Search results

The purpose of this paper is to engage some of the central themes of Gayatri Spivak’s seminal essay, “Can the Subaltern Speak? (CSS)” In particular, her criticisms of post-structuralism’s treatment of the “subject” as well as its privileging of “discourse” and micrological analyses of power vis-à-vis her discussion of Foucault and Deleuze.

The paper also draws on a historical materialist approach to examine how Spivak’s own work often reinscribes the discursive and politically pusillanimous tendencies of both post-structuralist and post-colonialist thought.

This lends itself to the “complexification” of capitalism – a bourgeois form of mystification of capital’s essential workings and the underlying class structure of the globalized economy, inclusive of “postcolonial” societies.

The authors conclude that CSS – while an important question – is ultimately a misdirected one that, in effect, mistakes discursive empowerment for social and economic enablement.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate critically the competing theories of informal entrepreneurship that variously represent such endeavour as a residue from a previous mode of accumulation (modernisation theory), a direct by‐product of contemporary capitalism and survival strategy for those marginalised from the circuits of the modern economy (structuralism), an endeavour voluntarily pursued due to over‐regulation in the formal economy (neo‐liberalism) or a practice chosen for social, redistributive, political or identity reasons (post‐structuralism).

To evaluate these competing theories, a 2005/2006 survey involving face‐to‐face interviews with 298 informal entrepreneurs in Ukraine is analysed.

Contrary to previous studies which assert that one single theorisation is universally applicable, this study finds that each theory is valid for different types of informal entrepreneurship, and therefore proposes a typology of informal entrepreneurship that joins together the contrasting theorisations in order to achieve a more accurate and finer‐grained explanation of the complex and heterogeneous configuration of informal entrepreneurship in contemporary Ukraine.

This paper reveals the need to move beyond treating the competing explanations as mutually exclusive by outlining a typology that combines the contrasting theorisations in order to more fully understand the heterogeneity of informal entrepreneurship.

By unravelling the heterogeneity of informal entrepreneurship, a more nuanced policy approach is shown to be required which does not seek to simply either eradicate such endeavour, pursue a laissez‐faire approach or harness such entrepreneurship but instead pursues all these approaches to varying extents in relation to different kinds of informal entrepreneur.

This is one of the first papers to identify and empirically evaluate the competing theories of informal entrepreneurship.

This chapter provides readers with a summary of sport sociology in the United States. It begins with a brief overview of sport in the United States before describing the development of the sociology of sport in the United States and some of the major contemporary patterns in sport research. They key movement in US sport sociology was the critical-cultural turn that took place during the 1980s and 1990s when critical theory and feminism became dominant approaches to research. Scholarship in the 21st century has largely developed upon that turn and is generally qualitative and cultural. Contemporary US sport sociology is a critical endeavor heavily influenced by cultural studies, post-structuralism, feminism, queer theory, critical race theory, post-colonial theory, and theories of globalization. Despite a fairly consistent approach to sport research in the United States, sport sociology remains contentious and in disunity. This chapter argues that the contention and disunity results from broader structural patterns that guide sport sociologists’ social actions.

This chapter focuses on theories and methods for policy studies in higher education, in an era of accelerating globalisation. Policy is increasingly conceived as a complex process which extends from global to local levels, and is contested at all levels. At the same time, higher education has assumed a more central role in the development of a so-called ‘global knowledge economy’. Thus, the re-conceptualisation of ‘policy’, along with the repositioning of the role of higher education in globalising times, call for a rethink on theory and method for higher education policy studies. With attempts to cover a broad global-local span, single theoretical framings are often insufficient, and theoretical eclecticism potentially offers more comprehensive insights into dynamic policy processes than single theories alone. In particular, the combination of critical theory and post-structural theory has presented a fruitful way to build policy ‘trajectory’ and ‘network’ analyses across multiple levels and sites.

The purpose of this paper is to examine Barthes' influence on, and potential for, accounting communication research; and to apply Barthes' principles to visual images of professional accountancy.

The study seeks to provide: a synthesis of prior accounting research that has drawn on Barthes' work, followed by an overview of Barthes' work in both its rational, structuralist, phase, and its more sentimental, post‐structuralist, phase, that identifies strands of interest to accounting communication; and Barthesian semiotic interpretations of visual images of accountancy portrayed in the annual report front covers of a major UK accounting firm through their linguistics (anchorage and relay), denotation and connotation.

Barthes' work has been surprisingly little used in accounting; a number of aspects of Barthes's work could be more fruitfully exploited, especially those from his later post‐structuralist phase; a Barthesian approach assists in reading the dual portrayal of accountancy as both an art and a science, and as business‐aware as well as traditionally professional.

The theoretical section is limited to a broad overview of Barthes' very extensive work; the empirical section provides a detailed analysis of one organization. It would be useful to extend the research to more extended analyses based on Barthes' prolific work, and to many aspects of accounting communication.

The analysis may be of interest to all accounting researchers, practitioners, trainees and auditors, since communication is central to accounting.

The paper adds to theoretical work in accounting communication, to the empirical literature on the interpretation of verbal and visual signs in accounting and accountability statements, and to understanding of the external images of professional accountancy.

The purpose of this paper is to argue for more widespread and consistent engagement of critical management scholars in influencing policy debates on globalisation, social and economic justice, and the proper role of international business.

The paper explores the reasons that critical management studies (CMS) scholars have been relatively absent from the policy debate surrounding the global economic crisis beginning in 2007. It begins by reviewing the opportunities for policy engagement provided by the crisis, and outlining some of the notable contributions to the debate that have been made by critical management scholars. The paper lists and discusses six factors that need to be addressed if CMS is to have a bigger practical policy impact in the future.

The paper asserts that the critical management scholarly community could have been more effective in the contemporary global economic crisis. Some common policy objectives need to be settled upon, including a global focus on egalitarianism. There is a need to move beyond the exhausted epistemological debate between Marxism and post‐structuralism, and to pay more attention to practical policy impact. CMS scholars should resist academic narrow‐casting, keep a focus on meta‐narratives, and treat each other more collegially.

The paper encourages discussion within the critical management scholarly community on the need for engagement in practical policy debate and advocacy.

The purpose of this afterword is to examine which questions have been illuminated in the present issue and which theoretical problems still need to be addressed.

Examines articles in this issue.

Many epistemological views, e.g. social constructivism, critical theory, feminist epistemology, postmodernism and systems theory, need to be considered more deeply within library and information science (LIS). For some of the other epistemologies such as phenomenology and (post)structuralism there is still a need for deeper explorations of their potential contributions. Finally eclecticism is discussed as one way of coping with different theories in a field.

The value of this afterword is to contribute to future reflections and debates concerning the philosophical basis of LIS and the specific contributions of specific systems of thought.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the ethical complexity and dilemmas, which arise in the co-production of knowledge between researchers and other participants.

The starting point for the paper is a narrative from a conference the authors attended where the authors, as researchers, found themselves on slippery and emotionally charged ground. Using a critical, reflexive approach informed by post-structuralism, the ambition was to deconstruct gaps between rhetoric and practice and critique normative understandings of the nature of ethically sound co-production processes in collaborative research. More specifically, at the conference, the authors sought to expose and discuss the gap between the good intentions and the own practice as researchers in a collaborative research project at a major hospital. However, instead of reflexive discussions with the research community, the authors experienced that the conduct was criticized and categorized as unethical practice.

Instead of omitting sensitive phenomena from the research process, the authors argue that it is an ethical imperative to investigate these phenomena in order to gain insight into what is at stake in dialogical, reflexive processes not only between researchers and research participants—but also between researchers in the research community. An awareness of the emergent nature of power relations in all processes of knowledge production may strengthen the practical validity of “co-produced” knowledge in action research.

A poststructuralist perspective on collaborative research processes reveals normative expectations regarding ethical research practice and provides insight into the tensions in collaborative research that arise irrespective of the individual competence (or not) of the researcher.

This paper seeks to offer a retrospective look at an intellectual journey in and out of using actor‐network theory, which the author drew on to carry out an in‐depth case study of the troubled implementation of a computerised reservation system in a major transport company. The application of some key ANT concepts, i.e. human and non‐human actors, symmetry and translation, is reflected upon, highlighting their benefits and limitations.

The paper's aims are accomplished through a confessional account of how it was done, rather than a normative post hoc justification. Some empirical evidence is provided to illustrate the difficulties and problems encountered in travelling back and forth between theory, methodology and data.

In particular, ANT was very useful in focusing the paper on how to look at IS success and failure symmetrically and how social and technical distinctions are socially constructed, for instance in the conception and application of yield management software. Formulating a series of translations to encompass a large number of actors is shown to have provided some explanatory capacity. But a limitation is how to relate local and global actors, which is also a matter of power relations and politics.

The paper explains why, as a late and unplanned reaction to this, but also in contradiction with ANT principles, it ended up complementing ANT with Clegg's theory of power to bridge that gap. The paper concludes with a discussion of where the difficulties lie in using ANT and how it can be misused in IS research; the author argues that this is due to a lack of exposure to post‐structuralism in IS research, compared with other management‐related disciplines; and that recent efforts by scholars in the science and technology studies field to combine constructivist approaches such as ANT with critical social analysis should be considered.