Search results

Bullying affects at least one-third of the workers through either direct exposure or witnessing, both of which lead to compromised health, and as a result, reduced organizational effectiveness or productivity. However, there is very little evidence that organisations provide effective protection from bullying, and in fact, the converse appears to the case. The purpose of this paper to explore the role of both individual and organisational power in the creation and maintenance of the problem. Such an approach moves away from the specific practice of identifying “bullying” that typically engages targets and perpetrators in a dance that is really just around the edges (Sullivan, 2008) of a larger problem; a culture that permits the abuse of power and ill-treatment of workers, in both practices and through organisational politics.

This paper elucidates key problems with organisational response as identified in the literature and critically examines weak organisational response to workplace bullying using the power theory, arguing that while overt approaches to addressing bullying appear to be underpinned by a simplistic, functionalist understanding of power, practices on the ground are better explained by more sophisticated “second-dimension” theorists.

There is a need for organisations to move beyond the current individualistic understanding of bullying towards a more nuanced understanding of how anti-bullying policies and procedures are themselves an exercise in institutional power protecting and reinforcing dominant power structures.

The literature from which this paper is drawn is limited to studies published in English.

The authors advocate a realistic assessment of the role of both individual and organisational power in the creation and maintenance of workplace bullying, as a way forward to plan appropriate intervention.

Workplace bullying is problematic for organisations at several levels, and therefore for society.

That power is relevant to workplace bullying has been apparent since the work of Brodsky in 1976 and Einarsen's early work, this paper builds on a the more nuanced work of McKay (2014), D'Cruz and Noronha (2009), Liefooghe and MacDavey's (2010) and Hutchinson et al. (2010), exploring the organisational response to the raising of bullying issues by individual employees as an exercise of power.

The purpose of this paper is to explore leadership succession in families in business. Although there is a vast amount of research on leadership succession, no attempt has been made to understand this phenomenon by using an intergenerational learning approach. By applying the Double ABC–X model, the authors discuss how resilience is developed through intergenerational learning during family leadership succession in business.

Based on a single case, the authors define pre- and post-event parameters of the business family under study and use the Double ABC–X Model as an analytical framework. Individual and pair interviews, as well as a family firm workshop, were undertaken following an action research approach using multiple interventions. The qualitative data were collected by reflective journals, field notes and observation protocols. Finally, the authors analyze the data according to a circular deconstruction strategy.

The authors find specific pre-event stressor parameters related to mutual mistrust, independent decision making and non-strategic transmission of power, knowledge and responsibility from predecessor to successor. The intervention based on the intergenerational approach during the post-crisis phase focuses on problem solving and coping within the new situation of co-habitation among the two generations. The intergenerational learning approach based on pile-up of demands, adaptive resources and perception is the source of family adaptation. Additionally, the power of the narrative to reflect past events and project the future seems to the point where the family starts developing resilience.

The way family businesses deal with critical and stressful events during leadership succession may lead to intergenerational learning, which is a source of resilient families. The authors apply the Double ABC–X model to understand family leadership succession in business and further develop it to explain how families develop resilience.

The purpose of this paper is to examine human resources (HR) professionals’ self-perceptions of ethically questionable human resource management (HRM) practices (i.e. disregard for the individual, favoring those in power and discrimination). The research sought specifically to determine how these perceptions are influenced by their organizations’ ethical infrastructure and corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices.

Data were collected from 134 HR professionals using an anonymous structured questionnaire.

The scope of organizations’ ethics programs and the degree of importance given to developing an ethical infrastructure were found to predict the level of acceptance of unethical HRM practices related to discrimination. These practices are also less acceptable to professionals from organizations that are perceived as more socially responsible regarding their employees.

Additional studies with larger samples are needed to determine more clearly not only the influence of contextual determinants, but also the practical consequences of high levels of acceptance of unethical practices in HRM.

Organizations can decrease their HR professionals’ acceptance of ethically questionable HRM practices by developing and emphasizing a strong ethical infrastructure and CSR practices, especially those affecting employees.

HR professionals’ perceptions of ethical issues have rarely been analyzed using empirically tested methods. By surveying HR professionals, this study contributes to a fuller understanding of their perceptions regarding the ethics of their own practices. The results show that contextual determinants play an important role in predicting the level of acceptance of unethical HRM practices, especially those leading to discrimination.

This chapter looks at the discursive dimension of the working environment in research and higher education organizations; more specifically at neoliberal managerial discourse and at how it participates in shaping the way researchers, teachers and support staff perceive themselves and their experiences. It is based on a multiple case study and combines an intersectional and a socio-clinical approach. The empirical data is constituted by in-depth interviews with women conducted in Ireland and Chile, and includes some observations made in France. A thematic analysis of individual narratives of self-ascribed experiences of being bullied enables to look behind the veil drawn by managerial discourse, thus providing insights into power vectors and power domains contributing to workplace violence. It also shows that workplace bullying may reinforce identification to undervalued social categories. This contribution argues that neoliberal managerial discourse, by encouraging social representations of “neutral” individuals at work, or else celebrating their “diversity,” conceals power relations rooting on different social categories. This process influences one’s perception of one’s experience and its verbalization. At the same time, feeling assigned to one or more of undervalued social category can raise the perception of being bullied or discriminated against. While research has shown that only a minority of incidents of bullying and discrimination are reported within organizations, this contribution suggests that acknowledging the multiplicity and superposition of categories and their influence in shaping power relations could help secure a more collective and caring approach, and thus foster a safer work culture and atmosphere in research organizations.

Gender equality plans (GEPs) are currently the preferred approach to initiate structural change towards gender equality in research organisations. In order to achieve structural change, GEPs have to be more than just a formally adopted institutional policy. Effective GEPs lead to a transformation of gendered practices and thus to structural change. This chapter presents the innovative approach developed for an H2020 structural change project and its theoretical background. We argue that due to the dual logic, which characterises academic organisations, the organisational logic and the academic logic, change is a complex endeavour. To deal with this complexity, one of the main functions of a GEP is to provide space and initiate reflexivity at an individual as well as at an institutional level. A theory of change approach supports reflexivity in all stages of a GEP as it ensures that basic assumptions of the institutional change process are questioned and reflected on by the different stakeholder groups involved in the implementation.

In this article, we offer a contribution to the ongoing study of food by advancing a conceptual framework and interdisciplinary research agenda – what we term “food system resilience”. In recent years, the concept of resilience has been extensively used in a variety of fields, but not always consistently or holistically. Here we aim to theorise systematically resilience as an analytical concept as it applies to food systems research. To do this, we engage with and seek to extend current understandings of resilience across different disciplines. Accordingly, we begin by exploring the different ways in which the concept of resilience is understood and used in current academic and practitioner literatures – both as a general concept and as applied specifically to food systems research. We show that the social-ecological perspective, rooted in an appreciation of the complexity of systems, carries significant analytical potential. We first underline what we mean by the food system and relate our understanding of this term to those commonly found in the extant food studies literature. We then apply our conception to the specific case of the UK. Here we distinguish between four subsystems at which our “resilient food systems” can be applied. These are, namely, the agro-food system; the value chain; the retail-consumption nexus; and the governance and regulatory framework. On the basis of this conceptualisation we provide an interdisciplinary research agenda, using the case of the UK to illustrate the sorts of research questions and innovative methodologies that our food systems resilience approach is designed to promote.

This paper aims to explore the pertinent issues, barriers and pitfalls of intergenerational communication in business families during their leadership succession period.

Building on relational leadership theory, the paper makes use of an action research approach using a qualitative single case study to investigate communication barriers and pitfalls in business transition.

Through action research, interventions were taken in the underlying case, which increased the consciousness, as well as the personal and social competencies of the business family. Thus, business families stuck in ambivalent entanglement understand their underlying motives and needs within the change process, get into closer contact with their emotional barriers and communication hindrances, which is a prerequisite for any change, and break the succession iceberg phenomenon.

Future research should undertake multiple case studies to validate and/or modify the qualitative methods used in this action research to increase the validity and generalizability of the findings.

Given the large number of business families in transition, our study shows the beneficial effects action research might have on business families’ communication behavior along a change process. The findings might help other business families to understand the value of action research for such underlying challenges and decrease communication barriers.

This is one of the few studies to have addressed intergenerational communication of business families using an action research approach.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss a production planning and control model known as the Lean construction management (LCM) model, which applies a number of visual tools in a systematic way to the planning and control process. The application of the visual tools in this way facilitates the flow of information, thus improving transparency between the interfaces of planning, execution and control.

Design Science research is adopted for this investigation, which analyses the original development of the model and reports on its testing and refinement over different types of projects. The research is divided into three parts, each part focussing on a different stage of development and construction project type.

The main findings are related to the benefits of visual management in the construction planning and control process, such as maintaining consistency between different planning levels, so that feasible execution plans are created; control becomes more focussed on prevention rather than correction, and creates opportunities for collaborative problem solving. Moreover, the physical display of the visual tools in a discrete planning area on-site encourages a regular exchange between participants on actual work progress as it unfolds, leading to more timely reaction to the problems at hand.

The problem of a lack of transparency in construction planning and control leads to communication issues on-site, poor process orientation and high levels of waste. LCM improves process transparency by making information related to system-wide processes more readily available to project participants. This enables them to foresee problems in a timely manner and to take necessary measures to resolve them or to adapt the process to current circumstances. The LCM model proposes a new way of applying visual tools and controls systematically to improve transparency in construction planning and control.

This paper aims to analyze how knowledge networks can be configured within a value chain and provide evidence of the coexistence of multiple knowledge networks in the same value chain.

The empirical setting is the Conegliano Valdobbiadene Prosecco Superiore DOCG wine cluster in the Veneto region of Northeast Italy. Data was collected through the administration by telephone of a semi-structured questionnaire to 37 oenologists, sales managers, production managers and owners of bottling companies in the district. The authors used social network analysis tools to map knowledge networks in the Prosecco cluster.

The results shed light on the importance of singling out knowledge networks in clusters at the value chain level to aid practitioners and researchers in this field. In fact, this research proves the existence of knowledge networks specificities related to the various phases of the production process.

This study has certain limitations. The most relevant is connected to the choice to limit the analysis to a specific cluster. Future research might extend this type of analysis to multiple clusters in different locations.

The authors explain that in the cluster they studied, internationalization, as a common objective, might be made easier if firms could establish a more developed sales knowledge network.

The relational approach to value chain enables disentangling specific roles of each actors. The social dimension of the value chain is taken in consideration.

The authors show that a firm operating in the wine industry can have different knowledge networks in the same value chain. This work adds to previous literature on knowledge networks in clusters by shedding light on an important, but still understudied aspect in the cluster functioning. Knowledge diffusion in clusters is not only uneven but is also value chain stage specific. By intersecting literature on knowledge networks, value chain and cluster research, the authors proposed a new perspective of analysis of the wine industry.

The family is one of the foundations of society; its significance for societal redistribution in modern societies, though, remains particularly unclear. A major reason for this is that theoretical approaches to societal redistribution have not adequately included family either in social philosophy or in welfare state theory. As a consequence, also empirical analyses of differences and developments in societal redistribution have not included family or only in as far as family is affected by other redistributive principles. This paper contributes to filling this theoretical gap.

This paper theorises family as a redistributive principle. With reference to the major theoretical concepts of redistribution, it identifies the relevant dimensions of family in societal redistribution and develops a typology of its inclusion in societal redistribution.

Approaches to redistribution are shaped by distinct concepts of equal or unequal exchange, the relevant actors they identify and by different understandings of the economy. These distinctions are central to understanding the position of family in societal redistribution. With reference to the major theoretical concepts of redistribution, this paper identifies the relevant dimensions of family in societal redistribution and develops a typology of its inclusion in societal redistribution. Further investigations might draw on this typology and detect the theoretical foundations of its conceptualisations and its similarities to and deviations from the developed types.

This paper provides a theoretical groundwork for theoretical and empirical investigations of societal redistribution and for better comprehending its international variation. It aims to initiate a fundamental rethinking of the usual understanding of societal redistribution that widely ignores family as a redistributive principle of its own.