economic development is the servant of social progress, not vice versa. Such a paradigm shift involves integrating the creativity and innovativity of market performativity and the goals and drives of social performativity together with PM, that is, from market performativity to social performativity.

Being the most powerful creatures on the planet, we humans should carefully consider our beliefs for the simple reason that the way in which we think influences our behaviors; this in turn can either transform the world or negatively affect the world. Our mores, paradigms, and worldviews translate into behaviors (e.g., factory farming for meat production and consumption) that in turn modify the environment. In general, much of our thinking system is backed up by some concept, theory, paradigm, or ideology. Our thinking systems generate our belief systems of goals and mission statements; our belief systems, in turn, determine our behavior systems (e.g., our strategies, choices, commissions, omissions as implementation systems); our behavior systems determine our impact systems (e.g., impact on us, our families and neighborhoods, our cities and villages, our state and our country, our globe and sometimes our cosmos). Thus, our behavior systems eventually impact our thinking systems, which we started with, thus completing a circular or spiral loop. This chapter examines the thinking–beliefs–behaviors–impact loop, exploring its internal and external dynamics and validities. Specifically, in Part I, we examine the structure of our belief systems in business; in Part II, we explore the power of our structured belief systems in business; in Part III, we apply critical thinking that systematically questions and seeks to redesign our presumed thinking and belief systems.

This paper aims to examine how the fields of social enterprise, social entrepreneurship and social innovation have theorised and applied the concepts of narrative and storytelling.

A literature review and subsequent thematic analysis were used. A keyword search of three databases identified 93 relevant articles that were subsequently reviewed for this paper.

Four main roles for storytelling and narrative were found in the literature: to gain support for social innovation, to inspire social change, to build a social-entrepreneurial identity and to debate the meaning and direction of social innovation itself.

Following the literature review, capacities and applications of storytelling and narrative in other, related fields are discussed to highlight practical use cases of storytelling that might currently be underdeveloped in the social enterprise and innovation sectors.

The paper argues that the social innovation and enterprise literature predominantly views storytelling as a form of mass communication, while often overlooking its ability to foster communal debate and organise intrapersonal dialogue as possible aspects of strategic thinking and innovation management in social enterprise, social entrepreneurship and social innovation.

Near misses are important references for the construction industry to move toward zero injuries, and are of great significance in reducing accidents and improving safety education. To fully improve the construction industry's understanding and standardize the management process of near-miss events, this paper describes a systematic review of the research front and intellectual basis of near-miss events based on scientometric technique and CiteSpace.

The authors reviewed and summarized the research wave and definitions of near-miss events in construction. The science mapping approach is used to conduct quantitative analyses of 120 relevant articles published between 2009 and 2019. Three research themes are identified via author analysis, keyword analysis and co-citation analysis: the construction of near-miss management systems, near-miss events research and characteristic research.

It is found that improving the data collection method to maximize the quality of near-miss reports, optimizing and verifying the event analysis model considering the characteristics of near-miss events in construction, establishing a more comprehensive framework for the analysis of near-miss events and building a highly inclusive technology integration platform are the four main development directions for the future.

According to Heinrich's law, incidents are mainly blamed on near-miss events such as workers' unsafe behaviors. Due to the complexity and variability of the construction site, near-miss events in construction may have different features. This article helps promote the understanding of near misses in academia, standardizing the management process of near-miss events, which is conducive to mining the potential value of such events in practice. Some insights into the research front and the intellectual base of near-miss research in construction are proposed.

The 170-year-old Master in Business Administration (MBA) program is becoming obsolete and inefficient to address today's real-world problems, and is facing mounting criticism from business scholars, management deans, and academic scholars alike. Reviewing major criticisms, this chapter suggests a new design for the MBA program that will not only address the criticisms but also accept a paradigm shift that will spearhead it in coming decades. The redesigned MBA “structure” proposes a four-semester full-time program, during which each semester delves into deeper marketplace problems of increasing complexity (i.e., from simple to complex to unstructured to wicked problems) and deals with these problems with new levels of critical thinking skills and ethical reasoning processes tempered by corresponding entrepreneurial knowledge, skills, and values. The “content” of the redesigned program is anchored around five major themes of business learning: namely, intrinsic motivation management, creativity and innovation management, productivity management, revenue management, and eco-sustainability management, each geared to generate professional entrepreneurial knowledge, and skills and values urgently needed today. Numerous beneficial features of this newly redesigned integrated business management program (MBA) are also discussed.

Current events such as the #metoo and #timesup movements have ushered in an era of heightened awareness of sexist organizational climate. Increasingly, supporters have called for top-down changes, demanding that organizations embrace a culture of accountability. Accordingly, the current study proposed and investigated the concept of benevolently sexist organizational climate and explored the impact on women's state self-esteem, while testing for the potential moderating effects of power and gender.

The current experimental study utilized a video video-based manipulation to introduce benevolently sexist organizational climate with a 2 (content of communication) x 2 (gender of communicator) x 2 (status of communicator) between-subjects design. The hypotheses were tested using an analysis of variance moderation model, based on a sample of 652 women.

Results indicated a significant two-way interaction between benevolently sexist organizational climate and power on self-esteem. Specifically, results suggested that benevolently sexist organizational climates have a greater negative impact on women's self-esteem when a supervisor communicates the information on the climate as opposed to a coworker.

Benevolently sexist climate had a deleterious impact on women's organizational outcomes especially when communicated by a supervisor. These findings can be used for guidance on the development of training and interventions targeted at mitigating the prevalence of benevolently sexist workplace climate.

This study was the first to propose the concept of a benevolently sexist organizational climate. Additionally, the study demonstrated the negative impact of a benevolently sexist organizational climate on women's state self-esteem providing important implications for organizations. Further theoretical and practical implications are discussed.