Search results

Through a feminist lens, the study explores women’s experiences of entrepreneurial leadership in the UK and how the women manage competing and contrary patriarchal and individualism discourses and associated discursive paradox.

This study follows social constructionism and Feminist Standpoint Research approach, providing space for women to voice and contextualise lived experiences from multiple standpoints. The study comprises five cases of women entrepreneurs in IT, law, construction, beauty and childcare, using a two-stage semi-structured interview process analysed through discourse analysis.

This study provides new insights into the entrenched patriarchal socio-cultural context for women entrepreneurial leaders in the UK. The competing discourses provoke a discursive paradox, which dominates and oppresses women. This is managed through a process of discursive blending, blurring and merging contrary discursive expectations. The women use the individualism discourse to obscure patriarchy’s domination and as a resource to resist patriarchal gender power relations. To blend the discourses, the women use particular tactics: engaging in patriarchal bargains, such as “dressing not to impress”; can sidestep and manoeuvre these bargains and can utilise “patriarchal advantages”, turning gender oppression into benefits by “working it positively”.

This study addresses the lack of research interrogating patriarchy in the Global North and the absence of understandings of how women entrepreneurial leaders manage the competing and contrary discourses of patriarchy and individualism, which actively shape their experiences. The study illuminates the significance and increasing requirement for feminism to disrupt the ever-increasing power of patriarchy in entrepreneurship.

The purpose of this study is to understand the investment decision-making of real estate investors in housing, highlighting the interplay between rational and irrational factors. In this study, investment satisfaction was a mediator, while reinvestment intention was the dependent variable.

A quantitative, cross-sectional and descriptive research design was used, gathering data from a sample of 550 residential real estate investors using a multi-stage stratified sampling technique. The partial least squares structural equation modelling disjoint two-stage approach was used for data analysis. This methodological approach allowed for an in-depth examination of the relationship between rational factors such as location, profitability, financial viability, environmental considerations and legal aspects alongside irrational factors including various biases like overconfidence, availability, anchoring, representative and information cascade.

This study strongly supports the adaptive market hypothesis, showing that residential real estate investor behaviour is dynamic, combining rational and irrational elements influenced by evolutionary psychology. This challenges traditional views of investment decision-making. It also establishes that behavioural biases, key to adapting to market changes, are crucial in shaping residential property market efficiency. Essentially, the study uncovers an evolving real estate investment landscape driven by evolutionary behavioural patterns.

This research redefines rationality in behavioural finance by illustrating psychological biases as adaptive tools within the residential property market, urging a holistic integration of these insights into real estate investment theories.

The study reshapes property valuation models by blending economic and psychological perspectives, enhancing investor understanding and market efficiency. These interdisciplinary insights offer a blueprint for improved regulatory policies, investor education and targeted real estate marketing, fundamentally transforming the sector’s dynamics.

Unlike previous studies, the research uniquely integrates human cognitive behaviour theories from psychology and business studies, specifically in the context of residential property investment. This interdisciplinary approach offers a more nuanced understanding of investor behaviour.

This study aims to uncover the constraints of automation and the affordances of augmentation related to implementing artificial intelligence (AI)-powered systems across different task types: mechanical, thinking and feeling.

Qualitative study involving 45 interviews with various stakeholders in artistic gymnastics, for which AI-powered systems for the judging process are currently developed and tested. Stakeholders include judges, gymnasts, coaches and a technology vendor.

We identify perceived constraints of automation, such as too much mechanization, preciseness and inability of the system to evaluate artistry or to provide human interaction. Moreover, we find that the complexity and impreciseness of the rules prevent automation. In addition, we identify affordances of augmentation such as speedier, fault-less, more accurate and objective evaluation. Moreover, augmentation affords to provide an explanation, which in turn may decrease the number of decision disputes.

While the unique context of our study is revealing, the generalizability of our specific findings still needs to be established. However, the approach of considering task types is readily applicable in other contexts.

Our research provides useful insights for organizations that consider implementing AI for evaluation in terms of possible constraints, risks and implications of automation for the organizational practices and human agents while suggesting augmented AI-human work as a more beneficial approach in the long term.

Our granular approach provides a novel point of view on AI implementation, as our findings challenge the notion of full automation of mechanical and partial automation of thinking tasks. Therefore, we put forward augmentation as the most viable AI implementation approach. In addition, we developed a rich understanding of the perception of various stakeholders with a similar institutional background, which responds to recent calls in socio-technical research.

The purpose of this study was to examine how two socio-historical contexts within the United States, the Movement for Black Lives and the COVID-19 pandemic, informed approaches to improving racial climate in science, technology, mathematics and engineering (STEM) graduate education.

The authors used a general qualitative inquiry research study design to conduct focus groups (n = 121) with graduate students, postdoctoral fellows and faculty members from across STEM disciplines as well as administrators whose work involves STEM graduate students. Participants were from two US institutions involved in a National Science Foundation networked improvement community seeking to create inclusive environments for STEM graduate students.

This study demonstrates how these socio-historical contexts illuminated and amplified on-going efforts to address racial climate for graduate students in US-based graduate education. In response to these events, STEM faculty devoted time that otherwise might have gone to purely technical or scientific endeavors to addressing racial climate. However, some faculty members remain hesitant to address racial climate and efforts appear to have further waned over time. While diversity, inclusion and equity efforts came to the forefront of the collective consciousness during this time, participants worry that these efforts are not sustainable, particularly without support from faculty and administrators.

The findings from this study will inform efforts to improve racial climate in STEM graduate programs.

This study fills an identified need to capture how socio-historical contexts, like the US Movement for Black Lives and the COVID-19 pandemic, have influenced approaches to improving racial climate in STEM graduate programs.