Search results

A review article of Pasinetti and Schefold’s edition of the papers at a conference in Marseilles, 1997, on the impact of Keynes in the twentieth century. The book itself is in three parts – theory; Keynesianism in European countries; and institutional discussions of Keynesian policies. The essay concentrates on the issues raised in the first part by Pasinetti, Leijonhufvud and Skidelsky. Pasinetti uses his vital distinction between principle and theory to examine why the Keynesian revolution may not have succeeded. Leijonhufvud identifies Keynes as the last of the classics, contrasting his approach with those he calls the moderns. Skidelsky asks what policies Keynes would advocate today, had he remained ageless with us.

Research into educational organizations is usually concerned with one of two distinct connotations—investigation into the patterns of deploying teachers and pupils, as in team teaching, or investigations into the nature of the organizations themselves. The latter approach has great promise for providing insights into administrative behaviour. The work of Katz and Kahn, Presthus and Carlson helps to provide such insights. Much attention is now being paid to the initiation of organizational change, especially as it affects the organizational climate. The results of a recent project in this area suggest that administrators who wish to change organizational climate may 1. “Thicken the mix” through freeing communication; 2. Sharpen perception through training in interpersonal awareness; S. Improve output by not tinkering with the statics of the organization.

The verbal and nonverbal behaviors that individuals display (i.e., their communication styles) influence the status positions they attain in their task groups. Prior research has generally concluded that communication behaviors that convey agency (i.e., characteristics denoting intelligence, ambition, and dominance) are more effective for obtaining a high-status position in a task group than communication behaviors that convey communality (i.e., characteristics denoting warmth, sincerity, and agreeableness). The message from these prior studies is that it is more status enhancing to be smart than to be social. The objective of this chapter is to challenge this assertion and argue that in some task groups it may be more status enhancing to be social rather than to be smart. I suggest that the status benefits of particular communication styles depend on the characteristics of the group to which an individual belongs to. Thus, in contrast to prior research in this area, I argue for a more contextual approach to the study of communication styles and status conferral, focusing on how structural and process differences between groups influence how the group members’ words and actions are evaluated.

This article describes the development of a measure of role conflict. Role conflict was conceptualized as consisting of four dimensions: intrasender, intersender, interrotle, and person‐role conflict respectively. Study 1 (N = 65), which was conducted to pilot test the 96 item questionnaire (reduced from 224 items after expert rating), resulted in the reduction of the questionnaire to 43 items with three interpretable dimensions. Study 2 (N = 100) was carried out to examine the construct validity of the scale and confirm the factor structure. There was convergence with the findings of Study 1. Cronbach alpha for each subscale was adequate, and evidence of concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validities was found. Study 3 (N = 242) attempted to provide some normative data for the measure, in addition to carrying out a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using LISREL. The findings of Study 2 were almost duplicated, and the CFA results lent greater support to a three‐factor structure of role conflict.

“A mad hatter's tea party” is the way one reporter describe the October 1975 Limits to Growth Conference. In his view something thoroughly silly was going on at that meeting in Houston. But, as in Alice in Wonderland, whatever nonsense there may have been on the surface, profound matters were the true subject of the conference. Some day that reporter may wake up and wonder how he failed to see the significance of the debate over growth. By that time we could be firmly in the clutches of no‐growth policies.

Ever since the days of Sir Thomas More and Robert Owen, people have been engaged in studying and predicting the future. Today's futurist has refined the art to such a high degree that futures studies have important implications for business strategic planning.

This article aims to present an analysis of ideas and practices regarding governance of and by the network design process by participants in the technical design process during the first decade (1969-1979) as recorded in the technical document series that provides both the medium for and the history of that design process, the Internet RFCs.

The research was conducted via a comprehensive inductive and adductive reading of all of the publicly available documents in the series from its launch in October of 1969 through the close of 1979.

The findings show that internet designers were well aware that the infrastructure they were building was social as well as technical in nature. They were concerned about both governmental constraints on the design process (governance of) and about how protocol compliance could be achieved (governance by the network design process). As do informational states, network designers developed governance tools that affected the identity, structure, borders, and change in social, informational, and technological systems. The dual faces of network governance reveal tensions between the network political and the geopolitical.

This work contributes to our understanding of the interactions between the social and the technical in the course of the internet design process as it was expressed in concerns about governance by others and of others brought up in the course of resolving technical design problems. Methodologically, the research provides a model of one approach to analyzing the development of governance mechanisms and specific policies along sociotechnical boundaries.

In a time of ethical lapses and moral ambiguity, it is essential for the university, the source of preparation for managers, scientists, journalists, teachers, and other professionals, to understand its role as a force in preparing graduates for decision‐making. The university is a “moral force” because it constantly extends the boundaries of what is known, and therefore challenges societal rules describing desirable and undesirable states and behavior. By focusing on the decision‐making competence of those it educates, it also makes choices about the values it will express, exhibit, and eschew. In this way, the university has a unique opportunity to help create a culture of conscience not only for the professions and professionals, but for all citizens, through its teaching, scholarship, actions, and service to and with others. With this as its stance, the university would strengthen its place at the center of society and solidify its place at the margins – as curator, creator, and critic.