Search results

This chapter advances an articulation of the contemporary knowledge worker as an infrastructural bricoleur. The practical and pragmatic intelligence of the contemporary knowledge worker, particularly those involved in project-based work, reflects an ability to build adaptable practices and routines, and to develop a set of working arrangements that is creative and event-laden. Like Ciborra’s octopi, workers augment infrastructures by drawing on certain forms of oblique, twisted, flexible, circular, polymorphic and ambiguous thinking until an accommodation can be found. These workers understand the non-linearity of work and working, and are artful in their pursuits around, through and beyond infrastructural givens. Modern knowledge work, then, when looked at through the lens of infrastructure and bricolage, is less a story of failure to understand, a limitation in training or the shortcomings of a system, but instead is more a mirror of the contemporary realities of today’s knowledge work drift as reflected in individuals’ sociotechnical practices.

Distributed computing environments place more computer power in the hands of the end‐user, and often demand increased technical support. In response, organizations may choose to move technical support personnel close to end‐users. This can isolate them from each other, and may limit their ability to share knowledge. Thus, the growth of distributed computing calls for increased ability to share knowledge across organizational boundaries. This paper presents the results of a case study investigating how distributed technologists share knowledge through knowledge markets. We argue that knowledge markets are cultural entities shaped by the underlying work culture of their participants, and that the cultural forces that define knowledge markets are powerful, deeply held and difficult to change. Thus, improving the effectiveness of any given knowledge market will have less to do with the installation of information technology than with the ability to create a facilitating work culture. This study’s identification of clique knowledge markets, operating efficiently in parallel to the public knowledge market, may provide a hint of the type of culture that will create fewer knowledge trade barriers.

Highlights the importance of ensuring the highest possible return rates when using mail surveys. Describes a study investigating the difference in return rates between a parent company and a fictitious consulting firm. Reports that there was no difference between response rates for two different return addresses, and that response bias was not a problem. Concludes therefore that great cost savings can be made as a result of developing and mailing the materials in‐house. Summarizes research literature on response rate surveys.

This chapter presents a case study of the lesbian and gay rights movement following the Supreme Court's decision in Bowers v. Hardwick, which was a critical defeat in the campaign for sodomy repeal. Activists responded with a dramatic wave of mobilization by staging protests, successful appeals for organizational donations, building coalitions, and shifting institutional venues. This case provides a paradox for the dominant perspectives within social movement theory and legal mobilization literature, which often traces mobilization back to the expansion of political opportunities. The defeat in Bowers signaled a closing of political opportunities for activists. Drawing from a growing body of literature on political threats and heeding the call to specify the mechanisms of movement dynamics, I show how the defeat in Bowers was translated into proactive mobilization.

Board faultlines, which reflect intrinsic divisions of board members into relatively homogeneous subgroups, are associated with poor firm performance. This paper aims to extend the existing board faultline research by examining how acquisition deal size moderates the negative implications of board faultlines.

This paper uses a sample of acquisitions and a quantitative research approach to conduct statistical analysis.

Using a sample of acquisitions announced between 2007 and 2016, this paper finds evidence suggesting that strong faultlines are associated with poorer acquisition outcomes in the long-term, but not in the short term. Further, this paper finds that the effect of faultline strength on long-term acquisition outcomes is weaker for larger acquisition deals than smaller acquisition deals. The findings are consistent with deal size moderating the relation between faultlines and acquisition outcomes.

This paper addresses possible endogeneity through firm fixed effects and instrumental variable analysis. Although this paper provides evidence on the moderating role of deal size in the context of faultlines, future research could examine the role of additional moderators, such as pro-diversity, trust, board leadership and board and task characteristics.

The findings suggest that boards need to be aware of situations where the negative effects of faultlines are more likely to come to the fore. For example, faultlines are more likely to play a role in more routine, obscure monitoring than for high-profile strategic decisions.

The study is multidisciplinary as it draws on the management, organizational behaviour and psychology and finance literature. It contributes to the developing literature on faultlines in several important ways. First, this paper supports their view that faultlines have adverse effects on board performance by showing that faultlines negatively impact discrete strategic investment decisions. Second, this paper provides evidence that deals size moderates the faultline-acquisition performance relation, indicating that the role of faultlines is contextual. Third, this paper finds evidence that suggests investors do not factor in board faultlines when responding to acquisition announcements.

This study aims to examine the levels of stress and resilience in a sample of British Indian parents bringing up a child with autism.

A total of 52 British Indian parents took part in a survey that included measures of stress, resilience, support and child adaptive functioning. Results were compared to a sample of white British (n = 120) and Indian parents (n = 120).

The British Indian parents recorded higher levels of stress and less perceived social support than their white British counterparts. British Indian parents took longer to register concern about their child’s development and sought a diagnosis at a later age than the white British group. The delay in concern and diagnosis was similar to that found in the India group.

The research suggests that British Indian parents are disadvantaged in social support and mental well-being compared to white British parents and may face similar community pressures to parents bringing up a child in India.