Search results

To survive and grow in the future, organisations need to become lean, fast, fit and hungry for success. Like dieters, to change their ‘shape’ organisations need to re‐educate their current way of thinking.

During recent years Japanese products have made such an impact in foreign markets that the economies of all western countries have been seriously affected. Some markets are now completely dominated by Japanese goods. In Britain we have witnessed the destruction of our motor‐cycle industry; more recently, the Japanese share of our home markets for motor cars, television sets, and many other products have caused serious concern.

Quality means more than degree of excellence, or closeness to specification. By looking outwards at the customer, quality can become a driving force behind an organisation's success.

Since my original article published in this Journal in January 1980, entitled AN INTRODUCTION TO QUALITY CIRCLES, the name of the concept has become a buzz word, a fact and the latest craze amongst consultants throughout the world. That is not to suggest that the article in question was responsible for such developments. It would have happened some time or other anyway. The fact that Circles have taken off is both exciting and yet worrying. Properly implemented and in the right industrial culture, Quality Circles can help create in an organisation, a competitive drive totally outside the experience of any one outside Japan where Circles originated. Badly implemented or misunderstood, Quality Circles are almost inevitably destined for the file entitled “we tried it once and it didn't work”. Perhaps the most imposing feature is the staggering number of differing interpretations emanating from a number of self‐appointed specialists.

A Japanese idea for improving product quality in industry is starting to catch on in the UK. Other benefits from the scheme include savings in production costs, more job satisfaction — and a potential boost in status for Britain's maligned factory foremen.

EVERY so often, somebody comes up with a new idea. Of course, it may be an old idea dressed up, or an idea taken from some other country, so it MUST be good. Always the idea is intended to be the answer to almost every manufacturer's problems. They are seized on, copied, altered, adapted.

The purpose of the chapter is to overview the sociological literature related to social media and digital technologies in sport, with particular attention to media representations, content production, and audience responses. The chapter examines how social media and digital technologies reproduce and challenge hegemonic representation strategies, while maintaining existing cultural norms in the industry. Further, the chapter evaluates how athletes and fans create digital communities to bring visibility to marginalized groups. Finally, the chapter considers the potential of digital media for social justice and advocacy.

The chapter synthesizes existing literature in sociology of sport, sport communication, and media studies to provide an assessment of the implications of social media and digital technologies for sport.

Scholarship on social media and digital technologies in sport has primarily focused on descriptive analyses. Sociological approaches provide a theoretical grounding for examining issues of power, inequality, and social justice in relation to media ideologies, production, and consumption.

The chapter identifies future areas of study, including a more robust engagement with theory and an expansion of methodological approaches.

The chapter provides an overview of the literature on social media and digital technologies in sport of nearly 80 scholarly publications. The chapter moves beyond focusing on patterns in content to consider how structures, journalistic practices, cultural norms, and audience interactions collectively shape ideologies about gender, race, sexuality, religion, and disability in the sport media industry.