Search results

Although communication is of vital importance in construction projects, the construction industry is confronted with great communication difficulties and an ineffective use of information and communication technology (ICT) systems. In this study, the objective is to analyse obstacles and preconditions for an effective use of ICT by focusing on characteristics of interorganizational communication in construction projects. Interorganizational communication and ICT are studied by elaborating on these phenomena from the perspective of two paradigms – the traditional functionalist and the radical humanist – and theories representative for these paradigms – the agency theory and Habermas’ critical social theory. By using the method of metatriangulation, it is shown that in addition to the functionalist perspective, the critical social theory of Habermas is an appropriate theory for analysing obstacles and preconditions for an effective interorganizational communication and use of ICT. Based on this analysis, a critical research agenda on communication and ICT in construction is formulated. It is concluded that this type of research will lead to a more articulated view on the alignment between ICT applications and communication in construction projects and will show new directions for ICT development in the future.

This chapter informs current research and practice in organization development and change (ODC) with an actionable knowledge of the social science philosophies. It adds value to the scholarship of ODC by charting the progression of philosophies of social science, by showing how researchers in ODC structure their inquiry based on the inherent philosophical dimensions, and by offering useful and actionable knowledge for research and practice. The aim of the chapter is to reflect on the practice of ODC as a social science and to consolidate its social science philosophies so to provide solid philosophical and methodological foundations for the field.

To defend the thesis that critical theory has become unable to call into question and challenge the main impulses of modern capitalist societies. The reason for this is that the capacities of language on the one hand and the hermeneutic processes that underlie the process of “recognition” are insufficient to counter the power of socialization to shape subjectivity and the cognitive and evaluative capacities of subjects.

I provide a critical reading of the methodology of linguistic and recognitive theories of intersubjectivity by means of a theory of domination derived from Rousseau which shapes the cognitive and epistemic powers of subjects thereby weakening their capacity to be socialized via the media of language and social recognition.

By divorcing our cognitive ideas about the social world from the social-ontological processes that shape and deform it under capitalism, this brand of critical theory succeeds in sealing off the mechanisms of social domination and power relations that were at the heart of the enterprise from its inception.

Critical theory must move toward a more comprehensive theory of the social totality in order for it to retain its critical character.

The paper questions the main ideas held by the mainstream of critical theory such as its reliance on hermeneutic and linguistic forms of consciousness and social praxis as well as a theoretical reliance on pragmatic theories of mind and Mead’s conception of socialization.

Any career is marked by luck, both good and bad, as well as by hard work interspersed by times of uncertainty, fits and starts, and learning from one's mistakes and successes. But beyond these outcomes and actions, I owe an enormous debt to people who have shaped me and made life the challenging and rewarding journey it is. My family of origin and extended family were incredibly supportive in personal and functional ways. So many mentors and teachers influenced what I know and who I am. Many students, colleagues, secretaries, computer and library staff, and group chairs and deans provided the help, inspiration, and friendship guiding my career behind the scenes. My wife, son, and daughter sustained me through times of tears and joy, as did my community of faith. All these relationships were foundational to any contributions I may have made to attitudes, social action, and theory of mind; methodology, statistics, and philosophical foundations of research; sales force, organization, and health behaviors; emotions, ethics, and moral behavior; and marketing and managerial practice. For me, my career contributions are secondary to the relationships within which I was fortunate to engage.

Institutional theory is becoming one of the dominant theoretical perspectives in organization theory and is increasingly being applied in accounting research to study the practice of accounting in organizations. However, most institutional theory research has adequately theorized neither the institutionalization process through which change takes place nor the socio‐political context of the institutional formations. We propose a social theory based framework for grounding and expanding institutional theory to more fully articulate institutionalization processes. Specifically, we incorporate institutional theory and structuration theory and draw on the work of Max Weber in developing a framework of the context and the processes associated with creating, adopting and discarding institutional practices. We propose that the expanded framework depicts the socio‐economic and political context better and more directly addresses the dynamics of enacting, embedding and changing organizational features and processes. Expanding the focus of the institutional theory based accounting research can facilitate a more comprehensive representation of accounting as the object of institutional practices as well as provide a better articulation of the role of accounting in the institutionalization process.

Based on the assumption that information access disparity is a highly complex phenomenon demanding integrative explications that heed both structure and agency, the purpose of this paper is to outline the theoretical background against which endeavours to develop such explanations can be planned.

The study is based on a close reading of: existing explanations of information access disparity; research of other library and information science (LIS) issues that have demonstrated conscious attempts to bridge structure and agency; and cross-disciplinary integrative theories that have served as foundations for LIS research. Explanatory power of the first and applicability of the latter two are critically assessed; lessons for future research are drawn.

The examination shows that efforts to develop integrative theories for information access disparity are emerging but remain indistinct; integrative frameworks for other LIS phenomena exist but are developed primarily by adopting concepts from cross-disciplinary theories and are, therefore, both enabled and constrained by them. It also shows that cross-disciplinary integrative theories contribute to LIS by exporting the general integrative theorising approach and a range of specific concepts but, owing to their limitations in dealing with information-specific issues, their adequacy for explaining information access disparity cannot be assumed.

The study demonstrates that a promising way forward for developing integrative theories of information access disparity is to follow the general integrative approach, but to ground related concepts and propositions in empirical data alone, i.e., to begin the journey of integrative theorising theory-free.

Leveraging social action theory, social network theory and the notion of network externality, the purpose of this paper is to model two different return on investment (ROI) measures: the networked ROI which captures the network effect originating from a social media investment, and the discrete ROI which focuses social media discrete returns from individual users.

A field experiment was set up over a period of three months to test the effects of two variants of an advertisement campaign (a social vs a discrete ad) on the modeled networked and discrete ROIs.

The authors find that emphasizing discrete user actions leads to lower network gains, but higher monetary returns while the social action emphasis produces higher network gains, but lower monetary returns. The study further suggests that social action focus is preferable for brand promotion and engagement, whereas the discrete action focus is suitable for boosting sales and website traffic.

Several potential implications for social media researchers and marketers are also discussed.

The authors for the first time showed that that the social media returns are derived not only from individual actions taken by the user (e.g. likes and shares) but also from users’ social interdependencies and the additional exposure that results from network effects.