Search results

This paper aims to explore the value of transdisciplinary dialogues for advancing critical perspectives on international business. Specifically, it seeks to consider how conceptualisations of transnational corporations as embedded social communities can be advanced through dialogues and collaborations between two broadly defined scholarly communities, economic geographers and organizational sociologists.

The paper is conceptual and reviews existing work by economic geographers and organizational sociologists useful for studying transnational corporations. Specifically the paper considers how economic geographers' work on the affects of institutions on firms can be brought together with organizational sociologists' work on identity regulation to generate new lines of enquiry about the role of transnational identity regulation in firms.

It is shown that pragmatic rather than adversarial dialogues can overcome the limitations of disciplinary approaches and develop new questions about, and more sophisticated studies of, international business and transnational corporations, as long as the inherent dangers of transdisciplinary working are recognised and avoided.

The paper takes a different approach to existing discussions of the value of transdisciplinary collaboration for studying international business, explicitly advocating a pragmatic approach that involves collaboration between researchers from related paradigms so as to generate new questions for research rather than an approach that involves critique and counter‐critique of work from starkly contrasting research paradigms.

Is there such a field as social economics? Let us begin by providing some justification (the sceptics may call this rationalisation) for asking the question. The very fact that we are gathered here in Fresno ought to be a reassurance that, indeed, there does exist such a field. But this reassurance amounts to little more than a Descartian feeling of, “I think, therefore I am”. Some people question implicitly or explicitly whether there is such a field of enquiry called social economics. If you think this statement needs empirical support, consider the following:

It is fascinating to think about the growth of the literature on the informal economy since Hart and Ferman and Ferman first considered the problem in very different contexts in the early 1970's. In fact some intellectual history would probably be appealing for students of this literature. Irrespective of the knowledge gained from conducting an intellectual history, social scientists should be aware that many, if not most, of the empirical and theoretical problems they study have roots in different philosophical problems (Leaf, 1979). The “informal” economy is no exception. To situate the following collection of articles on the informal economy in one useful philosophical context, I will discuss in this introduction two distinct strategies of social science investigation. Having spelled out these strategies, I will then consider how each of the papers stands in relation to them.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the knowledge of precarious and low-quality jobs with the study of toilet attendants, an ideal typical case of low-wage manual service workers who are excluded from secure wages, decent working conditions, and employment protection.

An extensive survey with standardized questionnaires (n=107) and in-depth interviews (n=10) of toilet attendants in Belgian towns, mostly Brussels and Ghent. Results are compared to the work quality of low-skilled workers, and the within-group position of necessity workers is analysed.

Toilet attendants definitely occupy “bad jobs”, measured by the higher prevalence of informal and false self-employed statuses, more intense work-life conflicts and verbal aggression from clients, and a lower job satisfaction. In all these respects, they perform worse than other low-skilled workers. Concurrently, there is a strong within-group divide between necessity workers and those who see the job as an opportunity. Despite a similar job content, necessity workers less often earn a decent wage, suffer more from customer aggression, lack social support and pleasure from work. Mechanisms related to self-selection and the absence of intrinsic rewards explain these in-group differences.

This contribution indicates, first, that job insecurity spills over into poor working conditions, work-life conflicts, and customer aggression. Furthermore, it documents that jobs are not necessarily bad in themselves, but become problematic when taken up by people with too few choices and too pressing socio-economic needs. Problems of sub-standard jobs are not merely job problems but problems of workers in a certain position.

A persistent theme throughout the history of the Communication, Information Technologies, and Media Section of the American Sociological Association (CITAMS, formerly CITASA) has been that the work of section members has been underrepresented in sociology’s leading journals. This chapter empirically examines that claim, using data from the newly created American Sociological Review (ASR) Digital Archive, a collection of all manuscripts, published and unpublished, submitted to ASR between 1990 and 2010, along with all reviews of these manuscripts. Analyses in the chapter focus on a comparison of CITAMS and Methodology Section members’ participation in the ASR process as a manuscript author or reviewer. The findings of this chapter show that controlling for differences in the gender and age composition of the two sections, CITAMS members are significantly less likely than Methodology Section members to participate in the ASR publication process. This pattern is evident not only in the degree to which CITAMS members are asked to review papers, but also in the frequency with which they submit to ASR. Further analyses in the chapter look at membership in multiple sections and the possibilities for innovative collaboration. Increasing CITAMS involvement in the ASR publication process and amplifying the section’s voice in the discipline’s flagship journal may begin with more CITAMS members submitting manuscripts to ASR and collaborating with sociologists affiliated with other ASA sections.

This chapter investigates the ways in which transnational practices of Chinese migrants can contribute to our understanding of how migration and entrepreneurship operate in superdiverse urban settings. ‘Superdiversity’, as outlined by Vertovec (2007), draws attention to the new and complex social formations, characterised by a dynamic integration of variables (e.g. race, ethnicity and social class) in European cosmopolitan cities. Increased diversity has created a complex range of under-explored challenges to immigrant entrepreneurs, who work within and, most importantly, for such communities. Importantly, for migrant groups in the current climate of austerity, enterprise may be a way of promoting employment and local development, while also kick-starting broader business regeneration. The focus of the chapter is based on the transnational practices of immigrant enterprises through the intersectionality of gender and ethnicity. The study focusses on Chinese entrepreneurial owners of small transnational enterprises (STEs) living in Birmingham, UK. Despite the fact that the Chinese STEs have been documented elsewhere including Canada (e.g. Wong & Ng, 2002), the USA (e.g. Sequeira, Carr, & Rasheed, 2009; You & Zhou, 2018), Australia (Wang & Warn, 2018) and some South-east Asian countries including China (Tan, 2006; Weng, 2014), very little empirical research has been conducted in the UK to document and explore the existence and characteristics of the Chinese STEs. Timely empirical studies are called for which illuminate the contemporary development and dynamics of the businesses run by the new Chinese immigrants in the west Midlands UK.

In 1988, German‐speaking economists plan to celebrate the 150th anniversary of Gustav von Schmoller. Yet, in contemporary America, Schmoller is hardly known. His work is almost completely locked up in the German language, save for his The Mercantile System and its Historical Significance, published in 1888 and his essay on “The Idea of Justice in Political Economy”. Furthermore, because he was not an econometrician or a mathematical economist, nobody has much use for Schmoller today anyway.