Search results

Mary: To begin, I think it is important that we take into account some milestones in the development of multivoiced organizing. This will also set the stage for our extension into the realm of polyvocality. For example, we owe a debt here to work that René Bouwen did with Chris Steyaert (1999) on global organizing. They were among the first to promote multivoicedness in describing how an organization might be affected through the inclusion of many voices. They distinguished four metaphors that were useful in exploring how multivoicedness could influence global organizing: “building the Tower of Babel,” “dialogical imagination,” “polyphonic chorus,” and “strangers’ meeting.”

Many studies on legal consciousness suggest that the poor and working class are fundamentally excluded or disadvantaged, having a different legal consciousness from others that is “against the law” or cynical and dismissive about the law. My study is the first to examine polyvocality and change in legal consciousness among the poor. The women in my study are disadvantaged, to be sure, and face barriers to learning and mastering the law. But the interviews conducted for this study revealed that a remarkable shift in legal consciousness could take place as a result of the interface of perceptions, experience, and interaction with legal services, courts, and other members of the community. In this chapter, I develop a theoretical framework of legal entitlement in order to provide a more nuanced understanding of the variations and changes in legal consciousness among low-income mothers as well as how these differences impact the ways in which marginalized group members come to develop and exercise legal consciousness and also to mobilize the law.

Research projects designed to examine social identity difference in organizations are driven by a passion to affect positive change that ultimately leads to a more just society rather than one which enables status quo power perpetuation and continues to marginalize certain people and inhibit them from achieving personal and career goals. This important change requires the support of all people and not just those who use a simplistically essentialist dyad because they feel a personal connection or because such avenues of inquiry are considered off limits when a researcher or a manager does not “match” members of specific minority groups. Polyvocality is necessary to exorcise -isms in the workplace and larger global communities, so this important work is everyone’s responsibility.

In Chapter 2, difference is operationalized and it is acknowledged that recognizing power differentials between ourselves as researcher and our respondents or participants as researched is a starting point in any important journey when exploring social identity difference. Researching across social identity difference is examined, the simplistically essentialist dyad or racial-matching paradigm is critiqued, and the partial perspective and lived experience orientations are advanced. Useful guidance and methodological techniques also are offered for self-reflexive moves when considering research paradigms, theoretical underpinnings, data collection procedures, data interpretation and analysis steps, and dissemination of findings – as well as discussion about ways that institutionalized power can intervene in potentially risky ways for researchers of social identity and difference.

This book represents an integration of numerous theory streams and approaches so that researchers of social identity difference will have at least one go-to source for engaging with potential analytical, ethical, and methodological challenges. Chapter 2 is divided into these central subthemes: what is social identity difference?, power issues among researchers and the researched, techniques for doing social identity difference research, and researching across social identity difference and the matching paradigm.

These unprecedented times of the COVID-19 pandemic have generated a variety of responses from national governments, local communities, and individuals. Using podcasting as a medium, this comparative educational project interviewed individuals living through and adapting to the unprecedented upheaval at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in Mumbai, India and Houston, USA. Using a decolonial lens, the podcasting project unpacks how similarities and differences in structures of privilege, prevailing ideologies, and sociopolitical contexts have influenced the experiences of people navigating this global challenge in two very different cities.

This chapter reflects on findings from this project and builds on it further to explore the use of podcasting as methodology. The inclusion of diverse voices from contrasting contexts provides opportunities for polyvocality and democratic dialogue. Podcasting is a medium that allows for academic content to be presented in an accessible format for education practitioners and the general public, ultimately contributing to reducing gatekeeping in academia. With the goal of contributing to comparative research, this essay closes with a reflection on the dynamics of power in the production of new media from two highly different primarily English-speaking contexts, whilst striving to consistently retain the authenticity of each city.

Interdisciplinary approaches to sustainability curriculum and pedagogy remain a particular challenge internationally. This chapter shares insights from a 2016 attempt to establish a first-year undergraduate Design course with an interdisciplinary approach to sustainability education. A series of video dialogues between university and community-based sustainability experts was created to enable students to access understandings and research evidence about sustainability issues and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, through different disciplinary lenses. The video dialogues provided students with opportunities to learn reflexively through exposure to differing visions for sustainable development, including Indigenous perspectives. In doing so, the video dialogues provide material for critical, creative, and iterative design thinking. Drawing on feedback from students enrolled in the course, this chapter offers reflections about enhancing course design through using video dialogues to support students’ critical openness to addressing sustainability concerns.

Trans theory (also known as transgender studies) is a rapidly expanding interdisciplinary field in which activism, scholarship and lived experience are coalescing around questions of embodiment, personhood, and intersections of race/ethnicity/class/ability/gender/sexuality. Trans-themed research, whether explicitly located in trans theory or not, is a growing area of academic exploration. As a trans researcher and trans person, I am interested in two questions: how does autoethnography fit within trans and queer theory, and how can people who do not live in trans communities undertake ethical trans-related research? A symbolic interactionist perspective informs my understanding of trans theory and the social construction of identity and embodiment. I explore my own femme transmasculinity through autoethnography, and also consider my experience interviewing other trans people as part of researching masculinity. I suggest that researchers who are not trans (who are cisgendered, meaning they identify with the sex/gender they were assigned at birth) must accept that trans people have what Talia Bettcher (2009a, 2009b) terms First Person Authority over their embodiment, experience, and narratives. Having established this, I examine self-identification and intersubjective recognition in relation to my own experience of femme transmasculinity, asking what is femme incoherence and how does this relate to queer and trans theory/politics?

This book focuses on the concept and role of relational practices as a way to understand, conceive, and study processes of organization, and subscribes to a processual view of organization that, since Weick's seminal book The Social Psychology of Organizing, has turned the study of organizations into one of organizing. More than 30 years later, the field of organizing has increasingly expanded Weick's interpretive framework of sense making, resulting in a rich palette of conceptual frameworks that vary between such diverse processual approaches as complexity theory, phenomenology, narration, dramaturgy, ethnomethodology, discourse (analysis), practice, actor-network theory, and radical process theory (Steyaert, 2007). These various theoretical approaches draw upon and give expression to a relational turn that has transformed conceptual thinking in philosophy, literature, and social sciences, and that increasingly inscribes the study of organization within an ontology of becoming.

The practitioners of postmodern organization theory have had to respond to the charge that postmodernism has a declivity toward skepticism. Their response to organizational skepticisim is to decenter dominant theories, paradigms and organizational forms, rather than to negate them. Decentering supplements discourse by augmenting its repertoire; the opposite of skepticism, which diminishes its object. The main ways in which postmodern organization theories try to overcome the specific sceptical position of paradigm incommensurability (the reduction of discourse about organizations and organizational discourse to a solipsism of private language games) are described and assessed in terms of three positions: John Hassard’s “multiple paradigm” approach on the level of methodology, Stewart Clegg’s “embedded rationalities” on the level of empirical conceptualization, and Kenneth Gergen’s “heteroglossia” on the level of discursive practice. Hassard and Clegg are engaged in the mapping function of postmodern organization theory, whereas Gergen is engaged in deconstraining organizations.

The evidence base associated with Open dialogue (OD) continues to develop. However, much of the literature associated with this “whole system philosophy” is focussed within therapeutic clinical practice. The purpose of this paper is to explore another key aspect of OD within a higher education context, the creation of “dialogical practice culture” and the application of key OD principles to enable an open, empowering ethos which permeates all aspects of teaching and learning and supports co-production.

The authors use a collective auto ethnographic approach to reflect on their experiences of developing and delivering a series of co-produced seminars within pre-registration mental health nurse education over a period of 4 years. This paper explores the data produced through this process focussing on the pedagogical impact and challenges of applying OD principles to teaching and learning practice.

The paper highlights the way in which two core principles of OD, resonate with the co-production process within teaching design and delivery. Moreover, the paper illustrates the impact that threading these principles throughout teaching practice can have: enhancing the learning environment and facilitating mutual empowerment, and thus supporting the students’ development of empowering therapeutic practice with service users. A significant theme in these reflections has been the nature of empowerment and the necessity to openly address power differentials and relationships.

This innovative paper is the first to explore the application of OD principles within a nurse education context; considering how they support co-production and enable an empowering culture. This exploration helps to provide a foundation for further inquiry and research.

Rethinking participation in disaster research and practice could be facilitated when practitioners are provided with opportunities to pause and reflect deeply on their work outside of the context of their own individual projects and organizational networks. The article draws from an extended collaboration between researchers from multiple countries and disciplines in a working group, which aimed at exploring ethics, participation and power in disaster management.

Under responsible engineering science and technology for disaster risk management, the authors undertook weekly meetings over four months to discuss various facets of adopting participatory methods in their individual projects in Nepal, India, the Philippines and the USA. The article develops a critical reflection of practice using an auto-ethnographical and poly-vocal approach.

The voluntary, digital, sustained, unstructured, recurring and inter-disciplinary characteristics of the authors' working group created an opportunity for researchers and practitioners from different fields and different national, cultural and linguistic backgrounds to come together and collectively issues related to participation, ethics and power.

In the paper, the authors do not offer a systematic evaluation of what was a fairly unique process. The paper offers no evaluation of the working group or others like it that focus on questions of replicability, scale and sustainability.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, the current work is a unique paper that focuses on situating multi-disciplinary practice within disaster risk management (DRM) and enhancing networks, capacities and expertise for professional education for engineers, physical and social scientists who are involved in research and practice. The polyvocal character of the presentation will help readers access the particular experiences of the participants, which reflect the deeply personal character of the subject matter.