Search results

Delves into history to find out if sociological knowledge can be applied successfully to policy making. Explains that society is based on the use of multiple knowledge structures and belief systems. Cites examples of centres which were set up in the USA to improve understanding and knowledge in a specific area, which could then contribute towards policy making and, ultimately, improved practice. Discusses the application of knowledge at various points in history, indicating that ruling elites are not motivated by knowledge (intellect) but by sentiment, and that this is still the case today. Refers to various literary works on sociological practice. Advocates that modern social research should be driven by policy issues and that sociologists should seize the opportunity, presented by decentralization, to become policy makers in their own communities.

The purpose of this paper is to represent an epistemological analysis of Russian sociological scholarship.

The analytical approach that allows reducing the particular representations within the sum of propositions is the methodological base of the paper. Clearing of propositional attitudes explains the basic communications in a thought of researchers. The circle of grounds available to achievement of intuitively noticed purposes defines the preferences of researchers in general.

The author proves that the theoretical developments in the Russian sociology are possible as a derivative from the development of questions, which are raised nowadays in worldwide science, but possible in a view of original development of questions, which were raised in worldwide science in the past.

The Russian sociology represents a part of the European humanities, which is based on the various forms of theoretical combat or agonality.

The author shows the ways out of the theoretical combat or agonality.

The research clarifies the perspectives for increasing of the knowledge-based society in Russia. The author analyzes the concept of Russia as a paradigmatic society, particularly in the context of transition economies.

In general, the author concludes that the pro-argument with respect to theoretical developments is weaker than the contra-argument with respect to theoretical developments. This paper has revealed the model within which extreme positions can be reconciled.

The relationship between research pursued in sociology as an academic discipline and sociological research undertaken as a contribution toward social policy formation is a somewhat uneasy one in the USA. The author undertakes to examine the evolving relationship between the disciplinary and professional thrusts of the American sociological enterprise.

The purpose of this paper is to explore conceptual issues arising in an empirical study of the emergence of a distinctive new form of expertise – of industry analysts and in particular the leading firm Gartner Group that exercises enormous influence over the Information Technology (IT) market.

The paper critically reviews existing analytical frameworks and especially work from the Sociology of Professions. This has largely focused upon groups which have already succeeded in gaining wide acceptance of the effectiveness of their methods and knowledge. For emerging expert groups a key challenge is to create an audience for whom they are expert (Turner, 2001). The study contributes to a “third wave” of studies that shift the focus of enquiry from the operation of professional institutions to the conduct of expert work – and how knowledge is produced, validated and consumed. The paper draws upon an extended ethnographic study of Gartner Inc., and other industry analysts to characterise some key features of their expertise. Data sources include over 100 hours of participant observation of industry analysts and their interactions with vendors and technology adopters at IT industry conferences; interviews with over 20 industry analysts from Gartner (including a telephone interview with its founder Gideon Gartner) and other analyst organisations; a substantial body of interviews with technology vendors and clients (particularly in relation to the Customer Relationship Management technology sector); together with a review of Gartner documentation and reports.

The paper compares the empirical findings of industry analysts with accounts from current literature on management consultants and other groups such as journalists and financial analysts. Industry analysts, like consultants, have not sought to follow a classical professional model. Thus the brand reputation of big (industry analyst or consultancy) firms provides an alternative warrant of the quality of expertise to professional institutions. However, Gartner analysts identify differences as well as similarities between their work and management consultants. Gartner’s ability to rank the offerings of IT vendors requires them to adopt formal methodologies and internal review procedures to produce defensible knowledge and demonstrate their independence. Industry analysts need to establish cognitive authority over rapidly changing technological fields. This imparts some “public good” elements to their knowledge.

The paper suggests ways forward for analysing new forms of knowledge intermediary in business and accounting, applying perspectives from the “third wave” of studies, and involving detailed study of the “epistemic systems” through which such knowledge is produced, consumed and validated (Knorr Cetina, 2010).

It is possible to say that an expert in any field of knowledge can be expected to know particular things and techniques. This can be said of a stone mason, a physicist or a midwife. The expertise consists of a notional core of knowledge and skills (i.e. applied knowledge). Such expertise arguably can be found in other experts in the same field, although there will be idiosyncrasies of approach and valuation and quite probably divergencies in what is considered “right” and “wrong”.

Classification is an important process in making sense of the world, and has a pronounced social dimension. This paper aims to compare folksonomy, a new social classification system currently being developed on the web, with conventional taxonomy in the light of theoretical sociological and anthropological approaches. The co‐existence of these two types of classification system raises the questions: Will and should taxonomies be hybridized with folksonomies? What can each of these systems contribute to information‐searching processes, and how can the sociology of knowledge provide an answer to these questions? This paper aims also to address these issues.

This paper is situated at the meeting point of the sociology of knowledge, epistemology and information science and aims at examining systems of classification in the light of both classical theory and current late‐modern sociological and anthropological approaches.

Using theoretical approaches current in the sociology of science and knowledge, the paper envisages two divergent possible outcomes.

While concentrating on classifications systems, this paper addresses the more general social issue of what we know and how it is known. The concept of hybrid knowledge is suggested in order to illuminate the epistemological basis of late‐modern knowledge being constructed by hybridizing contradictory modern knowledge categories, such as the subjective with the objective and the social with the natural. Integrating tree‐like taxonomies with folksonomies or, in other words, generating a naturalized structural order of objective relations with social, subjective classification systems, can create a vast range of hybrid knowledge.

This conceptual paper explores the implications for the sociology of the professions of robo-advice (RA) provided by robo-advisors (RAs) as an early example of successfully programmed algorithmic knowledge managed by artificial intelligence (AI).

The authors examine the drivers of RAs, their success, characteristics, and establish RA as an early precursor of commercialized, programmed professional advice with implications for developments in the sociology of the professions.

Within the lens of the sociology of the professions, the success of RAs suggests that the diffusion of this innovation depends on three factors: the programmed flows of automated professional knowledge are minimally disruptive, they are less costly, and attract attention because of the “on-trend” nature of algorithmic authority guided by AI. The on-trend nature of algorithmic governance and its increasing public acceptance points toward an algorithmic paradox. The contradictions arise in the gap between RA marketed to the public and as a set of professional practices.

The incursion of RA-like disembodied advice into other professions is predicted given the emergence of tech-savvy clients, the tie between RA and updatable flows of big data, and an increasing shift to the “maker” or “do-it-yourself” movements.

Using the success of RAs in the financial industry, the authors predict that an AI-managed platform, despite the algorithmic paradox, is an avenue for growth with implications for researchers in the sociology of the professions.

Wonders whether companies actually have employees best interests at heart across physical, mental and spiritual spheres. Posits that most organizations ignore their workforce – not even, in many cases, describing workers as assets! Describes many studies to back up this claim in theis work based on the 2002 Employment Research Unit Annual Conference, in Cardiff, Wales.

Knowledge encourages us to be self‐aware. The presence or absence of knowledge in ourselves and other people has a clear effect upon our attitudes and behaviour. The different aspects of knowledge and the process of knowing are discussed, together with the sociological effects.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a more basic macro‐sociological approach to a discussion on the archaic marketing practices of the Russian firm as examined in the empirical research of Wagner.

To show fundamental conditions for relationship marketing being implemented in Russia, the paper applies assumptions of sociology of knowledge, systems theory, world society theory, organisation theory, network theory, and economic sociology.

The paper argues that the global diffusion of relationship marketing first observed on mature Western markets, to a transitional economy such as Russia will depend on global interrelation by technology, formal organisation, epistemic community, network, and event within the four relevant function systems: science, education, mass media, and economy which primarily determine the knowledge capacities of the Russian firm.

In this paper, relationship marketing is reduced to knowledge. Further, the paper pinpoints social structures that lead to global knowledge diffusion. Since the Contemporary Marketing Practices, University of Auckland, NZ approach is concrete rather than abstract, the paper contributes to analytical considerations of a paradigm shift from transactional to relational marketing in present transition economies.