Search results

1 – 6 of 6
Per page
102050
Citations:
Loading...
Available. Content available
Article
Publication date: 4 May 2010

Barry G. Frechette

1057

Abstract

Details

Journal of Consumer Marketing, vol. 27 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0736-3761

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 26 June 2019

Barry Goldman, Dylan A. Cooper and Cagatay Koc

In this investigation, the authors aim to ask whether engineers, as a profession, share distinct characteristics in their attitudes and behaviors relating to negotiations. Based…

575

Abstract

Purpose

In this investigation, the authors aim to ask whether engineers, as a profession, share distinct characteristics in their attitudes and behaviors relating to negotiations. Based on a review of the literature, the authors answer in the affirmative. Generally speaking, the existing studies on individual differences of engineers conclude that they are more conscientious, more goal-driven, more competitive and less people-oriented than non-engineers. The authors suggest that these differences have significant consequences on how engineers engage in negotiations. In particular, the authors propose that engineers’ approach to negotiation includes differences related to distributive versus integrative negotiation, emotional intelligence, perspective-taking and preferred persuasion techniques.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper involves an integrated literature review, combining research in management, psychology and engineering to investigate whether engineers approach negotiations differently from non-engineers.

Findings

The authors suggest that individual differences between engineers and non-engineers have significant consequences for how engineers engage in negotiations. In particular, the authors propose that engineers’ approach to negotiation includes differences related to distributive versus integrative negotiation, emotional intelligence, perspective-taking and preferred persuasion techniques.

Research limitations/implications

The authors offer 11 research propositions in areas relating to how engineers engage in distributive versus integrative negotiations, emotional intelligence, perspective-taking and their preferred persuasive techniques.

Practical implications

There are important implications for how engineers and their supervisors should be aware of these differences between how engineers and non-engineers view negotiations and how these differences may affect them and their employing organizations. There are also cultural implications, particularly for organizations for which engineers comprise a majority or a minority of the workforce composition.

Social implications

There are important implications for diversity in the engineering profession, especially as it relates to the hiring of women in engineering (as they now comprise a small minority of the profession).

Originality/value

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that investigates how engineers negotiate. Because engineering is a hugely important contributor to society, the results of this have important implications for the society.

Details

International Journal of Conflict Management, vol. 30 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1044-4068

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 16 January 2007

Sylvia I. Karlsson

The purpose of this paper is to explore and compare three different principles – the culpability, capacity and concern principles – for allocating responsibility for governance in…

2734

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explore and compare three different principles – the culpability, capacity and concern principles – for allocating responsibility for governance in a multi‐level context of addressing sustainable development.

Design/methodology/approach

The principles are first analysed from a theoretical and normative standpoint, linking to earlier literature on for example, the contribution principle, subsidiarity and global citizenship. Then the three principles are analysed in an empirical setting. The selected case is the issue complex around the health and environmental concerns from pesticide use in developing countries. Document analysis and semi‐structured interviews were carried out with relevant stakeholders from local, national and global governance levels on themes which enabled analysis of the workability and justness of the principles and whether they were already applied to some degree.

Findings

Analysis of the case shows the mutual complementarity of the three principles for allocating responsibility for governance, especially when culpability and capacity are dispersed across different agents and levels. However, the concern and capacity principles emerged as more important and promising. The results indicated the need for moving the value basis of agents towards more selfless global concern in order to create an effective multi‐level governance system.

Practical implications

The results may help policymakers at different levels to analyse more systematically who should assume responsibility for sustainable development governance and why.

Originality/value

Extends the analysis of principles for allocating responsibility for global issues.

Details

International Journal of Social Economics, vol. 34 no. 1/2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0306-8293

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 1 February 1997

A.E. Hohl and C.A. Tisdell

During the very short period of cultural evolution of mankind, the world has changed dramatically. Modern humans have modified the environment not only to satisfy their needs, but…

181

Abstract

During the very short period of cultural evolution of mankind, the world has changed dramatically. Modern humans have modified the environment not only to satisfy their needs, but also to please their greed. The forces that are united to destroy the last wildlands for short‐term economic benefits seem to be overwhelming. However, at least in some developed countries, values, preferences and political majorities have been changing over the last two decades in favour of alternative approaches. A new multiplicity of goals has sprung up, and it will not be an easy task to reconcile the diverging interests. What makes it even more difficult is that the means, by which the different goals are to be achieved, are barely known. The scientists, whose task might be to provide tools of measurement to enable political decision‐makers to set priorities, are facing serious methodological problems. Economists have not yet found practical and acceptable ways of valuing all commodities, biologists have not yet come up with proven environmental safety standards and sociologists and philosophers are far from providing a satisfactory method of integrating environmental values into the ‘social contract’.

Details

Humanomics, vol. 13 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0828-8666

Access Restricted. View access options
Book part
Publication date: 1 February 2021

Natalia Kucirkova

Abstract

Details

The Future of the Self: Understanding Personalization in Childhood and Beyond
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-80043-945-0

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 1 February 2005

Damon P. Coppola

This paper aims to examine the roots of public fear and often‐distorted reality of risk, and proposes methods by which emergency management agencies can successfully manage fear…

2538

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to examine the roots of public fear and often‐distorted reality of risk, and proposes methods by which emergency management agencies can successfully manage fear, should a terror‐based event occur within their jurisdiction.

Design/methodology/approach

The October 2002 sniper crisis in Washington, DC is used to identify the processes by which public fear is generated, maintained, and managed.

Findings

In the USA's post‐9/11 era of terror‐awareness, extreme actions of groups like Al Qaeda are no longer necessary to spark detrimental anxiety‐based social reactions. The two snipers who placed the nation's capital under siege for three weeks with one rifle and a box of bullets confirmed this fact. Washington, DC's duct tape and plastic panic buying spree, spurred by a Terrorism Threat Index increase, illustrated how the mere hint of a future event can induce irrational behavior.

Practical implications

Clearly, the emergency management community can no longer simply blame the media for such strong public sentiment. Controlling public fear is a public safety responsibility but fear management must be supported by the Federal government to be effective. There exists a rapidly‐growing need for agencies to adopt formal fear management capabilities staffed by appropriately‐trained, dedicated officials. In many cases of terrorism, fear is the greatest emergency that must be managed, and irresponsible or inadequate attempts to do so can actually increase public risk. This paper proposes methods by which emergency management agencies can successfully manage fear, should a terror‐based event occur within their jurisdiction.

Originality/value

This paper will assist emergency managers, administrators at the city, county, and national levels, and others involved in planning for the management of fear during emergencies that can occur in the aftermath of terror‐based events.

Details

Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, vol. 14 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0965-3562

Keywords

1 – 6 of 6
Per page
102050