Search results

This paper aims to examine the use of coproduction to create a film “Do You See Me?”, to amplify the voices of a “hard to reach” group: older lesbian, gay, bisexual (LGB) victim-survivors of domestic abuse (DA).

Qualitative methods were used as part of the co-production, which included two practitioner focus groups and 14 narrative interviews with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning persons or the community (LGBTQ+) victim-survivors.

Despite differences in gender, sexualities, roles and “lived experiences” across stakeholders, there was a shared aim to ensure victim-survivors had a sense of ownership in this endeavour. Consequently, a positive reciprocity existed that helped to foster effective communication, allow for capacity building and subsequent knowledge exchange. The collaboration produced a nuanced meta-narrative making visible the “lived experiences” of LGB victim-survivors’ perceptions of perpetrator behaviours.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is original in two ways, firstly, providing insights into the “lived experiences” of an invisible group; older LGBTQ+ victim-survivors, and secondly, in involving them in the co-production of a film. The paper aims to reveal how interdependencies that developed between stakeholders helped to disrupt understandings, develop new ways of knowing and build levels of trust. Group interactions helped to dismantle hierarchies, so those with experiential knowledge: the survivors, had greater control throughout the research process. The paper is significant in providing a critical reflection on the ethical, methodological and resource challenges involved in co-production. It also makes recommendations for researchers and funders about the value of using co-production as a method to engage with hard-to-reach groups.

This exploratory inquiry sheds light on the nature of victim (i.e. provocative and passive) and specific work context in shaping the perceived causes and outcomes of felt workplace ostracism in teaching faculty of Pakistani higher educational institutions (HEIs) based on target-centric victimization framework.

This phenomenological research is based on data gathered from 30 ostracized teaching faculty members working in Pakistani public and private HEIs through in-depth semi-structured interviews. The interviews were tape-recorded, and transcription was entered in NVivo 12 Plus software to conduct thematic analysis.

This study found that provocative and submissive victim status, as well as the specific contextual factors in Pakistani HEIs (i.e. negative competition, cronyism, egoism and poor interpersonal relationships), is responsible for fostering workplace ostracism and yielding unique outcomes in each case.

This study has taken the scantly used target-centric victimization framework to distinguish the causes and consequences of workplace ostracism based on the nature of victim and work context in Pakistani HEIs .

This paper aims to examine how verbal responses (denials vs apologies) following a trust violation in cooperative relationships influence reconciliation by changing attributions of responsibility for the transgression and transgressor’s perceived integrity. Additionally, the moderating role of perceived sincerity of the response is examined.

Two experimental studies were conducted with 465 participants. Hypotheses were tested using ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions and moderated serial mediation analyses with bootstrapping procedures.

In the occurrence of integrity-based trust violations, denials are more effective than apologies to repair trust. The positive indirect effects of these verbal responses on reconciliation are explained by a two-part mediating mechanism (attribution of responsibility followed by transgressor’s perceived integrity). Additionally, when responses are perceived as highly credible, denials are much more effective in deflecting blame than apologies.

This study contributes to the literature on trust repair by examining when and why managers’ verbal responses to breaches of trust may be more or less effective in restoring cooperative relationships.

Managers must be aware that their perceived integrity following a breach of trust is influenced by the level of responsibility taken. Therefore, they should choose wisely which defensive tactics (apologies or denials) to use.

As trust plays a central role in many cooperative relationships, choosing an appropriate response after a transgression is critical to solving conflicts both within and between organizations.

This work contributes to the reconciliation literature by uncovering the underlying cognitive mechanisms and boundary conditions by which different verbal responses influence reconciliation.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the roles and responsibilities of non-state actors (NSAs) in contributing to disaster governance from an international human rights law (IHRL) perspective. In particular, it examines how non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and business enterprises are implicated.

The paper analyzes a range of IHRL instruments, particularly treaties and international soft-law documents, and it utilizes the concepts “human rights-based approaches” (HRBAs) and “direct”/“indirect” human rights obligations to frame and understand how IHRL responsibilities for NSAs arise from these instruments.

IHRL not only includes relevant standards for NSAs in the area of disaster management, but NGOs and businesses also actively engage with IHRL and HRBAs by means of (soft) self-regulatory instruments to further clarify their responsibilities.

The findings are of interest to all actors involved in disaster governance, and are instructive for NGOs and businesses seeking to improve the design of disaster management activity. The research addresses only the responsibility of NGOs and private companies, but the framework of analysis set out is equally of interest to other actors’ activities.

The implications of IHRL for NSAs involved in disaster management are still poorly understood, despite their vast engagement. This study contributes by clarifying the roles and IHRL responsibilities of NGOs and businesses specifically, and articulates how applications of HRBAs may improve the protection of persons.

This paper elucidates the role of anger in error management (EM) and organizational learning behaviors. The study explores how anger can catalyze learning, emphasizing its strategic implications.

A double-layered moderated-mediated model was developed and tested using data from 744 Chinese CEOs. The psychometric properties of the survey instrument were rigorously examined through structural equation modeling, and hypotheses were tested using Hayes's PROCESS macros.

The findings reveal that anger is a precursor for recognizing the value of significant errors, leading to a positive association with learning behavior among top management team members. Additionally, the study uncovers a triple interaction effect of anger, EM culture and supply chain disruptions on the value of learning from errors. Extensive experience and positive grieving strengthen the relationship between recognizing value from errors and learning behavior.

This study uniquely integrates affect-cognitive theory and organizational learning theory, examining anger in EM and learning. The authors provide empirical evidence that anger can drive error value recognition and learning. The authors incorporate a more fine-grained approach to leadership when including executive anger as a trigger to learning behavior. Factors like experience and positive grieving are explored, deepening the understanding of emotions in learning. The authors consider both negative and positive emotions to contribute to the complexity of organizational learning.

The main purpose of this paper is to document the first author's experience of using institutional ethnography (IE) to “take sides” in healthcare research. The authors illustrate the points with data and key findings from a study of cardiovascular disease prevention.

The authors use Dorothy E Smith's IE approach, and particularly the theoretical tool of “standpoint”.

Starting with the development of the study, the authors trouble the researcher's positionality, highlighting tensions between institutional knowledge of “prevention” and other locations where knowledge about patients' health needs materialises. The authors outline how IE's theoretically and methodologically integrated toolkit became a framework for “taking sides” with patients. They describe how the researcher used IE to take a standpoint and map institutional relations from that standpoint. They argue that IE enabled an innovative analysis but also reflect on the challenges of conducting an IE – the conceptual unpicking and (re)thinking, and demarcating boundaries of investigation within an expansive dataset.

This paper illustrates IE's relevance for organisational ethnographers wishing to find a theoretically robust approach to taking sides, and suggests ways in which the IE approach might contribute to improving services, particularly healthcare. It provides an illustration of how taking a patient standpoint was accomplished in practice, and reflects on the challenges involved.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight an urgent need for new and improved approaches to supporting hate crime victims and tackling hate crime perpetration in the light of escalating levels of hate crime and growing concerns over the effectiveness of existing interventions and support structures.

The paper draws from the authors’ own extensive fieldwork conducted with more than 2,000 victims of hate crime over a series of recent studies. The research was designed to uncover lived experiences of hate crime, to understand the physical and emotional harms suffered by victims and their families, and to identify ways of improving the quality of support offered to victims.

The findings illustrate that current responses to hate crime are hampered by a range of perceived challenges and barriers to justice which exacerbate the harms associated with hate crimes. This includes low levels of public awareness of relevant policies, laws and support services, a lack of meaningful engagement between professionals and marginalised communities and a failure to provide victim-centred criminal justice interventions.

This paper includes a number of recommendations in relation to how scholars, policy makers and professionals can overcome the failings that have been identified, which includes prioritising engagement with diverse communities, improving awareness of hate crime and generating a more comprehensive evidence base on hate crime perpetration.

These themes discussed within this paper are based upon the views and experiences of an extensive sample of hate crime victims, many of whom have never previously shared their stories with researchers, the police or any other support organisations.

Using observational and experimental designs, the purpose of this study was to explore if the power relation between the offender and the victim of incivility and the level of perceived severity of the incivility were associated with bystanders’ intentions to help when witnessing workplace incivility.

In Study 1, 160 participants completed a questionnaire where they described a recent uncivil incident they had witnessed, and completed measures of perceived severity and measures of their behavioural response as bystanders. In Study 2, 183 participants were randomised to read one of two vignettes (a manager being uncivil towards a subordinate or vice versa), and completed measures of perceived severity and of their motivation to intervene. The authors investigated whether the power relation between perpetrator and victim, and the perceived severity of the uncivil exchange, were associated with prosocial bystander behaviours in Study 1 and with motivation to defend the victim of incivility in Study 2.

Higher perpetrator power was significantly associated with the incident being perceived as more severe, and higher perpetrator power was directly related to greater tendency to confront, and lower tendency to avoid, the perpetrator. Perpetrator power was indirectly associated with social support according to the perceived severity. A supervisor acting in an uncivil manner was rated as more severe than a subordinate acting in such a way. Perceived severity mediated the relationship between perpetrator power and the witness’s introjected, identified and intrinsic motivation to intervene.

This study extends previous work by investigating how the perpetrator’s power influences both the bystander’s prosocial behaviour and their motivation to defend the victim. Furthermore, previous research has not considered how perceptions of severity might mediate the relationship between power, behaviour and motivation.

Are financially illiterate individuals all the same? This study aims to answer this question. Specifically, the authors investigate whether people answering incorrectly and “do not know” to the big five questions about financial knowledge (FK), all identified by previous literature as financially illiterate, are two sides of the same coin, or rather individuals with different socio-economic and demographic characteristics, and whether this leads to different levels of risk of falling victim to financial fraud.

Using a large and representative sample of Italian adults, the authors run both ordered probit and probit regressions to test the determinants of financially illiterate individuals, distinguishing between those answering FK questions incorrectly and those answering “do not know”. The authors also measure the probability of falling victim to financial fraud for the two groups. To check the robustness of our results, the authors run a multinomial regression, a structural equation model and an instrumental variable regression model.

The authors demonstrate that the socio-demographic and socio-economic characteristics of individuals selecting incorrect responses to FK questions are different from those of individuals selecting the “do not know” option. Moreover, the results show that the former are more likely to be victims of financial frauds.

The “one-size-fits-all” approach is not suitable for financial education. It is important to consider socio-demographic and socio-economic characteristics of individuals in order to identify specific targets of education programmes aiming to reduce insecurity and excessive self-confidence as well as to increase objective FK. The study’s findings also identify vulnerable groups to which financial fraud prevention schemes should be targeted.

To date, financial illiteracy has been measured as the sum of incorrect and “do not know” responses given to FK questions. This approach does not allow to observe the socio-demographic and socio-economic differences between people choosing the “do not know” option and those answering incorrectly. The paper aims to overcome this limit by investigating the socio-demographic and socio-economic characteristics of individuals selecting “do not know” and incorrect responses, respectively. The authors also investigate whether the two groups have different probabilities of being victims of financial fraud.

This study aims to analyse whether and when victim incivility may be related to work-to-family conflict and then burnout among emergency workers.

A total of 304 Italian emergency workers from five firehouses and six emergency rooms completed questionnaires, examining: victim incivility, work-to-family conflict, social support seeking and burnout symptoms. Descriptive analyses, confirmatory factor analyses and structural equation models were conducted.

Victim incivility was positively associated with burnout symptoms, both directly and indirectly, as mediated by work-to-family conflict. Additionally, social support seeking exacerbated (rather than mitigated) the impact of work-to-family conflict on burnout symptoms.

Organisations can greatly benefit from implementing family-friendly practices and providing their workers with training programmes on how to deal with difficult victims.

This study contributes to the existing literature on workplace incivility and work–life interface by supporting for the first time the notion that victim incivility can spill over into emergency workers' family domain and by clarifying how and when victim incivility is related to burnout symptoms.