Search results

Narrative comments about dentists on physician review sites have been documented to increasingly influence people's selection of their dentists. From a communication standpoint, these comments are a type of narrative communication that people share their experiences with dentists by telling stories. Based on the frameworks of rhetoric structure theory and extended elaborated likelihood model, this study aimed to examine the effects of such storytelling from two perspectives including narrative structure and narrative focus.

A 4 (narrative structure) × 2 (narrative focus) between-subjects experiment was conducted to examine the proposed hypotheses and research questions

The results showed that a one-sided comprehensive comment focusing on technical competence generated the strongest persuasion effects measured by attitude and behavioral intention. These effects were mediated by perceived narrative credibility and enjoyment.

This study contributes to the extant literature in two ways. First, it extends previous studies of online narrative comments by showing which narrative structure and focus are deemed to be more persuasive when selecting a dentist. Second, it offers a test of two routes of information processing (i.e. cognitive and experiential) to understand the mechanism underlying the effects of narrative comments.

The peer-review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-08-2020-0359

The paper criticises the dominant paradigm of public relations theory for lack of interest in discursive and rhetorical dimensions of public relations. An alternative theoretical approach to public relations is identified that does treat discursive and rhetorical dimensions of public relations, but it is indicated that at present it has not been sufficiently integrated into dominant public relations theory. The paper explores the points of convergence between rhetoric and public relations. The narrow and broad conceptions of rhetoric are presented, the first characterising rhetoric with persuasive and argumentative discourse, the second with different types of discourse. It is suggested that elements of the broad conception of rhetoric could provide heuristics for analysing public relations techniques as “genre repertoire” of public relations discourse. In the second part, an enquiry into the narrow conception of rhetoric as persuasive and argumentative discourse is made. Positivistic understanding of “truth” and “objectivity” as normative criteria of public relations discourse is criticised on the basis of the so‐called “rhetoric as epistemic” view. It is argued that in corporate discourse, especially in situations of confrontation with active publics, key managerial decisions have to be justified in argumentation. In the last part of the paper, Toulmin’s model of argumentation is suggested as especially suitable for analysis of the argumentative nature of corporate discourse.

The purpose of this study is to present empirical evidence of the nature of corporate rhetoric in developing human capital and how it becomes embedded within a large international organization operating in the Nordic region. The qualitative case study aims to examine the sensemaking of individual managers, and how human capital rhetoric is selected, acted upon, and retained by employees.

An exploratory case study approach is taken in order to provide an in‐depth understanding of the rhetoric and reality of human capital development. Focus groups, archival data, and interviews with key informants (i.e. external consultants, senior executives, managers, and employees from various departments across the Nordic business units) are used to explore different perspectives on the phenomena of human capital development.

The findings highlight a number of key dimensions that can distort the rhetoric of human capital: corporate strategy, organizational structure, managerial style, and the cognitive frames of individuals.

The study suggests a need for senior managers to take pre‐emptive actions to close the gap between the rhetoric of human capital development and what actually happens in practice. A lack of clarity concerning human capital concepts and their outcomes is to be overcome through more effective communication strategies.

The research suggests that managers construct rhetoric that has to be absorbed by multiple audiences and that, in some cases, a counter‐rhetoric of human capital is formed. Employees interpret human capital rhetoric, shape it and alter it in their own interests. Ambiguity and ignorance over human capital concepts is succeeded by pragmatic assessment and refinement on the part of employees, with the initial human capital development program iteratively amended as it passes through the organization.

In a postmodern context this paper proposes that analogical scholarship in which one conceptual schema is used to view another in order to generate new perspectives, be used to view play. Hermeneutic philosophy specifically is used in a process modelling hermeneutic inquiry. Included are a review of play, hermeneutic philosophy, and the outcomes of the juxtaposition of hermeneutic concepts against play. Resultant perspectives on key issues in play, such as the meaning of play, play in meaning making, the binaries of play, play and practice, and play in the reconceptualizing movement in early childhood education, follow.

The purpose of this paper is to present a critical view of rhetoric, science, scientific research, and management that discloses the role of rhetoric in these fields and that offers a conceptual framework for this special issue of the Journal of Organizational Change Management.

The approach taken is a critical and historical analysis.

The following main topics are uncovered: first, even if we think on scientific theories in terms of the classical concept of proven knowledge by empirical evidence and logical deduction, they are constituted by propositions accepted by reasonable rhetorical arguments, which depend on the paradigm of each scientific community. Second, even if we consider that scientific research is a strictly rational activity that follows precise methods, it continuously involves rhetorical reflections, judgements, arguments and debates. Third, even if management sciences usually conceptualize management as activities led by rational arguments and decisions, management constantly involves rhetorical conversations, in which managers use language for achieving their aims.

Beyond the scope of many research papers and books that emphasize the role of rhetoric in science and in management, the paper offers a systematic approach on the foundations of the functions of rhetoric in science and in management.

Previous research has shown that eras of managerial rhetorics have alternated between normative and rational ideologies. The purpose of this study is to test the influence of generational membership on this phenomenon.

Examining data for the past 130 years, eras of managerial rhetorics are matched with recurring generational archetypes.

Empirical evidence is analyzed and found to be generally supportive of the hypotheses: generational membership is associated with the timing of the alternation in managerial rhetorics.

The findings of association suggest generational change could be a causal driver of long‐term change in managerial rhetorics.

The model tested implies a predictive ability to anticipate the movement from the current normative rhetoric to a new rational rhetoric in the near future.

This study is the first to find evidence that the alternation between rational and normative managerial rhetorics is related to generational effects.

Wonders whether companies actually have employees best interests at heart across physical, mental and spiritual spheres. Posits that most organizations ignore their workforce – not even, in many cases, describing workers as assets! Describes many studies to back up this claim in theis work based on the 2002 Employment Research Unit Annual Conference, in Cardiff, Wales.

The need for a permanent revolution in organizational structures and use of human resources is legitimated by reference to the need to adapt to ever more turbulent times. This gives rise to and is sustained by a distinctive anti‐bureaucratic rhetoric based largely on over‐hyped, unrepresentative examples and misunderstood processes. However, though empirically unsustainable, the rhetoric survives, in part because this kind of managerial discourse is playing by different rules. Explores and challenges the internal dynamics of this discourse to show that the rhetoric of discontinuity has been a continuous feature. Uses case studies of privatized utilities and analysis of the literature to explore both the gap between rhetoric and reality, and how managers operate in that gap.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the current rhetoric of predictability in investment theory. After making the case for unpredictability, a new rhetoric for investment theory is proposed.

McCloskey's project of the rhetoric of economics provides the background and approach for the author's investigation. In particular the author will use the notions of metaphor, prediction, discourse analysis, and virtue ethics.

The current rhetoric equals the original rhetoric in the seminal work of Markowitz. The current rhetoric is based on predictability and rational behaviour. The proposed new rhetoric for investment theory denies predictability. The new rhetoric aims to cope with statistics by stressing that statistics is supportive but not decisive: handling investment theory is about judgements, combining virtues with historical and theoretical insights.

The investigation of the rhetoric of investment theory has practical relevance because the theory constitutes investment practice, and can put financial wealth at risk. The new rhetoric for investment theory invites practitioners and researchers to reflect on the epistemology of investment theory, and its consequences for the field.

The rhetoric of investment theory is to the author's knowledge not yet analysed in the literature. The rhetorical analysis of the current rhetoric and the proposal of a new rhetoric aim to contribute to the literature on the rhetoric of investment theory.