Search results

This paper aims to provide an insight into how fashion designer businesses work and survive in London, with an understanding of business techniques and the survival strategies of British fashion designers.

The initial research demonstrated a need to define “innovation” as well as recognise the approach of “creative people” in business by exploring existing literature. This was followed by a series of structured interviews with nine British Fashion Designers in London, and three with intermediaries aimed at putting the designers' activities within a business context: a fashion PR; a lawyer specialising in fashion business and a creative director of a fashion distributor.

The research suggests ten survival strategies employed by fashion designers. The five fashion designers in a sustainable business all operated all of these principles. Those no longer in business operated between one and five of these principles. As designers gain experience and realise their “value“, there is evidence that they can get leverage for contractual agreements with licensors, which has led to financial growth of the designers' businesses. Strategies for diversification and consultancy, if managed without diluting design values, have also led to business growth and stability.

Further research is required to consider innovation and entrepreneurship in the different creative and cultural industries, particularly concerning issues and challenges for the creative person.

The implications are that designers need to be quick to understand the business and wider environment in which they are operating. More published material needs to be widely available to them concerning role models and business models relevant to this unique and problematic industry.

The value of this original research is to share experience and inform designers and practitioners of current practices.

The purpose of this paper is to explore data from the University and College Union (UCU) Further Education in England: Transforming Lives and Communities research project and through this the paper develops a distinctive, theorised conceptualisation of transformative teaching and learning (TTL).

The research used an approach grounded in critical pedagogy utilising digital methods, including video interviews, to collect narratives from learners, teachers, family members and their communities from colleges across Britain.

Within a context in which there are structural pressures militating in favour of instrumentalising students in further education, TTL offers a way of theorising it as a transformative critical space that restores students’ hope and agency. The research provides evidence of how further education offers this “differential space” (Lefebvre, 1991) and subverts the prescriptive, linear spaces of compulsory education. While productivist approaches to vocational education and training support ideologies that legitimate prescribed knowledge, reproducing inequality and injustice through the practices employed (Ade-Ojo and Duckworth, 2017; Duckworth and Smith, 2017b), TTL shifts to a more holistic approach, achieving a different level of engagement with students.

The findings suggest that the TTL lens is a way of focusing on the dignity, needs and agency of further education students. The lens allows us also to identify how the existing structures associated with funding and marketisation can undermine the potential of TTL to activate students’ agency through education.

Extending on existing literature around transformative learning, and drawing on a range of theoretical frameworks, the paper formulates a new, contextually specific conceptualisation of TTL.

The purpose of this paper is to propose that in order to tackle the question of bias in algorithms, a systemic, sociotechnical and holistic perspective is needed. With reference to the term “algorithmic culture,” the interconnectedness and mutual shaping of society and technology are postulated. A sociotechnical approach requires translational work between and across disciplines. This conceptual paper undertakes such translational work. It exemplifies how gender and diversity studies, by bringing in expertise on addressing bias and structural inequalities, provide a crucial source for analyzing and mitigating bias in algorithmic systems.

After introducing the sociotechnical context, an overview is provided regarding the contemporary discourse around bias in algorithms, debates around algorithmic culture, knowledge production and bias identification as well as common solutions. The key concepts of gender studies (situated knowledges and strong objectivity) and concrete examples of gender bias then serve as a backdrop for revisiting contemporary debates.

The key concepts reframe the discourse on bias and concepts such as algorithmic fairness and transparency by contextualizing and situating them. The paper includes specific suggestions for researchers and practitioners on how to account for social inequalities in the design of algorithmic systems.

A systemic, gender-informed approach for addressing the issue is provided, and a concrete, applicable methodology toward a situated understanding of algorithmic bias is laid out, providing an important contribution for an urgent multidisciplinary dialogue.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a model to test whether the combined effects of valence and objectivity/subjectivity of online review have an effect on consumer judgment and whether e-WOM platforms have a moderating effect.

In total, 480 respondents participated in online experiments with a four (positive+objective, positive+subjective, negative+objective, and negative+subjective online review) by two (marketer-generated vs consumer-generated brand community web sites) between subject design.

The experiment showed that: an objective negative online review was rated higher in terms of message usefulness compared to the other types of online reviews; positive reviews, whether they are objective or subjective, were rated higher in terms of attitudes toward and intention to purchase the reviewed product, and the effects of online reviews moderated by e-WOM platforms on consumer judgment were supported.

The present study, based on an established theoretical foundation, will help the research community to gain a deeper understanding of the combined effects of online review valence and attributes on consumer judgment and whether user-generated web community is better for consumers to consult product experience.

The findings of this study can provide interested firms with useful strategies and tactics to enhance users’ acceptance of online reviews in terms of who operates the web sites.

With increasing use of consumers’ online reviews, the present study proposed and tested a comprehensive research model integrating both the valence and objectivity/subjectivity of online review, which has rarely been addressed in previous research.

The aim of this article is to open a dialogue between several books written on Goldman Sachs and the academic literature.

Greg Smith's “Why I Left Goldman Sachs” and the French investigation of Marc Roche entitled “THE Bank: How Goldman Sachs Rules the World” are closely studied to identify recurring topics regarding the investment bank.

Three major dynamics are identified: the intense socialisation that every new employee encounters (almost an indoctrination), the cultural paradigm shift that Goldman Sachs underwent during the 1990s and 2000s and the intensity of the revolving doors between Goldman Sachs' managers and the public regulatory sector.

Focusing on revolving door dynamics, this article opens a dialogue with the academic literature allowing for a problematization: the constant circulation of personnel between regulatory institutions and regulated organisations generates a convergence of actors' habitus that weakens regulation as a whole.

Sociology is often pitched as the social science discipline most obviously in need of postcolonial deconstruction, owing to its ostensibly more transparent Eurocentrism as a formation. For this reason, even postcolonial scholars working within the ambit of sociology are reluctant to play up its analytical strengths in addition to exposing its ideological deficits. Without underestimating the profound impact of the growing body of postcolonial theorizing and research on self-reflexivity within sociology, this paper points up some key ways in which the structure of comprehension within postcolonial critique itself is characteristically sociological. Alternatively, if that latter conclusion is to remain in dispute, a number of core epistemological and socio-theoretical problems must be accepted as being, still, radically unresolved. Consequently, a more dialectical grasp of sociology’s role within this domain of enquiry and style of intellectual politics is needed. I develop these considerations by critically engaging with three recent currents of postcolonial critique – Raewyn Connell's advocacy of “Southern Theory”; the project of “reinventing social emancipation” articulated by Boaventura de Sousa Santos; and the “de-colonial option” fronted by Walter D. Mignolo.

This study aims to correct errors in, and comment on the claims made in the comment papers of Rigdon (2022) and Henseler and Schuberth (2022), and to tidy up any substantive oversights made in Cadogan and Lee (2022).

The study discusses and clarifies the gap between Rigdon’s notion of scientific realism and the metaphysical, semantic and epistemological commitments that are broadly agreed to be key principles of scientific realism. The study also examines the ontological status of the variables that Henseler and Schuberth claim are emergent using emergence logic grounded in the notion that variables are only truly emergent if they demonstrate a failure of generative atomism.

In scientific realism, hypothetical causal contact between the unobserved and the observed is a key foundational stance, and as such, Rigdon’s concept proxy framework (CPF) is inherently anti-realist in nature. Furthermore, Henseler and Schuberth’s suggestion that composite-creating statistical packages [such as partial least squares (PLS)] can model emergent variables should be treated with skepticism by realists.

Claims made by Rigdon regarding the realism of CPF are unfounded, and claims by Henseler and Schuberth regarding the universal suitability of partial least squares (PLS) as a tool for use by researchers of all ontological stripes (see their Table 5) do not appear to be well-grounded.

Those aspiring to do science according to the precepts of scientific realism need to be careful in assessing claims in the literature. For instance, despite Rigdon’s assertion that CPF is a realist framework, we show that it is not. Consequently, some of Rigdon’s core criticisms of the common factor logic make no sense for the realist. Likewise, if the variables resulting from composite creating statistical packages (like PLS) are not really emergent (contrary to Henseler and Schuberth) and so are not real, their utility as tools for scientific realist inquiry are called into question.

This study assesses PLS using the Eleatic Principle and examines H&S’s version of emergent variables from an ontological perspective.

Face-to-face meetings between auditors and clients are becoming increasingly more difficult and expensive to arrange, due in large part to the ceaseless expansion of commerce across the globe. Relying on electronic communication media such as e-mail messaging or video-conferencing for auditor–client inquiry purposes is one way to enhance the timeliness of such communications; however, questions arise with respect to potentially biasing influences of certain technical aspects of electronic media on auditors’ judgment and decision-making processes. Drawing on information processing theories, the current study posits that media and message attributes can interact, thereby differentially affecting auditors’ belief revisions – holding information content constant. The media attributes examined in the current study are cue multiplicity (i.e., the range of central and peripheral cues a medium is capable of transmitting) and message reprocessability (i.e., the extent of archival and retrieval features a medium is capable of handling); and the message attribute studied is evidence strength (e.g., the credibility of client-provided evidence). Research findings from a laboratory experiment with 189 graduate accounting students indicate the following: (1) when client-provided evidence is strong, neither message reprocessability nor cue multiplicity significantly affect the auditors’ belief revisions; (2) when evidence is weak and reprocessability is present, higher cue multiplicity leads to significantly greater belief revision in favor of the client; (3) when evidence is weak and reprocessability is absent, lower cue multiplicity results in significantly greater belief revision in favor of the client. Study results suggest theoretical and practical implications for globally distributed auditor–client communications.