Search results

The case is derived from secondary sources, including publicly available reports and information about all companies directly or indirectly engaged in the industry. No primary sources were available.

This teaching case is designed for students to demonstrate their mastery of industry-level analysis in the emerging space tourism industry. It allows students to understand what constitutes the industry within the broader space sector and to apply analytical tools such as PESTEL and Porter’s Five Forces, with the option to discuss strategic groups. Students gain insights into how the industry is evolving within its broader environment and how companies could respond or differentiate themselves. Information is also provided for students to consider the broader social impact of a relatively new industry from the perspective of sustainable development.

The case is written for undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in strategic management courses. The case placement is ideally in conjunction with industry-level analytical frameworks such as Porter’s Five Forces, PESTEL analysis, strategic groups (optional) and industry life cycle. Most strategic management textbooks cover these concepts in the first few chapters. For example, “Strategic Management, 14th edition” by Hill, Schilling and Jones (2023) covers these topics in chapter 2. Given that space tourism is an embryonic industry dependent on technological innovation, instructors might also use this case in innovation or entrepreneurship-related courses. This case could also be used to address critical issues, such as sustainability, in tourism management courses.

This paper critiques institutional whiteness and racial categorisation in UK higher education. This is done through the representation of the complex narratives of “mixed race” women navigating their PhD experiences in predominantly white institutions, when their identities have proximity to whiteness.

This study introduces five vignettes of “mixed race” women, gathered from a wider study of 27 PhDs and early career researchers in UK higher education. The paper employs Yuval-Davis’ framework of belonging and bell hooks' approach to chosen versus forced marginality to create a conceptual framework based on fluid agency and empowerment, recognising belonging as an ongoing process.

The findings reveal how “mixed race” women can occupy a liminal space between belonging to and rejecting racial categorisation, as they attempted to situate their self-identifications within the boundaries of institutional whiteness.

The study only utilises a small sample size of five counter-stories from a larger study on PhD career trajectories, limiting its empirical claims. It also only engages with “mixed race” women who have proximity to whiteness, encouraging research on different “mixed race” intersections.

This paper encourages more discussion around “mixed race” experiences of UK higher education and critical engagement with higher education’s reliance on statistical data to understand racialised communities.

This paper contributes new empirical insights into how whiteness is experienced when “mixed race” women negotiate their relation to it in UK higher education. It also provides theoretical advancements into understanding of institutional whiteness and critically engages with racial categorisation.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which interdisciplinary (HASS, i.e. non-STEM) factors—in particular, accounting, stakeholder management and accountability—enable, influence and motivate large human exploration ventures, principally in maritime and space fields, utilizing Columbus’s and Chinese explorations of the 1400s as the primary setting.

The study analyzes archival data from narrative and interpretational history, including both academic and non-academic sources, that relate to two global historical events, the Columbus and Ming Chinese exploration eras (c. 1400–1500), as a parallel to the modern “Space Race”. Existing studies on pertinent HASS (Humanities and Social Sciences) and STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) enablers, influencers and motivators are utilized in the analysis. The authors draw upon the concepts of stakeholder theory and the construct of accountability in their analysis.

Findings suggest that non-STEM considerations—politics, finance, accountability, culture, theology and others—played crucial roles in enabling Western Europe (Columbus) to reach the Americas before China or other global powers, demonstrating the pivotal importance of HASS factors in human advancements and exploration.

In seeking to answer those questions, this study identifies only those factors (HASS or STEM) that may support the success or failure in execution of the exploration and development of a region such as the New World or Space. Moreover, the study has the following limitation. Relative successes, failures, drivers and enablers of exploratory ventures are drawn almost exclusively from the documented historical records of the nations, entities and individuals (China and Europe) who conducted those ventures. A paucity of objective sources in some fields, and the need to set appropriate boundaries for the study, also necessitate such limitation.

It is observable that many of those HASS factors also appear to have been influencers in modern era Space projects. For Apollo and Soyuz, success factors such as the relative economics of USA and USSR, their political ideologies, accountabilities and organizational priorities have clear echoes. What the successful voyages of Columbus and Apollo also have in common is an appetite to take risks for an uncertain return, whether as sponsor or voyager; an understanding of financial management and benefits measurement, and a leadership (Isabella I, John F. Kennedy) possessing a vision, ideology and governmental apparatus to further the venture’s goals.

Whilst various historical studies have examined influences behind the oceangoing explorations of the 1400s and the colonization of the “New World”, this article takes an original approach of analyzing those motivations and other factors collectively, in interdisciplinary terms (HASS and STEM). This approach also has the potential to provide a novel method of examining accountability and performance in modern exploratory ventures, such as crewed space missions.

This paper aims to discuss the complexities and foresight of Mars colonization. There are many pioneers competing in a space race to Mars, for example, Elon Musk – SpaceX, Jeff Bezos – Blue Origin and Richard Branson – Virgin Orbit. The analyses are focused on the aerospace industry – the process of space adventures to Mars.

This study offers new methodological approaches – the development of a complexity metric and system innovation mode – to analyze how the complexities relate to the systemic nature of innovation. The complexity metric and system innovation model can be applied in various industries. These analysis tools can help gain insights into the strategies for achieving the diffusion of commercial space.

The analyses of findings have shown that, despite various attempts among the pioneers in a space race to colonize Mars (Elon Musk – SpaceX, Jeff Bezos – Blue Origin and Richard Branson – Virgin Orbit, among others), the aerospace industry has not yet reached a stage of commercialization. The commercial space to Mars is of low systemic nature at present. Many companies compete in a space race to develop technologies on a proprietary basis. However, the highest complexity level suggests a multinational and intergovernmental collaboration to achieve economies of scale and economies of scope as well as accelerate the process of technology diffusion – successful commercial space for the interplanetary settlement.

The main contribution that shows originality and value of this paper is the development of a complexity metric and system innovation model which can be used to explore how the complexities relate to the systemic nature of innovation and how they relate to the strategies in managing technological innovations. The new methodological approaches can be used and applied to various industries.

Although special education was built upon the foundation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the discrimination that many racialized students receiving special education services experience cannot be denied. Many culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse students receiving special education services encounter labels that perpetuate racism and ableism and lead to inequitable access to services and resources necessary for more positive postsecondary outcomes. By honoring intersectionality and dismantling the singular identity, educators can become change agents and shift the historic oppressive narrative to create a system of empowerment as these individuals transition from transitional kindergarten to age 21 special education programs (TK-21) schools into adulthood.

The purpose of this chapter is to illuminate the importance and impact of Black women in higher education, specifically considering how they themselves and others engage with them regarding their intersectional identities. Through a Black Feminist Auto-ethnographic approach, the authors develop and articulate a reflexive praxis to reveal the hegemonic practices that Black women are subjected to at Historically White Institutions (HWIs). The authors, two Black women educators at HWIs, amplify the challenges Black women experience in academia by naming and describing their lived experiences in hopes of providing insights into the continued disparities that exist. In doing so, this chapter highlights how the authors dismantle systems to excel in their respective areas as educators. The authors center their identities as Black women to offer insight and perspectives on how they navigate experiences in academia.

This chapter introduces the tenets of international student critical race theory (IntlCrit) by expanding the critical race methodology to better account for the racialized experiences of international students of color (SOC) in higher education. IntlCrit emphasizes recognizing international SOC as a racialized student body and acknowledges international students' different racial contexts and experiences in their home countries beyond the US dominant monolithic paradigm of racism (Black and White). IntlCrit provides a conceptual foundation for scholarly discourse on race and racism by offering a set of tailored tenets while utilizing tenets of critical race theory (CRT). The tailored tenets can further advance critical analyses to examine developmental processes of racial “othering” and understand the ways that racism affects international SOC in the internationalization of higher education. The IntlCrit tenets include: recognizing and humanizing international SOC as a racial body; evolving international students' eyes (racial identity development); acknowledging intersectional and transnational identities; using an expansive and inclusive historical approach; centering race and racism on international students' experiential knowledge; challenging notions of color-evasiveness and meritocracy in the internationalization of higher education; and committing to global justice. While IntlCrit tenets are focused on addressing the contexts of international students, the framework provides critical perspectives that can be useful in understanding the experiences of different international student groups by nationality or region. Indeed, it can contribute to more extensive discussions regarding how racism functions globally and in the United States. Lastly, it is important to note that the IntlCrit tenets are not definitive or permanent but are a meaningful initiative that challenges inequities and inequalities toward international students' racial experience. I hope the IntlCrit perspectives contribute to including race and racism in international education scholarship and enhancing the policies and practices in diversity, equity, and inclusion to embrace the global, multicultural, and multi-ethnic/racial contexts.

This chapter presents a critical reflection on delivering a lecture on the impacts of colonialism to a cohort of predominantly white, undergraduate students in the UK. This chapter provides an overview of the lecture, including its key content and how it built on a wider programme of learning. It then discusses student reactions to the lecture content, reviews the literature on teaching sensitive subjects, highlights what pedagogues in Higher Education (HE) can learn from this literature, and explores both teacher and student positionality. The chapter concludes that pedagogues in HE should pursue the teaching of sensitive subjects and not ‘give in’ to student discomfort. Not creating the conditions to discuss such issues in learning spaces ultimately sides with existing structures of power and privilege in HE that should be challenged. However, strategies need to be put in place to overcome students’ fears of discussing sensitive subjects. These strategies include pedagogues building up trust, facilitating open dialogue, and reflexively exploring positionality. These present both students and teachers with the opportunity to recognise and transform their own biases, perceptions, and attitudes to facilitate deeper and more democratic learning; and challenge existing structures of privilege in HE that benefit more powerful groups.