Search results

This paper aims to understand what reflexivity means and explores which types of reflexivity could be applied within social marketing practice as a critical approach to overcoming failures.

This paper is a critical literature review.

The study proposes a typology for a reflexive approach to social marketing practice to overcome failures. The typology is built on self and critical reflexivity, simultaneously allowing social marketers to reflect on external and internal factors that may affect the individual's role and could negatively affect social marketing practice unless otherwise considered. The types of reflexivity discussed are not prescriptive; instead, the authors intend to provoke further discussion on an under-researched but vital area of social marketing.

The proposed typology is conceptual; an empirical investigation to gain social marketer's views would further enhance the effectiveness of the applications of the typology.

Social marketers could use the proposed typology for future practice.

This is the first study that conceptualises various types of reflexivity within social marketing practice to overcome failures.

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of leader humility on team reflexivity. This study also investigates the mediating role of relation-oriented shared leadership and the moderating role of leader trust.

This study collected data from the information technology (IT) service provider of a large telecommunications company in South Korea. A total of 311 employees (individual response rate of 31.2%) in 59 teams (team response rate of 83.01%) were included in the final analysis. Several hierarchical regression analyses and PROCESS macro were used.

The results indicate that leaders’ humble behaviour is positively associated with team reflexivity and facilitates relation-oriented shared leadership among team members, particularly when they have a higher level of affect-based trust in leaders.

This study may help researchers and practitioners better understand the conditions influencing the impact of leader humility on team members’ behaviour.

The main value of this study is to add to the knowledge on team reflexivity by identifying leader humility as a critical factor affecting team reflexivity. Furthermore, this study provides a deeper understanding of why leader humility influences team reflexivity.

Based on the conservation of resources theory, the authors propose a research model depicting the positive relationship between team reflexivity and work-to-family enrichment via the mediation of thriving at work, with the moderation of transformational leadership. This paper aims to discuss the aforementioned idea.

The authors collected data from 367 employees in 79 teams at three time points. The authors test the model by using a multilevel moderated mediation analysis.

Results of this paper indicate that thriving at work partially mediates the relationship between team reflexivity and work-to-family enrichment. Furthermore, transformational leadership enhances the positive relationship between team reflexivity and thriving at work.

Organizations are advised to encourage employees' involvement in team reflexivity, facilitate their thriving at work and raise managers' awareness of work-family issues. Exemplary measures include nurturing open communication and providing training programs that encourage positivity in the workplace. By doing so, organization could strengthen the relationship between team reflexivity and work-to-family enrichment.

This research demonstrates the positive relationship between team reflexivity and work-to-family enrichment, deepening theoretical understanding of the antecedents of the construct. The findings of moderated mediation analysis shed light on the mechanism through which team reflexivity affects work-to-family enrichment, and the role that transformational leadership plays.

Debriefs are a type of workplace meeting that often use after events and critical incidents. Debriefs are used to review performance, promote shared learning and understanding, and improve future team performance. Similarly, reflexivity refers to the extent to which team members reflect upon and openly discuss group processes, procedures, and actions to improve future team performance. In this chapter, the authors review the separate literatures and explore the relationship between debriefs and reflexivity. While the debrief literature does focus on aspects of reflection, what occurs between the aspects of reflection, planning, and action is left unexplored. The concept of reflexivity fits well with the successful use of debriefs, as reflexivity ensures that reflection results in outcomes and moves beyond just an overview or discussion during debriefing. Additionally, important constructs such as psychological safety and sensemaking are relevant to both debriefs and reflexivity such that open and honest discussion as well as developing shared understanding are necessary for effective debriefing and reflection. Using the constructs of psychological safety and sensemaking, the authors propose a model that situates both reflexivity and effective debriefs in the context of team learning. This model integrates team reflexivity with team debriefs, provides a better understanding of how teams can carry out more effective debriefs, and explains how more effective debriefing and greater team reflexivity lead to enhanced learning and improvement in team performance.

Since the publication of Schon’s (1984) landmark text The Reflective Practitioner, there has been a surge in research literature demonstrating reflection as an essential “best practice” for teachers. However, it often feels as if reflection is forced into our lives or we happen upon it at inopportune times, creating a contradiction of un/predictability – it is touted as crucial but afforded only particular spaces or purposes, while it sneaks into our lives at inappropriate times. From our perspective, this indicates underlying flawed modernist and humanist logics at work in conceptualizations of teacher and teachers’ work –we cannot plan on bodies in motion being predictable, and just because reflection seems located in the mind, does not mean the human is solely involved in reflection. The purpose of this chapter is to explore reflexivity as un/predictable in order to generate new possibilities and potential that are not bound by modernism’s penchant toward structure and humanism’s myopic self-awareness. Via co/autoethnography, we present individual narratives illustrating our relationships with reflexivity in various spaces of our lives. By using various types of mirrors (e.g., classic mirror, interrogation mirror, window as mirror, water as mirror) as analytical devices, we illustrate reflexivity as embodied processes that emerge un/predictably as we traverse various geotemporal–political locations and engage with other human, non-human and material bodies. By recasting reflexivity as dynamic and fluid, we raise possibilities for spontaneously incorporating reflexivity into teaching–learning and research, thereby untethering critical reflection from modernist and humanist logics that attempt to corral reflection into discrete activities and truncate its potential for transforming praxis.

Many papers have been written about group reflexivity. Testimonials by practitioners often contain strong claims about its performance benefits. Research papers, by scientists, seem to support such claims at first glance, but a closer look reveals methodological problems and weak results, even in the studies that show performance benefits, and there are several studies that show no performance benefits. We have begun our own program of research on group reflexivity, and so far, we have found no performance benefits either. All of this suggests that enthusiasm for group reflexivity should be tempered, until more and better research has been done.

Mead's notion of “reflexivity” is one of his key ideas. Our mind “bends” or “flexes” back to itself in this process. Mead argues that universal ideas were first attained reflexively when humans could understand their own communications; for example, when the primate mother could both indicate to her children where food was and also give herself the same message. These two cases, viewed together, constituted the first “universal” (for Mead). This contrasted with the traditional theory of universals, which had the knower abstracting the universal idea, i.e. the “essence,” from a group of particulars. Mead's universal is not essentialist but linguistic. It is syntactic and not ontological. This allowed him to sidestep the problem of essences (since no one could find any, anyway). Mead's version shows how reflexivity may have first originated, in the evolutionary process, though he does not actually prove this. I examine reflexivity itself here, singling out several varieties. I look at self-referencing pronouns (especially “I”) and show how Cooley's observations of his daughter's use of pronouns clarified this process. I also examine the reflexivity of recognizing one's own face in the mirror. Mead said the body could not be reflexive, but self-recognition in a mirror is a form of bodily reflexivity. And there are several others, for example the varieties of bodily meditation, that Mead missed. Recognizing this reflexivity introduces the body (and, therefore, gender) early in Mead's theory, rather than late, as he has it. This point also opens him to a badly needed infusion of feminist thought, such as that of Nancy Chodorow. The self-recognizing mirror face is, as Lacan points out, “all smiles.” This insight also introduces emotion early into Mead. As it is, he has emotion late, as a kind of afterthought. This paper then promotes a badly needed feminization of Mead.

I provide an exploration and critique of reflexive research practice, which explores the nature of reflexivity, its relevance to and influence on accounting academic identity formation.

The paper gives detailed explanations of three different approaches to reflexivity dependent on perspectives on reality and exemplifies the chosen approach – intersubjective reflexivity. It draws from three personal experiences to illustrate intersubjective reflexive practice in action and its impact on academic identity, including my own identity as a feminist accounting academic. The examples involve the process of reflexively “being struck” regarding voice and representation; addressing power, privilege and decolonisation in knowledge production; and negotiating insider/outsider academic identities.

I reconceptualise and illustrate reflexivity as academic identity formation that enables transformative experience and more reflexive academic praxis within a turbulent academic context. Reflexive academic identity formation will resonate with accounting academics who are reflecting on the role and purpose of the accounting academy and their identity within it.

The paper provides a significant contribution into understanding intersubjective reflexivity, by reconceptualising intersubjective reflexivity beyond research and applying it to the identity formation of accounting academics. I identify the process of reflexive identity transformation through active engagement in identity work and emotion work, which transforms academic praxis. I argue for a broader more nuanced and power-laden perspective on reflexivity and academic praxis, which moves us to consider the responsibility of our academic identity and actions as accounting academics.

Reflexivity involves critical reflection by the qualitative researcher as to the influence of the researcher's culture, history and belief on the conduct and outcome of the research. It is often seen as a practice exercised in the analysis of results in order to attempt to objectify the research. The purpose of this paper is to argue that the value of reflexivity is located in its practice in the field encounter as a means of recognising and embracing subjectivity. In order to widen reflexivity as hermeneutics, the paper draws on Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics as developed in “Truth and Method”.

This is a conceptual paper which distils critical themes from Gadamer's truth and method and applies them to the concept of reflexivity as applied in the field.

The paper suggests that reflexivity is an important component in the field encounter. Immersion in the language and terms of the field is critical to understanding meaning; who I am, my past, my lived experience are essential inputs to my research; the researcher's opinions, ideas and outspoken statements are part of the fabric of qualitative research; qualitative interpretation as a creative exercise; qualitative research should bring insight and understanding that can be applied to catalyse change.

Understanding and applying reflexivity in the field will provide innovative insights which can be carried through to the data analysis.

This study uniquely applies Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics to reflexivity and the field encounter.

Based on experiential learning theory (ELT), this study explores the cross-level effect of team reflexivity on employee innovative behavior. The authors especially focus on the mediating effect of individual intellectual capital (IIC) and the moderating effect of empowering leadership on the relationship between the two constructs.

This study collects data from 76 work units, which include 362 employees and their direct supervisors. A cross-level moderated mediation model was tested by using multilevel path analysis.

The results show that team reflexivity significantly contributes to employee innovative behavior. IIC mediates the above relationship. Empowering leadership not only positively moderates the relationship between team reflexivity and IIC but also reinforces the linkage of team reflexivity → IIC → employee innovative behavior.

The study suggests that organizations should invest more in promoting team reflexivity and empowering leadership in the workplace. Furthermore, managers should make members aware of the importance of IIC for employee innovative behavior. They need to make efforts to enhance IIC via internal communication channels or open discussions, which facilitate IIC and employee innovative behavior.

This research tests the relationship between team reflexivity and employee innovative behavior and identifies IIC as a key mediator that links team reflexivity to employee innovative behavior. It also highlights the moderating role of empowering leadership in the process.