Search results

A growing body of literature suggests that creating a just sustainable society will require reorganizing economic arrangements and, in particular, rethinking work. Previous studies have recognized alternative organizations, such as cooperatives and intentional communities, as sites for building more democratic, sustainable models of work. This study contributes a description and analysis of work and sustainability at Twin Oaks Intentional Community, an 80-person income- and resource-sharing commune in Louisa, Virginia. Some measures show that Twin Oaks members live more sustainably in terms of energy consumption than the average US resident. In this article, I investigate the relationship between sustainability and work at Twin Oaks. I find that sustainable work is linked to the following key principles: broadening definitions of work, prioritizing community well-being, and democratizing decision making. In doing so, I contribute to previous literature on work, sustainability, and alternative organizations by suggesting that (1) sustainability in intentional communities is deeply intertwined with systems of work; (2) broadening definitions of work to include social reproductive labour contributes to sustainability; and (3) the democratization of work can further goals of sustainability.

The study discusses the professionalization of academic leadership in Israel by analyzing and comparing two different training programs: the Hebrew University of Jerusalem’s (HUJI) program and the CHE-Rothschild program. The HUJI program began in 2016 to train the professoriate to take charge of leadership positions alongside a separate program for administrative staff, while the CHE-Rothschild program was launched in 2019 to train academic leaders, both professors and administrators from universities and colleges nationwide. The analysis reveals two “ideal types” of collegiality: While Model A (exemplified by the HUJI program) bifurcates between the professoriate and administrative staff, Model B (exemplified by the CHE-Rothschild program) binds administrative and academic staff members through course composition, pedagogy, and content. The study suggests a pattern of redefinition of collegiality in academia: we find that while academic hierarchies are maintained (between academic faculty and administrative staff and between universities and colleges), collegiality in academia is being redefined as extending beyond the boundaries of the professoriate and emphasizing a partnership approach to collegial ties.

This chapter outlines milestones and circumstances that led to the evolution of the profession of research management and administration (RMA) in Poland. The RMA has a history stretching back around 20 years, with the breakthrough year being in 2007, when the Polish National Council for Research Project Coordinators (KRAB) was established. Currently, the Polish community of RMA is scattered across universities, scientific and research institutes; and its RMAs are employed in research support centres, national/international research programmes offices or welcome offices. At the national level, main activities concerning RMA are centred around KRAB and its pool of activities related to research project management implemented by International Project Management Association (IPMA) Poland. In some respects, RMA can still be considered a semi-profession in the country; and RMAs are that part of the administration staff engaged with the development of scientific excellence in research institutions: they are more often an invisible workforce, but necessary to project development and related activities. There are no dedicated RMA certifications available yet, however, support for RMAs in Poland has been consistently becoming stronger and more widespread over the years in the higher education system (HES) and beyond.

All three Baltic countries – Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – share common features, similar history, and took similar steps to establish an external evaluation of their science base. Even though the three countries have similarities in terms of their geography, size, economic structure, development and demography, they demonstrate differences, for example Estonia is often considered to be ahead of Latvia and Lithuania in terms of the economy and development. So, do the Baltic countries share similarities or differences from the point of research management and administration?

In this chapter, we provide further insights into challenges and opportunities as perceived by Research Managers and Administrators (RMAs) and previously described in Chapter 4.6 (Professionalism section, Part 1). The study provides a bird’s-eye view of the current state of the RMA profession in the Western Balkans (WB) and offers a set of recommendations for future research.

The Government of Ireland, through the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science (DoFHERIS), sets the framework for the national research ecosystem. Within that ecosystem, the Research Management and Administrators (RMA) community evolved in response to changing circumstances and continues to evolve becoming a more professional and expert community. The profile of the community, admittedly based on a small sampling, is normal with a hint that females occupy the most senior roles. Most Irish research-performing organisations (RPOs) including the HE sector, College and State Research Organisations (CSRO), and the Health Service have RMA members active in The European Association of Research Managers and Administrators (EARMA). The next step in the profession’s evolution in Ireland has to be the development of a single, national, and inclusive RMA network providing a representative voice for the profession with respect to issues such as career development and career paths.

Customers today expect businesses to cater to their individual needs by tailoring the products they purchase to their own preferences. The term “Industry 5.0” refers to a new wave of manufacturing that aims to meet each customer's unique demands. Even while Industry 4.0 allowed for mass customization, that wasn't good enough before, customers today demand individualized products at scale, and Industry 5.0 is driving the transition from mass customization to mass personalization to meet these demands. It caters to the individual needs of each consumer by meeting their demands. More specialized components for use in medicine are made possible by the widespread customization made possible by Industry 5.0. These individualized parts are included into the medical care of the patient to meet their specific needs and preferences. In the current medical revolution, an enabling technology of Industry 5.0 can produce medical implants, artificial organs, bodily fluids, and transplants with pinpoint accuracy. With the advent of AI-enabled sensors, we now live in a world where data can be swiftly analyzed. Machines may be programmed to make complex choices on the fly. In the medical field, these innovations allow for exact measurement and monitoring of human body variables according to the individual's needs. They aid in monitoring the body's response to training for peak performance. It allows for the digital dissemination of accurate healthcare data networks. In order to collect and exchange relevant patient data, every equipment is online.