Search results

Boundaries are a popular topic among organizational researchers, many of whom argue that over the past decade we have witnessed a trend toward permeable boundaries and in some cases a blurring between organization and environment. Contrary to received wisdom, we argue that the question as to whether organizational boundaries have become more permeable or not cannot be decided empirically but is mainly a theoretical issue. Whether or not data indicate permeability or impermeability depends on the theoretical lens employed. Against this backdrop, we review how two prominent approaches to the study of boundaries, sociological systems theory and new institutionalism, not only arrive at different conclusions but also mandate diverging avenues of research. We focus in depth on several empirical trends: advances in information and communication technologies, increasingly dynamic fields and markets, invasive transparency regimes, and meta-organizations. We then introduce the contributions in this volume, showing how they elaborate on these and other empirical trends, drawing on different theoretical perspectives, to advance our understanding of the importance of boundaries within and around organizations.

In the work of von Mises and Rothbard one can find a case for a strong presumption against traditional coercive paternalist policies. Coercion is generally undesirable, and legislators and bureaucrats cannot know what is best for each agent. Not all of the traditional case against paternalism applies to the new libertarian paternalism espoused by behavioral economists and popularized in Sunstein’s and Thaler’s Nudge. There is no way to rule out the possibility that legislators sometimes know better than agents what generally benefits them, and that they can impose feasible regulations that do not limit important freedom and whose costs and risks do not outweigh their benefits. Paternalism is not a bugbear to be avoided at all costs. There’s good reason for skepticism about its virtue and feasibility but no justification for its blanket condemnation.

Purpose – This is an examination of how border policies become intertwined with patriotic expressions that result in an atmosphere conducive to border vigilantism. We analyze how vigilantes target sources of immigrant employment, demonstrate at public buildings in attempting to put pressure on public officials, and speak and rally at educational institutions in order to disseminate their message.

Methodology – We use content analysis, broadly defined.

Findings – Brutalization theory helps understand how a militarized border policy shapes an environment in which violence becomes an acceptable and appropriate response to undocumented migration.

Value – This chapter provides insights on both recent vigilante activities along the border and also within the interior of the nation.

Research sponsored by entities in developed countries, but conducted in developing countries, has recently been the focus of academic debate, international declarations and media controversy. Much of this attention has focused on whether the trials are exploitative and if so what should be done to avoid exploitation. This chapter takes Alan Wertheimer's principles of mutually advantageous transactions and applies them to the question of exploitation in international research. In this chapter, I develop an analysis of exploitation and apply this to the hypothesis that some pharmaceutical companies who run drug trials in developing countries wrongfully exploit the trial participants.

This article examines how a profit-centered restructuring of labor relations in an academic medical center undermined team-based care practices in its intensive care unit. The Institute of Medicine has promoted team-based care to improve patient outcomes, and the staff in the intensive care unit researched for this paper had established a set of practices they defined as teamwork. After hospital executives rolled out a public relations campaign to promote its culture of teamwork, they restructured its workforce to enhance numerical and functional flexibility in three key ways: implementing a “service line” managerial structure; cutting a range of staff positions while combining others; and doubling the capacity of its profitable and highly regarded intensive care unit. Hospital executives said the restructuring was necessitated by changes to payment models brought forth by the Affordable Care Act. Based on 300 hours of participant-observation and 35 interviews with hospital staff, findings show that the restructuring lowered staff resources and intensified work, which limited their ability to practice care they defined as teamwork and undermined the unit’s collective identity as a team. Findings also show how staff members used teamwork as a sensitizing concept to make sense of what they did at work. The meanings attached to teamwork were anchored to positions in the hospitals’ organizational hierarchy. This paper advances our understanding of he flexible work arrangements in the health care industry and their effects on workers.

Purpose – This study analyzes the rhetoric casting U.S. President Barack Obama in the role of betraying and undermining the nation because he seeks government policies supporting a social safety net, gay rights, abortion rights, and other progressive agendas.

Methodology/Approach – The analysis is based on sociological social movement theories, especially the interrelationship of ideology, frames, and narratives in understanding how activists take their ideas and turn them in to action. The power devaluation model of Rory McVeigh is applied to the construction of reality used by right-wing anti-Obama forces, especially those linked to the various Tea Party movements.

Findings – The most militant anti-Obama ideologues construct frames and narratives based on a dualistic worldview in which Obama and liberals in general are demonized and scapegoated for existing economic, social, and political problems.

Research limitations/implications – More scholarly research using statistical analysis of the views and demographics of Tea Party supporters is needed to provide a complete picture of this new social/political movement.

Practical implications – By showing that right-wing populists are basing their beliefs on a long history of similar frames and narratives, this study can help prompt a more constructive response by political opponents who wrongly demonize the Tea Party supporters and their allies as ignorant or crazy.