Search results

For Weberian Marxists, the social theories of Max Weber and Karl Marx are complementary contributions to the analysis of modern capitalist society. Combining Weber's theory of rationalization with Marx's critique of commodity fetishism to develop his own critique of reification, Georg Lukács contended that the combination of Marx's and Weber's social theories is essential to envisioning socially transformative modes of praxis in advanced capitalist society. By comparing Lukács's theory of reification with Habermas's theory of communicative action as two theories in the tradition of Weberian Marxism, I show how the prevailing mode of “doing theory” has shifted from Marx's critique of economic determinism to Weber's idea of the inner logic of social value spheres. Today, Weberian Marxism can make an important contribution to theoretical sociology by reconstituting itself as a framework for critically examining prevailing societal definitions of the rationalization imperatives specific to purposive-rational social value spheres (the economy, the administrative state, etc.). In a second step, Weberian Marxists would explore how these value spheres relate to each other and to value spheres that are open to the type of communicative rationalization characteristic of the lifeworld level of social organization.

Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) increasingly view social entrepreneurship as means to expand their mission scope while simultaneously diversifying revenue streams and strengthening financial foundations. However, the pursuit of social entrepreneurial ventures often incites a tug-of-war phenomenon between the deep-rooted social welfare logic of the parent NPO and a newly evolving commercial logic at the subsidiary social enterprise (SSE). The present study seeks to understand how NPOs navigate such logic conflicts as they strive to become more entrepreneurial. Based upon case studies of two NPOs, we found divergence in organizational identity, legitimacy, and mission/vision between parent nonprofits and their SSEs as they struggled with a defining question: Are we a program or are we a business? Our research indicates that organizations reconcile such cognitive dissonance through four distinct processes: connecting, variegating, separating, and augmenting social welfare and commercial logic spheres. We, thus, contribute to the social entrepreneurship and nonprofit management literatures by illustrating ways in which noncommercial organizations may address issues of logic divergence when engaging in revenue-generating commercial activities.

The chapter studies the problems of formation of regional mechanisms of modernization and development of infrastructure of regions and the country, which are determined by complexity of attracting private capital in financing of infrastructure, which is limited by a long return period and the level of profitability of projects. The mechanism of public–private partnership is offered, which allows leveling high risks of implementation of infrastructural projects under guidance of the state. Also, the methodology of foresight control is studied, which is the last stage of modernization and development of infrastructure of regions and the country, as innovational tools of forecasting the future, which is aimed at leveling the risks, allows determining and neutralizing the danger of nontarget usage of invested financial resources, and seeing the threats to internal environment and external environment.

The chapter dwells on barriers for restoration and development of country's infrastructure on the platform of individual physical and practical forces, which are peculiar for the states with developing and transitional economy, as well as for developed countries. Directions of formation of the organizational model of restoration and development of country's infrastructure on the platform of individual physical and practical forces are presented; forms of public–private partnership are studied, as well as possibilities of financing. An important aspect is finding the mechanisms of leveling the risks according to the given classification. A mechanism of organizational model of controlling development of country's infrastructure and its structural elements are provided.

Purpose – This chapter identifies the reasons why institutions need to undertake transformation to engage a diverse student population: it presents a model of student retention and success, which centres on student engagement pre- and post-entry.

Methodology/approach – The chapter overviews the literature on student retention and success and utilises emerging findings from the meta-analysis of the What works? Student retention and success programme.

Findings – The emerging model puts student engagement at the heart of student retention and success. Institutions should promote engagement by•Provision of a range of opportunities for student engagement of different types, at different levels, across the institution in different sites (academic sphere, social sphere and professional services sphere), throughout the student lifecycle.•Developing students to recognise the importance of engagement and to have the capacity to engage in a range of opportunities.•Developing staff responsibility for and capacity to provide effective engagement opportunities.•Taking responsibility for engagement, including monitoring engagement and acting when there are indicators of lower levels of engagement.•Creating a partnership between students and institutions towards a shared outcome of successful learners and graduates.

Research limitations – This chapter draws on emergent findings from the What works? programme.

Practical implications – This chapter assists institutions to improve student retention and success by focusing on engagement and institutional culture.

Social implications – The model assists institutions to critically consider transformation to engage a diverse student population and improve retention and success.

Originality/value – The chapter pre-views original research about engagement, retention and success, which are international concerns.

The institution of the university has played a significant role in the economic, social, political, and cultural developments of society throughout history, which has resulted in presenting different but also contradictory views on university missions. After the middle of the twentieth century, some economic developments, especially technological ones, have led to the maximum domination of economic discourse over university missions and, consequently, the marginalization of other aspects of university missions, which constitute a significant part of the contribution of universities in society. In this regard, this study aimed to identify the missions of universities based on a comprehensive understanding of the contribution of universities in society. This study uses a systematic qualitative review strategy for collecting and investigating the data and a metasynthesis method to analyze and synthesize the findings. The data included 130 valid studies related to university missions. The research findings indicated 18 important university missions, 11 of which are considered transeconomic missions, including social, political, and cultural ones. Among the implications of this research are: the necessity of redefining higher education policy frameworks based on a more comprehensive understanding of the missions of universities and a warning about policy frameworks based on the exclusive authorization for their role in the knowledge-based economy.

Despite profound differences, both the German Historical School and the critical theory of the Frankfurt School have in common a theoretical and cultural heritage in Central European traditions of social thought and philosophy. Although both schools often are perceived as quintessentially German traditions of economic and social research, their methodological presuppositions and critical intent diverge strongly. Since the objective of the Frankfurt School was to carry the theoretical critique initiated by Marx into the twentieth century, and since its members did so on a highly abstract level of theoretical criticism, the suggestion may be surprising that in terms of their respective research agendas, there was a common denominator between the German Historical School and the Frankfurt School critical theory. To be sure, as will become apparent, the common ground was rather tenuous and indirect. We must ask, then: in what respects did their theoretical and analytical foundations and orientations overlap? How did the German Historical School, as a nineteenth-century tradition of economic thinking, influence the development of the Frankfurt School?

The proposition is that a self-governing society needs more effective interactions between the three Spheres of Commerce, Public Administration and Politics. This is notably the case for organisations dealing with complex protocols and jurisdictions, each containing its own norms and practices. Effective leaders need to grapple knowingly and positively with matters far outside the realm of their traditions.

Frictions arise between the Spheres because each has differing motives and driving forces. The resulting collisions, cooperations and contests between the Spheres are never-ending, but the needs for cooperation drive them on. They will never fully merge because their missions are dissimilar, and so the forces that propel their actions are also distinctively, sometimes jarringly, different. Business people tend to think that only they operate in a competitive market. Yet Public Administrations also have deep-seated market features. Intermingling with these Spheres is the Social Sector; a demi-monde of Non-government Organisations, international regulators and authorities, advisory boards, industry bodies, think tanks, consultancies and other hybrid interface organisations.

Enhancement of the increasingly mutual interests of the Spheres will, if progressed well, raise the effectiveness and achievements of them all. This has implications for many forms of leadership development. A greater focus on sociotechnical systems should help the inhabitants of each of the three Spheres to fully recognise the validities and driving forces of the other two Spheres. There is a heightened need for collective problem-solving. There is a huge opportunity for a more integrated approach to cross-pollinating leadership development.

This chapter examines the peculiarities of the Belarusian socio-political model and its internal contradictions, which are becoming increasingly significant enhanced in the context of the new information and communication reality. The authors describe the information environment and the current political situation in Belarus. This chapter examines the factors behind the intensification of socio-political communications. The authors note the increased role of authorities in the online information domain. Particular focus is placed on the new role of social media, opinion leaders, activists, and bloggers. This chapter includes case studies detailing how exactly information technologies and online communication contribute to the formation of a new socio-political agenda in the country. Key examples relate to situations where, owing to extensive public engagement and support for online appeals, it became possible to use mechanisms of legitimate influence on government decision-making and bring to account officials responsible for concealing information. The authors emphasize the importance of information and communication technologies when it comes to external political challenges.