Search results

This paper acts as a commentary on the paper “Self‐reflexivity scrutinized: (pro‐)feminist men learning that gender matters” (Styhre and Tienari, 2013).

The following discussion seeks to build on Styhre and Tienari's argumentation and points to arguments of agreement and disagreement.

First, the authors argue that while self‐reflexivity cannot be fully taken into account it would be detrimental to social change to restrict it to accidental, haphazard happenings. Second, they argue that perhaps Styhre and Tienari do not always take self‐reflexivity far enough. In order to increase our understanding of why particular kinds of structural hierarchies take place in academia, it is important to locate these incidents within a system of practices that contribute to the marginalisation/privileging of certain groups of people.

The authors further see it as a researcher's moral obligation to at least attempt to overcome the identity‐related, cultural, political and structural conditions that make self‐reflexivity difficult, tiresome and emotionally constraining. We should encourage ourselves to have an ongoing conversation with our whole self about what we are experiencing as we are experiencing it, not only after a critical incident has taken place.

In conclusion, the authors are more inclined to argue along the lines of Alvesson et al., who see reflexivity as a skill or capacity that can be developed, while remaining in consensus with Styhre and Tienari that it can never be fully under the control of the researcher or practitioner.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the debate on reflexivity in organization and management studies by scrutinizing the possibilities of self‐reflexivity.

By means of auto‐ethnography, the authors analyze their own experiences as (pro‐)feminist men in the field of gender studies.

The authors argue that self‐reflexivity is partial, fragmentary and transient: it surfaces in situations where the authors’ activities and identities as researchers are challenged by others and they become aware of their precarious position.

The paper's perspective complements more instrumental understandings of self‐reflexivity, and stimulates further debate on its limits as well as potential.

The aim of this paper is to outline how public managers' reflective thinking capacity is developed through integration of education and practice using a real-life organizational problem as the educational starting point. Managers' reflective thinking capacity becomes important due to an increasing organizational complexity and the growing trend of introducing post-new public management paradigms.

Inspired by Brinkmann's (2012) approach to the inquiry on everyday life materials, semi-structured interviews were conducted with public managers taking a public management program. A phenomenologically inspired content analysis was applied in the process of scrutinizing the findings, subsequently informing the discussion on the development of problem solving through public management education.

The analysis indicates that the managers' pre-understanding of continuing education at the university level, managers' personal objectives, along with a growing experience with and insights into problem-based learning (PBL), appear to facilitate managers' integration of theory and practice. As revealed in this paper, an inquiry that integrates daily organizational practice and theoretical models and terms, as the origin of the personal development module, seems to facilitate managers' reflective thinking and self-reflexivity.

This paper illustrates that learning processes facilitated by seminars like the personal development module (PDM) not only facilitates the development of reflective thinking, but managers also seem to develop competencies in self-reflexivity – the latter being an underdeveloped element of Dewey's (1933) notion of reflective thinking. Thus, further theoretical and empirical research is needed to explore the potentials of developing a pragmatically inspired notion that offers an understanding of managers' self-reflexivity. By inquiring about managerial puzzlements through a personal development lens, a self-reflective focus adds to the Dewey-inspired approach to reflective thinking.

The purpose of this paper is to elaborate on self-reflexivity and, in particular, explore the notion of context in relation to men's reflexivity in academic work.

The paper is a commentary on an earlier paper published in Equality, Diversity and Inclusion addressing the issue of reflexivity in organization studies and commented on by three different scholars.

Relating specifically to men doing gender studies research, the authors argue that they are always men in context, and their “privilege” (and reflections on it) needs to be accounted for in situ; in relation to the assumptions, relations, and practices at hand, rather to some abstract and vague “privileges” contained in, and carried by, men as a general category.

The paper seeks to advance a novel understanding of reflexivity not so much anchored in the willful capacity to reflect on scholarly work but as engagement with experiences of exclusion or unexpected outcomes in fieldwork and in interacting with other researchers.

The purpose of this paper is to present a methodology to develop responsible leaders through developing their response-ability within the context of their day-to-day lives that addresses the existing disconnect between the knowledge about responsible leadership and its practice.

The responsible leadership development methodology begins by helping individuals increase their awareness of their impact on others based on how they are relating and responding to them. This is facilitated through individuals engaging in self-reflexivity and reflection on relationships for which they want to be responsible. Then individuals experiment with and take responsibility for how they are relating and responding within the relationships. Finally, they engage in self-reflexivity and reflection to make sense of the experience to develop practical wisdom and the response-ability that will allow them to become more responsible leaders.

Students that completed an MBA leadership course that employed the responsible leadership development methodology overwhelmingly reported that their response-ability improved in ways that allowed them to become more responsible for their actions, impact on others, relationships and the reality they co-construct with others, as well as becoming a more responsible person.

The research is based on an MBA class of 24 students, only a few of whom currently occupied organizational leadership positions.

The presented leadership development methodology facilitates the development of responsible leaders through developing their ability and commitment to act responsibly within the context of their day-to-day lives.

This paper aims to understand what reflexivity means and explores which types of reflexivity could be applied within social marketing practice as a critical approach to overcoming failures.

This paper is a critical literature review.

The study proposes a typology for a reflexive approach to social marketing practice to overcome failures. The typology is built on self and critical reflexivity, simultaneously allowing social marketers to reflect on external and internal factors that may affect the individual's role and could negatively affect social marketing practice unless otherwise considered. The types of reflexivity discussed are not prescriptive; instead, the authors intend to provoke further discussion on an under-researched but vital area of social marketing.

The proposed typology is conceptual; an empirical investigation to gain social marketer's views would further enhance the effectiveness of the applications of the typology.

Social marketers could use the proposed typology for future practice.

This is the first study that conceptualises various types of reflexivity within social marketing practice to overcome failures.

I provide an exploration and critique of reflexive research practice, which explores the nature of reflexivity, its relevance to and influence on accounting academic identity formation.

The paper gives detailed explanations of three different approaches to reflexivity dependent on perspectives on reality and exemplifies the chosen approach – intersubjective reflexivity. It draws from three personal experiences to illustrate intersubjective reflexive practice in action and its impact on academic identity, including my own identity as a feminist accounting academic. The examples involve the process of reflexively “being struck” regarding voice and representation; addressing power, privilege and decolonisation in knowledge production; and negotiating insider/outsider academic identities.

I reconceptualise and illustrate reflexivity as academic identity formation that enables transformative experience and more reflexive academic praxis within a turbulent academic context. Reflexive academic identity formation will resonate with accounting academics who are reflecting on the role and purpose of the accounting academy and their identity within it.

The paper provides a significant contribution into understanding intersubjective reflexivity, by reconceptualising intersubjective reflexivity beyond research and applying it to the identity formation of accounting academics. I identify the process of reflexive identity transformation through active engagement in identity work and emotion work, which transforms academic praxis. I argue for a broader more nuanced and power-laden perspective on reflexivity and academic praxis, which moves us to consider the responsibility of our academic identity and actions as accounting academics.

The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the problems of teaching qualitative research methods to large culturally‐mixed groups of postgraduate business school students.

After a consideration of some current relevant pedagogical issues the author presents an autoethnographic account of his own parallel experiences of teaching qualitative research methods and learning to play a musical instrument. Emotional aspects of teaching and learning are highlighted in an analysis of the dynamic interaction between the two activities. This is presented as an example of how the “use of learning stories” can increase sensitivity to the anxieties of students.

Finds that the core of the argument lies in the value of self‐reflexivity to the business school teacher and that looking inward at personal learning experiences is invaluable for informing current and future teaching practice. Recent learning experiences seem to have the most potential and learning something that is found difficult may be the richest source of empathy and insight.

It is argued that reflexive analysis by research‐methods lecturers of their own learning experiences can develop synergies which would not only improve the effectiveness of their teaching but also enrich the learning experience of their students.

The paper is an attempt to generate some original ideas about teaching research methods in business schools via a mix of autoethnography and music. The core of the argument lies in the value of self‐reflexivity to the business school teacher.

The purpose of this paper is to study the status of the individual self in the emergence of change initiatives in organizations.

This theoretical paper examines the emergence of change initiatives through the building of agents’ capacity to act, based on a theory of action inspired by Paul Ricœur.

This paper identifies the “course of recognition” to favor the emergence of change initiatives and the building of the capacity to act of agents, respecting the autonomy at the individual level, a sense of care at the group level and justice at the institutional level.

The theoretical research can be extended with empirical studies dealing with the role of agents’ capacities in conflict management, the role of the “narrative self´” in change processes in organizations and the conjoint operationalization of autonomy care and justice to determine the agents’ capacity to act for initiatives to emerge.

It is important to develop a sense of shared leadership to nurture the capacity to act of agents to make change initiatives emerge in organizations, increasing organizational members’ feelings of being recognized.

So far, research has not provided satisfactory answers to the question about how to best initiate organizational change. The use of Ricœur’s theory of action adds value to the existing approaches as it addresses the source of the emergence of initiatives from agents’ feelings of their capacity to act, and integrates individual, group and institutional levels, which are rarely contemplated together.

The purpose of this paper is to self‐reflexively deconstruct a paper published by the author in 1996 about a Singaporean entrepreneur for whom the author worked. Through the deconstruction a number of important methodological and epistemological issues are raised. Firstly, the way in which the value of qualitative research in management and organization studies is judged more by how it conforms to acceptable ways of data collection, analysis and interpretation (strategic apparatus) than on any “truth” value it may have. Secondly, a consideration of how the “I” of the researcher is influential in how research is undertaken and written up. Thirdly, that this “I” of the researcher is also determined by what is acceptable “scientific” discourse and by other prevailing discourses.

In a paper published in 1996, the author detailed the “dark side” of an entrepreneur for whom he worked. Using a psychoanalytic framework this paper constructed the entrepreneur as an irrational and unethical incompetent. In the present paper, this earlier work is deconstructed using insights from Derrida's in order to highlight “strategic exclusions,” and to offer alternative readings. These alternative readings emphasize the influence of various discourses on the construction of the earlier paper, and also introduce a reading of the earlier paper as a psychoanalytic narrative.

The paper highlights the uses to which “objective tools” of analysis can be put in order to manipulate and construct an explanation and interpretation of personal experiences. This raises important epistemological issues concerning the influence of broader discourses on the representation of experiences and how realities and identities are constructed and performed. The paper concludes by suggesting that whom we are as researchers, and what we observe and write, is more complex and influenced by more discourse(s) than we might think. Even if researchers tell impressionistic and confessional tales simultaneously with their realist ones, it is necessary to consider what discourses may lay behind their telling. It has been argued that a limitation of deconstruction is that it may result in endless iterations and readings of text with no discursive closure. This may be a limitation of the deconstruction offered here.

The paper raises questions about the nature of the “academic” narrative and the importance of deconstruction in establishing author positioning within narrative. It contributes to the discussion about objectivity in organizational and management research and issues of epistemology and ontology more generally.