Search results

This paper proposes a way to integrate three different analytical approaches into a consistent framework of national systems of innovation that can benefit academia and policy makers. The approaches include the traditional structural method of national systems of innovation, the new development of functional view of national systems of innovation, and the effective approach.

As a theoretical research paper, the paper reviews and analyses intensive literature on national system of innovation from the perspectives of functional, structural, and effectiveness approaches.

The paper argues that these three approaches reflect different perspectives of national systems of innovation. Instead of contradicting each other, they could be integrated into a coherent framework.

The paper builds an integrative framework to bring different methods of national systems of innovation together. It provides an integrative framework for academy and policy makers to more comprehensively understand the concept of national systems of innovation and further policy design and implementation.

Research of artificial intelligence (AI), has aimed at making machines intelligent via the simulation of natural intelligence, particularly human intelligence. During the past decades, there have been three major approaches aimed at achieving this goal, namely structuralism, functionalism and behaviorism. Unfortunately, they work separately and contradictorily to a large extent. The purpose of this paper is to present a better and more unified approach.

The paper analyses each of the three major approaches to AI, describing their advantages and disadvantages. There then follows an attempt to explore a new and more reasonable approach to AI. The new approach should be able to solve all the problems that the existing approaches can solve on one hand and can solve the problems that the existing approaches cannot solve on the other hand.

It was found that the more reasonable and more powerful approach is the one that directly touches the common and core mechanism of intelligence formation. This is due to the fact that the mechanism of intelligence formation is much more essential than other windows of an intelligent system, such as structure, function, or behavior. It was also found that the common and core mechanism of intelligence formation can be implemented through the information‐knowledge‐intelligence transformation. The third finding is that the three existing approaches are special cases of the mechanism approach under different conditions and can thus be harmoniously unified within the frame of the mechanism approach.

The three findings in the paper: the mechanism approach, the implementation of the mechanism approach, and the unification of the existed three major approaches, are important laws never found before in the literature. The breakthrough of the mechanism approach to AI will be of great significance to both theoretical and practical research in AI in the years to come.

This paper focuses on an analysis of the factors that contribute to differences in political attitudes and political participation of Russian capital owners. Such factors may include different size and type of capital, the degree of past political socialization, the respondents’ age and generational experiences, past/present well-being comparisons and education. The paper begins with a discussion of different theories that make hypotheses about the political behavior of capital owners. These hypotheses were tested in a small, exploratory study of Russian capital owners that I conducted in Russia in the late 1990s. The results of the study are then analyzed within two different but closely interrelated contexts: the wider historical context of social, political and economic changes of the first decade of post-Soviet transformation, and the micro-context of the respondents personal political, economic and social history. In the end, I return to the analyses of the original hypotheses and conclude with a discussion of which theory comes closest to predicting and explaining the results of the study.

The purpose of this chapter is to apply structural functional theory and the concept of “unbundling” to an analysis of the deinstitutionalization and community mental health efforts that have shaped the current mental health services environment.

We examine the original goals of the institutional movement, the arguments supporting it, and the functions of the institutions that were created. We then examine the criticisms of that approach and the success of the subsequent deinstitutionalization process, which attempted to undo this process by recreating the hospitals’ functions in community settings. Finally, we address the question of whether the critical functions of psychiatric institutions have indeed been adequately recreated.

Our overview of outcomes from this process suggests that the unbundling of state hospital functions did not yield an adequate system of care and support, and that the functions of state hospitals, including social control and incapacitation with respect to public displays of deviance were not sufficiently recreated in the community-based settings.

The arguments for the construction of state hospitals, the critiques of those settings, and the current criticism of efforts to replace their functions are eerily similar. Actors involved in the design of mental health services should take into account the functions of existing services and the gaps between them. Consideration of the history of efforts at functional change might also serve this process well.

The paper extends the organizational learning framework: Structural-Functional (SF)-single-loop or Conflictual-Radical (CR)-double-loop learning to the management accounting literature. The sociological approach of organizational learning is utilized to understand those contingent factors that can explain why management accounting innovations succeed or fail in organizations.

We view learning as enhancing an organization’s strategic competitive advantage by making it better able to adopt and diffuse innovation in respond to changes in its environment in order to manage improved performance. The success of management accounting innovations is contingent upon whether its learning process involves SF-single-loop or CR-double-loop learning to adopt and diffuse process innovation.

The paper suggests that the learning strategy that the organization chooses is the reason why some management accounting innovations are more successfully adopted than others and why some innovations are easily diffused in some organizations but not in others. We propose that the sociological approaches to learning provide an alternative framework with which to better understand the adoption and diffusion of process innovations in management accounting systems.

It has become evident that management accounting researchers need to pay particular attention to an organization’s approach to adoption and diffusion of innovation strategies, particularly when they are designing and implementing process innovation programs for an organization. According to Schulz (2001), there are two interrelated stages of the learning that can shape the outcome of the innovation process in an organization. The first stage is related to the acquisition/production (adoption) of knowledge that results in gathering information, codification, and exploration. This is followed by the second stage which is the distribution or dissemination (diffusion) processes. When these two stages – adoption and diffusion – are applied within an accounting context, they address issues that are commonly associated with the successes and/or failures of management accounting innovations.

Although innovation involves learning, the nature of the learning process does not completely describe the manner in which an innovation affects the organization. Accordingly, we suggest that the two interrelated organizational sociological dimensions of innovations processes, namely, (1) the adoption and diffusion theories of Rogers (1971 and 1995), to approach organizational learning, and (2) the SF (single loop) and CR (double loop) approaches to learning be used simultaneously to describe management accounting innovations.

When an innovation is implemented, it initially can be introduced as an incremental change, one that can be limited in both in its scope and its breadth of administrative changes. This means that situations which are most likely to benefit from its initiation can serve as the prototype for its adoption by the organization. If successful, this can be followed by systemic accounting innovations to instituting broader administrative changes within the existing accounting reporting and control systems.

This paper argues that much communication management literature and practice is biased because it fails to take acount of the organisational cultural context in which communication takes place. As a result, culture's influence on the understanding and behaviours of members of organisations is overlooked, which leads to managed communication activities that are often misinterpreted, resisted or rejected by employees. The paper contends that when organisational communication is analysed through a number of different perspectives (which include both traditional and cultural), then a more comprehensive understanding of the complexity of communication is gained. A multiperspective analytical approach of this nature sensitises researchers and managers to other points of view, helps to expand problem definitions, reveals a wide range of influences affecting communication activities, and helps to prevent stereotypical thinking about communication in organisations. To illustrate this approach, the paper presents a longitudinal case study of managed communication in a television company. Practical strategies for managers are then offered.

The synthesis of cybernetics and general systems theory makes it possible to formulate the concept of cybernetic evolution, considered as the higher stage of an anti‐entropic evolution universe. In this broad framework, it is possible to draw epistemological conclusions and implications. These concern the essence of cognition and knowledge, and directedness and the main stages of epistemic evolution, as well as classes and forms of cognitive mechanisms and processes. The three stages of cognition, the biological, the sociological or societal, and the technological, are discussed.

This chapter examines the significance of the fact that the fundamental outlook of modern religion according to Bellah, is compatible with the description of reality and the system of analytic concepts crystallized by Giddens and Habermas in their analysis of modern society. The conceptual common denominator between these three researchers indicates that Bellah's as well as Giddens’ and Habermas’ thought include an anti-nomological reflexive scientific-educative narrative that reflects a vision of the desired face of human society. A vision calling for the encouragement of continual reflexivity and the personal involvement of the individual in constructing his social reality. This common denominator brings to light a transition in the sociological-theoretical arena – flexing past borders created between theoretical streams in light of the fact that the roots of Bellah's thought lie in the Functionalistic tradition, Giddens’ in the Positivistic tradition and Habermas’ in the neo-Kantian tradition.

The approach is based on an evolutionary interpretation of the fundamental concepts of cybernetics, general systems theory, information theory, theory of automata, autopoiesis, etc. In the author's view, this enables us to formulate principles of the evolutionary theory of cybernetic systems which is visualised as the theory of structures, functions and evolution of cybernetic or control systems. This suggests a heuristic idea of cybernetic evolution as the higher stage of negentropic universal evolution of open systems.

The purpose of this paper is to compare three cultural approaches from anthropology and business literature: National Culture Approach (NCA), Corporate Culture Approach (CCA), and Transactional Culture Approach (TCA). The author grounds these approaches in different epistemological standpoints and locate them at different positions on the unity-infinity continuum. The author outlines their strengths and weaknesses, and offer the Douglasian Cultural Framework (DCF) as a transactional tool for cultural sense-making.

Reviewing conventional NCA/CCA frameworks reveals that while their simplicity renders them attractive to users, their assumption of stable, internally homogenous and coherent cultures has its limitations. Conversely, reviewing anthropology-based TCA literature reveals that while TCA overcomes some limitations of NCA/CCA frameworks, it also has its weaknesses – it overemphasizes “self-interest” as the preferred form of rationality, and some TCA scholars render cultural comparisons impossible by supporting cultural infinity. Finally, examining DCF reveals that it overcomes some limitations of NCA/CCA frameworks, while simultaneously advancing TCA. Nevertheless, DCF too has limitations which are also exposed.

Most NCA/CCA scholars support the “unity” argument of culture, while some transactional scholars support the “infinity” argument. DCF finds a perfect balance between the two through “constrained relativism”. Also, since DCF focuses on human transactions, it is not limited in its applications to specific levels and scales. It can therefore be applied to scenarios spanning across levels and scales. Finally, it offers a compromise between the differentiation and fragmentation perspectives of corporate culture, and brings out the best of the interpretivist and post-modernistic traditions.

The exposition of DCF opens up new avenues for research which have hitherto remained unexplored for want of appropriate frameworks, for instance the UN Peace Corps., NATO, Medecins Sans Frontiers, etc.

By focusing on human transactions, the paper allows for a much more dynamic conceptualization of culture as compared to static NCA/CCA frameworks.