Search results

This study aims to reveal a lesser known side of Late James G. March, as a poet, by offering a curated selection of his poems. The other purpose of this study is to make a case for using poetry as a methodology. Poetry requires engagement by the reader, thus creating space for the personal. With multiple personal explanations co-existing, poetry allows clarity of action at the individual level while simultaneously leaving room for debate and discussion at the collective level. Thus, poetry offers pluralistic histories with room for complexity, ambiguity, paradox and contradictions.

The selection of poems is highly subjective, so an auto-ethnographic approach was appropriate. The collection is curated for the readers of this journal, on topics relevant for the members of the Academy of Management. The argument for poetry as a methodology is based on engaging with the poems for self-reflection and reflexivity.

March had a life-long commitment to self-expression through poems. Poetic engagement by one poetry lover with a selection of his poems about our shared profession, yields small self-discoveries that are good for the collective, by revealing unknown histories, with possibilities other than the dominant single story. Poetry as a methodology brings in the personal, that yields moving theories, that are practical in guiding individual action in personally meaningful ways, even in ambiguous, contradictory and complex situations.

Ideas expressed in poetic form provide a way to liberate possibilities latent in the language itself. Future work from this contribution can be that March’s poems stimulate the imaginations of other poets and poetry lovers, who may have kept it as a private pursuit, just as he did, to come out and share their personal reflexive journeys.

The purpose of this paper is to review the current research program in agonistic dialogic accounting and to reflect on future possibilities for broadening out and opening up accounting and accountability systems, especially as they relate to social and environmental accounting (SEA).

The authors describe an ethic of accountability as a context for dialogue and debate intended to broaden out and open up new imaginings of accounting for democracy. The authors review the accounting literature addressing dialogic accounting and agonistics as the precursor of what has evolved into agonistic dialogic accounting. The authors discuss their work to date on agonistic pluralism and engagement, recognizing the necessity of linking the normative framework to an effective political program. The authors review prior studies applying science and technology studies that have addressed these issues.

The authors consider how the application of agonistic ideas might facilitate the development of multiple accountings that take pluralism seriously by addressing constituencies and perspectives often marginalized in both SEA and mainstream accounting. An ethic of accountability and science and technology studies are useful for stimulating dialogue and debate regarding democratic and civil society institutions as they relate to economic entities, especially corporations.

Agonistic dialogic accounting in conjunction with other disciplines such as science and technology studies can be used in formulating, implementing and evaluating policy for advancing a progressive social agenda.

A reflective view of the current work in agonistic dialogic accounting highlights considerations for further research regarding the possible interdisciplinary work particularly with science and technology studies in broadening out and opening up accounting and accountability systems as facilitators of progressive social agenda.

The growing displacement of theory and other forms of wide-ranging knowledge of social phenomena by empirical research methods in economics is widely noted by economists and historians of economic knowledge. Less attention has been devoted, however, to understand the materialization of such changes in the scientific practices. This article studies the recent transformations in the epistemological practices at CEDE, a research center in Colombia. I use a machine learning technique called Topic Modeling, interviews to CEDE researchers, and exegesis of papers to characterize a shift in the production of knowledge in microeconometrics at CEDE during the years 2000 and 2018. I explain this shift by characterizing two sets of epistemological practices that implies a recent tendency to disdain research that cannot make a “strong” causal inference.

A new urban paradigm, the global city, emerged in the late 20th Century finding acceptance in discussions of urban development. Tied into a global network of exchange, it exists principally as a place of financial speculation and transaction. It is marked by a parallel economy of culture, which underpins a re-conceptualisation and spatial re-formation of the city. Despite its widespread currency, criticisms have challenged its economic sustainability. Further questions have contested its tendency to impose a singular, homogenized space prioritizing consumption while marginalising other concerns.

Post-independence Riga's recent experience provides a platform from which to critique the global city paradigm, which the city embraced as it sought to embed itself in the West not only politically but culturally and economically as well. In opposition to this model's intrinsic singular emphasis and exclusionary tendencies, this text will explore the concept of palimpsest; this proposition understands the city as a multiplicity of layers, within which convergences and divergences offer a site from which to generate synergies. This will be framed in reference to recent discourse on the sustainable city and development practice. Recent design-led inquiry situated in the context of Riga will then provide a lens on palimpsest as an alternative form of praxis.

This paper examines the historical development of pluralistic ignorance as a construct and its application to organizational studies. Pluralistic ignorance is a social comparison error where an individual holds an opinion, but mistakenly believes that others hold the opposite opinion. Pluralistic ignorance was first developed as an important social construct in the 1920s by social psychologist Floyd Allport, and has been applied to myriad settings in psychology and sociology, including racial segregation, student perceptions of alcohol use, and classroom behavior. Despite work in pluralistic ignorance for over 75 years, it has only recently been applied to management settings. Management scholars have suggested applications of pluralistic ignorance to decision‐making, business ethics, group dynamics, performance appraisal, and burnout. Other management applications are proposed as a means to guide research in pluralistic ignorance in the future.

Pluralistic ignorance is defined as a situation in which an individual holds an opinion, but mistakenly believes that the majority of his or her peers hold the opposite opinion. The purpose of this paper is to refocus attention on pluralistic ignorance as an important, applied, and multilevel concept to organizational researchers by developing a theory of pluralistic ignorance in organizational contexts.

The paper reviews the literature with regard to the causes and consequences (for individuals, groups and organizations) of pluralistic ignorance and develops an integrated understanding of how pluralistic ignorance influences employees and organizations.

The paper finds that pluralistic ignorance is a complex phenomenon that has important consequences for organizations with relation to behavior of individuals.

The development of a model of pluralistic ignorance, with research propositions, will assist researchers seeking to conduct research on this topic.

This paper is original in that it is the first to delineate the processes underlying pluralistic ignorance in a managerial/organizational context.

While quantification and performance measurement have proliferated widely in academia and the business world, management and organization scholars increasingly agree on the need for a more in-depth focus on the complex dynamics embedded in the construction, use and effects of quantitative measures (pertaining to the thread of research called ethnostatistics). This paper develops a pluralistic method for conducting ethnostatistical research in organizational settings. Whilst presenting practical techniques for conducting research in live settings, it also discusses how historical approaches which focus on source criticism and contextual reconstruction could overcome the limitations of ethnostatistics.

The methodological approach of this paper encompasses an in-depth discussion of the ethnostatistical method, its underlying assumptions and its methodological limitations. Based on this analysis, the authors propose a pluralistic method (model) for conducting ethnostatistical research in organizational settings based on the integration of 1) research practices employed by one of the authors conducting ethnostatistical research in a large multinational organization and 2) best practices from ethnographic and historical research.

This paper suggests how historical approaches can successfully join ethnostatistical enquiries in an attempt to overcome some limitations in existing conventional methods. The developed framework explores four levels of analysis (ethnography, statistics at work, rhetoric of statistics and history of statistics) and suggests practical approaches for each level that can contribute to strengthening the research output and overcoming limitations when using ethnostatistics.

This paper contributes to the ethnostatistical field by discussing the intersection between history and ethnography and the ways for their complementary use in organizational and management research on quantification processes. As such it offers unique insights and hands-on experience from conducting ethnostatistical enquiries in live organizational settings.

As COVID-19 outbreak has created a global crisis, treating patients with minimum resources and traditional methods has become a hectic task. In this technological era, the rapid growth of coronavirus has affected the countries in lightspeed manner. Therefore, the present study proposes a model to analyse the resource allocation for the COVID-19 pandemic from a pluralistic perspective.

The present study has combined data analytics with the K-mean clustering and probability queueing theory (PQT) and analysed the evolution of COVID-19 all over the world from the data obtained from public repositories. By using K-mean clustering, partitioning of patients’ records along with their status of hospitalization can be mapped and clustered. After K-mean analysis, cluster functions are trained and modelled along with eigen vectors and eigen functions.

After successful iterative training, the model is programmed using R functions and given as input to Bayesian filter for predictive model analysis. Through the proposed model, disposal rate; PPE (personal protective equipment) utilization and recycle rate for different countries were calculated.

Using probabilistic queueing theory and clustering, the study was able to predict the resource allocation for patients. Also, the study has tried to model the failure quotient ratio upon unsuccessful delivery rate in crisis condition.

The study has gathered epidemiological and clinical data from various government websites and research laboratories. Using these data, the study has identified the COVID-19 impact in various countries. Further, effective decision-making for resource allocation in pluralistic setting has being evaluated for the practitioner's reference.

Further, the proposed model is a two-stage approach for vulnerability mapping in a pandemic situation in a healthcare setting for resource allocation and utilization.

Attempts to document how different forms of ignorance may evolve in different organizational dialogues and become embedded in organizational context. Develops the four primary forms of ignorance based on the research from social psychology, public opinion studies, legal studies, behavioral economics, and clinical psychology. The recognition of the historic interdisciplinary evolution of the concept of ignorance plays an important role in the knowledge economy and learning organizations. If management is not aware of the various latent forms of organizational ignorance, it is difficult to develop meaningful innovation programs for organizations in the twenty‐first century. Develops a framework to address the issue of “not knowing what one does not know” (i.e. ignorance of ignorance) that may be the biggest barrier for organizations to becoming an active participant in the knowledge economy.

Methodological pluralism in consumer research is usually confined to post‐positivist interpretive approaches. Argues, however, that a positivistic stance, radical behaviourism, can enrich epistemological debate among researchers with the recognition of radical behaviourism′s ultimate reliance on interpretation as well as science. Although radical behaviourist explanation was initially founded on Machian positivism, its account of complex social behaviours such as purchase and consumption is necessarily interpretive, inviting comparison with the hermeneutical approaches currently emerging in consumer research. Radical behaviourist interpretation attributes meaning to behaviour by identifying its environmental determinants, especially the learning history of the individual in relation to the consequences similar prior behaviour has effected. The nature of such interpretation is demonstrated for purchase and consumption responses by means of a critique of radical behaviourism as applied to complex human activity. In the process, develops and applies a framework for radical behaviourist interpretation of purchase and consumption to four operant equifinality classes of consumer behaviour: accomplishment, pleasure, accumulation and maintenance. Some epistemological implications of this framework, the behavioural perspective model (BPM) of purchase and consumption, are discussed in the context of the relativity and incommensurability of research paradigms. Finally, evaluates the interpretive approach, particularly in terms of its relevance to the nature and understanding of managerial marketing.