Search results

1 – 10 of 562
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 August 2014

Sine Nørholm Just and Nico Mouton

The meaning of scandals like “Liborgate” is not given beforehand; it is constructed in the course of framing contests. The purpose of this paper is to provide a nuanced…

Abstract

Purpose

The meaning of scandals like “Liborgate” is not given beforehand; it is constructed in the course of framing contests. The purpose of this paper is to provide a nuanced framework for understanding such framing contests by re-conceptualizing them as rhetorical struggles.

Design/methodology/approach

A conceptual framework that combines modern framing theory, and classical stasis theory is applied to the rhetorical struggles over the meaning of “Liborgate.”

Findings

While rhetorical struggles over “Liborgate” overtly center on the issue of who is to blame, an analysis of the argumentative relations between competing frames leads to the conclusion that this political “blame game” is related to struggles over how to define the scandal, how to conceptualize its causes, and policy recommendations. Banks may have lost the battle of “Liborgate,” but the war over the meaning of financial culture is far from over.

Originality/value

The paper is theoretically and methodologically original in its combination of the theories of framing and stasis, and it provides analytical insights into how sense is made of financial culture in the wake of the financial crisis.

Details

Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 27 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0953-4814

Keywords

Content available
Article
Publication date: 11 August 2014

Eduard Bonet

Abstract

Details

Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 27 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0953-4814

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 5 May 2020

Jim Macnamara

This paper aims to explore the evaluation theory in a field closely related to corporate communication and public relations (PR) as well as in other disciplines and argues…

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to explore the evaluation theory in a field closely related to corporate communication and public relations (PR) as well as in other disciplines and argues that embracing the evaluation theory more broadly can break the “stasis” and “deadlock” identified in evaluation of corporate communication and PR. Specifically, this analysis seeks to show that a transdisciplinary approach can contribute to standards and demonstration of impact – two long-sought goals in evaluation of corporate communication and PR – as well as inform methodology.

Design/methodology/approach

Critical analysis is applied to review the evaluation theory in a number of fields, including international development, public administration, management and health communication, compared with major frameworks, models and methods used for evaluation of corporate communication and PR.

Findings

This analysis shows that the evaluation theory in other fields and related theory of change, program theory and program logic models can contribute to advancing evaluation of corporate communication and PR in three ways: identifying standards in terminology and approaches, shifting focus from activities and outputs to outcomes and impact and applying appropriate and rigorous methodology.

Research limitations/implications

While this paper does not present new empirical data, it expands the theoretical perspectives, models and methods applied to the evaluation of corporate communication and PR and identifies new directions for research.

Originality

As well as expanding the evaluation theory and opening up new ground for research, this analysis identifies a need for structural change in the field of practice.

Details

Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. 25 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1356-3289

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 5 November 2018

Roberto Grandinetti

Recently, some biologists have argued that the time has come to replace separation between Lamarckism and Darwinism with their connection. The aim of this paper is to…

Abstract

Purpose

Recently, some biologists have argued that the time has come to replace separation between Lamarckism and Darwinism with their connection. The aim of this paper is to understand whether this paradigm shift in the interpretation of biological evolution offers useful insights for dealing with the unresolved issue of how industries and their organizational populations evolve.

Design/methodology/approach

Lamarckism and Darwinism are two approaches that have contrasted or interwoven with each other in the study of biological evolution, just as they have in the study of organizational evolution. This paper provides a critical analysis of the long history of the debate through to the recent, revolutionary discoveries in evolutionary microbiology obtained in the wake of the genomic revolution.

Findings

From this new research frontier emerge three important findings: adaptive variations are no longer an anomaly that is peculiar to human organizations, but rather correspond to a widely observed phenomenon in the biological world; the same can be said for the process of horizontal replication; Lamarckism and Darwinism are not two mutually exclusive interpretations of evolution but two dimensions of evolution that coexist in various ways. Lamarckian dimension of evolution and the Darwinian one, handled in the light of these results, may help to understand the evolutionary logic that underpins specific stages of the history of industries.

Originality/value

The paper presents a new way of looking at industries and their firms from an evolutionary perspective.

Details

International Journal of Organizational Analysis, vol. 26 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1934-8835

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 July 2016

Gary Davies and Isabel Olmedo-Cifuentes

This paper aims to identify a typology of corporate misconduct affecting trust; to test the relative ability of individual misconducts to reduce trust and; to explain…

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to identify a typology of corporate misconduct affecting trust; to test the relative ability of individual misconducts to reduce trust and; to explain differences in how individuals respond to corporate crises.

Design/methodology/approach

The main research design uses conjoint analysis. Respondents (n = 404) rated eight combinations of six types of misconduct, identified from prior work on trust as likely to reduce trust. Initial levels of trust were established by varying both country of origin and product type.

Findings

The importance ranking for the six types was consistent across most conditions, with “bending the law” and “not telling the truth” as the most salient and “acting unfairly” and “acting irresponsibly” as the least salient in damaging trust. The characteristics of the respondent influenced the effect size.

Practical implications

As loss of trust represents loss of reputation, understanding how and when the framing of misconduct damages trust is important in managing reputation risk. The impact of any report of misconduct can be moderated if attributed by a company, the media or the individual, to a type that is less damaging to trust.

Originality/value

This study adds to our understanding as to why individuals respond differently to corporate misconduct, and contributes to prior work on reputation damage. The typology of corporate misconduct developed and tested here offers a different framework for researchers and practitioners with which to explore loss of trust and to develop existing crisis communication theory.

Details

European Journal of Marketing, vol. 50 no. 7/8
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0309-0566

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 3 October 2019

Abstract

Details

Big Ideas in Public Relations Research and Practice
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-83867-508-0

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 24 February 2012

David Pilgrim, Francoise Champion, Giel Hutschemaekers, Nadia Garnoussi and Fiona van Dijk

The purpose of this paper is to examine the similarities and differences in the development of psychological therapies in three European Union countries (the United…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine the similarities and differences in the development of psychological therapies in three European Union countries (the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and France) in the context of national policies about health services and public mental health.

Design/methodology/approach

Three case studies are utilised for this purpose as historical descriptions. The latter are then discussed in the light of traditional approaches to the sociology of the professions.

Findings

Whilst some similarities are identified across the three countries (for example the recent convergence of policy interest in “evidence‐based practice”) it is also clear that the particular national cultures have shaped developments and their different forms of healthcare organisation have been reflected in national legislative and regulatory arrangements.

Research limitations/implications

These case studies draw attention to the need to explore national variations in policy formation about the same matter (in this case the professionalization of psychological therapies) and to extend discussions within the sociology of the professions to ones of healthcare organizational contexts. In addition, the contested nature of applied psychology may require special attention relative to other forms of health work practice.

Originality/value

This paper provides a particular form of understanding about psychological practices within modern healthcare and public health policies, in the light of the peculiar and contextualised aspects of the case studies provided.

Details

International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, vol. 32 no. 1/2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0144-333X

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 11 July 2007

Terrence McDonough

This article traces the history of a continuous tradition of Marxian stage theory from the beginning of the twentieth century until the present day. The resolution of the…

Abstract

This article traces the history of a continuous tradition of Marxian stage theory from the beginning of the twentieth century until the present day. The resolution of the first crisis of Marxism was found in the work of Hilferding on finance capital, Bukharin on the world economy and Lenin on imperialism as a new stage of capitalism. Hilferding's, Bukarin's and Lenin's analysis was carried into the post–World War II era through the work of Sweezy and Mandel. A second wave of Marxian stage theorizing emerged with the end of the post–World War II expansion. Mandel's long wave theory (LWT), the Social Structure of Accumulation Framework (SSAF), and the Regulation Approach (RA) analyzed the stagflationary crises as the end of a long wave of growth. This long wave was underpinned by the emergence of a postwar stage of capitalism, which was analogous to the reorganization brought about by monopoly capital at the turn of the century. These new schools were reluctant to predict the non-resolution of the current crisis, thus opening up the possibility of further stages of capitalism in the future. This elevated Lenin's theory of the highest stage to a general theory of capitalist stages. The last decade has seen a substantial convergence in the three perspectives. In general, this convergence has reaffirmed the importance of Hilferding's, Bukarin's and Lenin's (HBL's) initial contributions to the stage theoretic tradition. The article concludes with some thoughts on the necessity of stage theory for understanding of the current period of globalization.

Details

Transitions in Latin America and in Poland and Syria
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-84950-469-0

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 9 July 2021

Jana Brockhaus and Ansgar Zerfass

Corporate communications is often less successful when it is competing for influence with neighboring functions such as marketing or sales within organizations. This…

Abstract

Purpose

Corporate communications is often less successful when it is competing for influence with neighboring functions such as marketing or sales within organizations. This article addresses the internal positioning of communication departments by developing a conceptual framework which helps to understand, analyze and optimize their standing in organizations.

Design/methodology/approach

The research is based on a literature review across several disciplines (e.g. organizational communication, strategic management) and supported by 26 qualitative in-depth interviews with board members, executives and communicators in a global industry company. By combining the theoretical and empirical insights, a framework for positioning communication departments within organizations was developed.

Findings

The framework depicts seven strategies (e.g. expectation and impression management, supporting ambassadors from other departments) and three spheres of influence (organizational integration, internal perceptions and social capital) to strengthen the position of corporate communications.

Research limitations/implications

The conceptual framework has been supported by one case study so far, and future research may further develop and verify it by applying it to a larger number of companies in different industries.

Practical implications

Practitioners can use the framework as an analytical tool to reflect the current situation in their organization and identify opportunities for strengthening it.

Originality/value

This article introduces a novel view in the academic debate about the role and influence of corporate communications. It establishes a framework that helps to identify different drivers and strategies, and lays ground for future research.

Details

Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1356-3289

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 25 July 2019

Howard Nothhaft and Hanna Stensson

The purpose of this paper is to explain the “evaluation deadlock” or “stasis” diagnosed by many authors. The explanation relies on a thought experiment.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explain the “evaluation deadlock” or “stasis” diagnosed by many authors. The explanation relies on a thought experiment.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper is conceptual and builds on a thought experiment inspired by qualitative research such as interviews with communication consultants in Sweden. It makes use of principal–agent theory and Akerlof’s theory of lemon markets.

Findings

A plausible explanation for the evaluation stasis requires consideration of practitioners’ self-interest as businesspeople. The deadlock is explained by an anomaly in practitioner populations and passive or active but covert resistance. If the long-time neglect of measurement and evaluation has led to expectation inflation and overpromising, even well-performing actors might shy away from rigorous measurement and evaluation practices in their own mandates, since they fear being measured against promotional, not realistic standards. At the same time, on the level of industry discourse, these practitioners would still advocate for measurement and evaluation in principle, so as to avoid the suspicion of underperformance.

Research limitations/implications

The paper suggests an explanation for further empirical investigation. It does not attempt to demonstrate anything else than that the suggestion is plausible and that it warrants further investigation.

Practical implications

The scientific community engaged in the measurement and evaluation debate appears puzzled by the discrepancy between practitioners’ words and actions. The authors hope that the paper contributes to a more realistic and thus more constructive dialogue between practitioners and academics in the measurement and evaluation debate.

Originality/value

Inspired by Alvesson and Spicer’s concept of functional stupidity, the paper argues that attempts to explain the evaluation stasis have been marked by circumspection and narrowness. At present, explanations for the evaluation stasis tend to focus on lack of knowledge or inadequate systems or frameworks. The paper offers a more comprehensive explanation.

Details

Journal of Communication Management, vol. 23 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1363-254X

Keywords

1 – 10 of 562