Search results

Ethnography produces accounts; the critical reflection of accounts produces accountability. Ethnography requires accountability if meaningful conclusions and/or observations are to be made. Accountability requires ethnography if is to address lived experiences. Virno argues that the principles of “languaging” make ethnographies and accountability possible. This papers aims to describe an instance of the circularity of accountability and use this to explore Virno’s insights. Doing this helps us to see the connections between accountability and ethnography, and reflect on the nature of these interconnections.

Inspired by Paulo Virno’s philosophy, the authors assert that an ethnographer typically produces an account of a chosen “Other” in which this “Other” is held to account. But at the same time, the ethnographer needs to be held to account by the very same “Other” and by the “Other” of the (research) community. Furthermore, ethnographers are accountable to themselves. All these moments of accountability can endlessly circle, as responsibilization of the researchers by their Other(s) continues. For ethnography to function, this must be tamed as a (research) account ultimately has to be produced for an academic project to be considered complete. Drawing on Virno’s principle of the “negation of the negation” by the “katechon,” by the “katechon,” the authors propose a potentially valuable intervention that would enable ethnography – and by extension, ethnographers – to prosper.

The authors apply Virno’s philosophical reflections to propose a positive feedback cycle between ethnography and accountability. Virno’s ideation centers on two key concepts: (i) the multitude of social relatedness and (ii) the ontology of the languaging of individuation. Hereby, a positive circle of causality between ethnography and accountability can be realized, whereby the authors can respect but also break the causal circle(s) of ethnography and accountability. This might be achieved via a reflection on Virno’s concept of the “katechon.”

The authors illuminate the accountability–ethnography dynamic, providing an illustration of the circularity of ethnography and accountability and showing how Virno provides us with tools to help us deal with it. Hence, ultimately, the paper focuses on the accountability as ethnographers.

This study aims to explain the cognitive bias of overconfidence and portray the different ways in which overconfident top managers may affect firm outcomes. This paper outlines their opportunities and risks and how these managers are surrounded by contextual factors.

This study draws on a systematic overview of the current literature on senior executives' overconfidence and empirical studies investigating its impact on strategic outcomes.

This study identifies the opportunities and risks of overconfident top managers in firms and considers the contextual factors that influence firm outcomes. The results provide three important managerial implications for interactions with overly confident top managers.

These findings help us understand top managers' overconfidence. Organizations receive guidance on how to constrain inappropriately confident top managers who are detrimental to their businesses.

This study contributes to a better understanding of overconfidence among top managers, illustrates associated opportunities and risks and provides recommendations for controlling and dealing with top managers characterized by this cognitive bias.

The purpose of this study is to extend Bippus and Young’s (2005) study and examine the effectiveness of the “I-you,” “I,” “You,” “We,” “But” and Question-based “Why” statements from Winer’s (2021) verbal coding program of conflict management using Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory (SLT).

Mixed methods were used using 175 university students from Texas and New York. A cross-sectional convenience sampling approach was conducted. Survey data was collected using Qualtrics.

Descriptive results demonstrated that the “We” statement was the most passive, the “I-you” statement was the most assertive and the “But,” “I,” “You” and Question statements were perceived to be aggressive. In addition, assertive “I-You” statements were perceived to be more effective in resolving the conflict and maintaining a relationship, whereas aggressive statements were less likely to resolve the conflict and maintain the relationship. Qualitative themes also support the “I-You” statement as the most assertive, while the “But,” “You” and “I” statements were found to be the most aggressive statements.

Implications and applications are discussed to stimulate future research among researchers and practitioners when addressing conflict. Being aware of the verbal statements that de-escalate conflict may be helpful in solving conflict in interpersonal, family and professional relationships. Future trainings can adopt effective verbal statements to resolve conflict when experiencing anger issues. Future research can continue to investigate verbal communication statements using SLT to help practitioners and managers address conflict in interpersonal relationships.

This study examines verbal statements in relation to communication styles and conflict management.

This case is used in Darden's required first-year course, “Strategic Thinking and Action.”

In 2015, Steve and Heidi Crandall, the founders of Devils Backbone Brewing, LLC (DBB), were looking back on eight years of unanticipated success and significant growth. DBB had created a destination, a brand, and beer that drew people from all over, and it was the largest craft brewery in its region. The entire community, not just loyal beer drinkers, had supported DBB. In addition to funding and zoning accommodations, so many local residents had built their own economic lives around what had been their “little brewery that could.”

But the success had brought challenges, specifically in terms of growth. DBB was consistently not meeting demand in its existing markets and was receiving complaints about out-of-stocks. The Crandalls and their team had to figure out how to grow with, or preferably ahead of, demand for DBB's product. Should DBB build further capacity despite an already exhausted line of credit? Should it employ a contract brewer despite the local authenticity concerns such a move might stir up? Or should it just keep trying to manage business within its existing footprint, comfortably serving its loyal customer base?

This study aims to empirically examine the influence of management control systems (MCSs) on knowledge acquisition from innovation failure (KAFIF), which further impacts empowerment, creativity and organizational innovation. This study argues that enabling an MCS positively influences KAFIF, whereas controlling the use of an MCS negatively influences KAFIF. Further, KAFIF positively impacts empowerment, creativity and organizational innovation.

This study aims to create a comprehensive stimulus–organism–response (S-O-R) framework. This framework includes an MCS (belief, interactive, boundary and diagnostic) as a stimulus, KAFIF as an organism and creativity, empowerment and organizational innovation as responses. The data were gathered using an online survey administered to a sample of 321 employees working in India’s micro, small and medium enterprises and analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling.

The results indicate that there is no correlation between belief control and the acquisition of knowledge from the failure of innovation, interactive control has a positive association with KAFIF and boundary control has no relationship with KAFIF. Diagnostic control has a significant negative association with KAFIF. Further, this study found that KAFIF positively associates with empowerment, creativity and organizational innovation.

This study is among initial studies that examine the influence of MCSs on KAFIF, which impacts empowerment, creativity and organizational innovation. Further, it helps be one of the initial literature on studying KAFIF rather than innovation success.

It is over 20 years since the publication of the Wanless Report, “Securing our Future Health: Taking a Long-Term View”. The Wanless Report argued that the National Health Service (NHS) would survive in its current form only if the population became “fully engaged” with it.

In this discussion paper, the authors explored what “fully engaged” meant to Wanless, what it might mean now (allowing for the impact of the anti-vaxxer movement) and what policymakers could do to enhance public engagement.

Although the Wanless Report neatly fitted into other long-term thinking about the NHS, it was unique in that it built economic models to predict the costs and impact of different patterns of NHS performance. Wanless predicted that people’s poor levels of health would put considerable pressure on the NHS. This pressure could swamp efforts to meet healthcare targets and improve health outcomes, despite its sizeable investment of money. Wanless set out three possible scenarios for public engagement with the NHS: solid progress, slow uptake and fully engaged.

The authors pose questions for policymakers and practitioners. Would a reboot of the Wanless approach be worth the effort for policymakers? If yes, how would it differ from the original? The NHS faces the whole of society; could it be the vehicle for engaging the anti-vaxxer public with the truthfulness of medical science, and will it be this, that is, Wanless' enduring legacy?

The exploration of the Wanless Report is complicated (at least for the time being) by the rise of the anti-vaxxer movement’s resistance to health promotion and mistrust of part of the NHS.

Different age groups display different shopping patterns in terms of how and where consumers buy products. During times of crisis, such behavioural differences become even more striking yet remain under-researched with respect to elderly consumers. This paper investigates the impact of age on retail-related behavioural changes and behavioural stability of elderly shoppers (in comparison to younger consumers) during a crisis.

The authors surveyed 643 Austrian consumers to assess the impact of perceived threat on behavioural change and the moderating effect of age groups. Based on findings from this survey, they subsequently conducted 51 semi-structured interviews to understand the causes of behavioural change and behavioural stability during a crisis.

Elderly shoppers display more stable shopping behaviour during a crisis compared to younger consumers, which is influenced by perceived threat related to the crisis. Such findings indicate that elderly shoppers reinforce their learnt and embedded shopping patterns. The causes of change and stability in behaviour include environmental and inter-personal factors.

Through the lens of social cognitive theory, protection motivation theory and dual process theory, this research contributes to an improved understanding of changes in shopping behaviour of elderly consumers, its antecedents and consequences during a time of crisis. The authors reveal reasons that lead to behavioural stability, hence the absence of change, in terms of shopping during a crisis. They further outline implications for retailers that might wish to better respond to shopping behaviours of the elderly.