Search results

The purpose of this paper is to revisit the potential of the New Deal as a research context in management and organization studies and, in doing so, forward the role one of its chief architects, Harry Hopkins, played in managing the economic crisis. The exploration takes us to multiple layers that work together to form context around Hopkins including the Great Depression, the Roosevelt Administration, and ultimately, the New Deal. By raising Harry Hopkins as an exemplar of historical-narrative exclusion, the authors can advance the understanding of his role in the New Deal and how his actions produced early insights about management (e.g. modern crisis management).

The paper experiments with the methodological assemblage of ANTi-History and microhistorical analysis that the authors call “ANTi-Microhistory” to examine the life narrative of Harry Hopkins, his early association with President Franklin D. Roosevelt and later, the New Deal. To accomplish this, the authors undertake a programme of archival research (e.g. the digital repository of The Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum) and assess various materials (e.g. speeches, biographies and memoirs) from across multiple spaces.

The findings suggest Harry Hopkins to be a much more powerful actor in mobilizing New Deal policies and their effect on early management thought than what was previously accepted. In the process, the authors found that because of durable associations with Roosevelt, key policy architects of the same ilk as Harry Hopkins (e.g. Frances Perkins, Henry Wallace, Lewis Douglas, and others) and their contributions have been marginalized. This finding illustrates the significant potential of little-known historical figures and how they might shed new insight on the development of the field and management practice.

The aim is to demonstrate the potential of engaging historical research in management with the individual – Harry Hopkins – as a unit of analysis. By engaging historical research on the individual – be it well-known or obscure figures of the past – the authors are considering how they contribute to the understanding of phenomena (e.g. New Deal, Progressivism or Keynesian economics). The authors build on research that brings to focus forgotten people, communities and ideas in management studies but go further in advocating for space in the research to consider the scholarly potential of the individual.

This chapter examines sexually violent hazing as a form of group sexual assault, which involves multiple perpetrators in a single sexually violent act, in the context of junior men's hockey in Canada. Research outside of the context of sport suggests that group sexual assaults are relatively rare. However, available evidence suggests that the prevalence of group sexual assaults perpetrated by male junior hockey players is significantly disproportionate to perpetration rates by men who do not participate in competitive sports. Drawing on examples from junior men's hockey in Canada, three main forms of group sexual assault are identified and explored in which multiple male junior hockey players have been reported for sexually assaulting: (1) new male team members through sexually violent hazing rituals, (2) female victims during team rookie nights or initiation parties and (3) a single female victim away from team activities. The data analysed include media files and written legal decisions involving group sexual assault allegations against 65 Canadian junior men's hockey players. This chapter reveals that each form is interconnected within the misogynistic culture of junior men's hockey in Canada, where group sexual assaults have long been tolerated, silenced and ignored by teams, leagues and legal officials.

Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914), recognized as the father of philosophical pragmatism, has been described as a philosopher’s philosopher. Eliyahu Moshe Goldratt (1947–2011), considered the father of the management philosophy theory of constraints (TOC), has been described as being, first and foremost, a philosopher. The TOC body of knowledge is mainly preserved as concrete methodologies used in the management discipline. By examining the foundational elements of synechism and the TOC, the purpose of this study is to investigate the intellectual connections between the arguments and legacies of Goldratt and Peirce. Although this connection is worthy of much further investigation, the research emphasizes the possible implications from a management philosophy perspective.

Based on a “review with an attitude,” the authors first examined the foundations of Goldratt’s TOC through the lens of Peirce’s synechism. Next, the authors then examined how the study of Peirce combined with a selection of contemporary research in the management and organizational studies domain could point out a direction toward completing Goldratt’s unfinished intellectual work to establish a unified science management while addressing some of the current gaps in the TOC body of knowledge.

Major findings show that synechism’s growth may extend TOC knowledge, improving managerial practice in organizations. Findings on the convergent ideas of both also reveal that Goldratt valued all synechism categories, emphasizing the importance of not overlooking Firstness. Furthermore, the study analyzes the abductive inference demonstrated in the two use cases, introducing an additional metaphor to the management of organizational systems inspired by Peirce’s philosophical concepts. The research concludes that incorporating TOC and synechism principles can enhance management and organizational practices and enrich management philosophy and theories.

This pioneering research opens promising opportunities to draw parallels between Peirce and Goldratt. Interdisciplinary collaboration will enhance the rigor and validity of integrating synechism and TOC. Experts in organizational behavior, systems theory and complexity science can provide valuable insights into this debate, while practitioners and consultants could help identify barriers and opportunities for integrating synechistic principles.

The study proposes a novel abductive approach using Peirce’s cable metaphor as an initial framework to build a unified science of management based on evolutionary stages: TOC, common sense and connectedness.

This research reinforces the argument that contemporary management practices need philosophical thinking. The authors argue that re-evaluating the foundations of management thought enriches the decision-making process in organizations and the understanding of contemporary theories in management and organizational studies.

The aim of this study is two-fold: (1) to promote a model of youth participatory research and offer a window of understanding into how it can be enacted and (2) to understand youth perspectives on youth empowerment. This study asks: “how can youth help us understand youth empowerment?”

The study applies youth participatory action research (YPAR) and interpretative phenomenological analysis. The study illustrates how to enact a model of YPAR by engaging youth in the process of research in a youth-serving community non-profit organization.

This study sets out to make two important contributions, one methodological and one theoretical: First, the study contributes to our understanding of the opportunities and benefits of youth-engaged, peer-to-peer research. Specifically, this study promotes a model of youth participatory action research and knowledge making processes, and the associated social and formal benefits for youth. By extension, this study illustrates an approach to engage youth in formal contexts which has implications for both management and organizational studies and education. Finally, the study extends our understanding and conceptualization of the phenomenon of youth empowerment (as informed by youth perspectives).

The study offers insight into how to conduct youth participatory action research and specifically how to address two limitations cited in the literature: (1) how to authentically engage youth including how to share power, and (2) how to perform youth participatory action research, often critiqued as a black box methodology.