Search results

This paper aims to explore how service organizations can improve the effectiveness of well-being creation efforts given the pressing societal issues and global crises. In this paper, the authors examine two essential dimensions (dignity and vulnerability approach) to develop a theoretical framework. This framework can be used to increase the effectiveness of well-being outcomes created by transformative service initiatives (TSIs) and minimize their negative unintentional consequences.

Drawing on social marketing and humanistic management literature, this paper develops a framework for TSIs based on whether human dignity is recognized or ignored and whether a deficit-based or strength-based approach to vulnerability is used. This framework explains different types of TSIs and provides real-life examples.

The framework developed in this paper discusses four different types of TSIs: (1) exclusionary, a deficit-based approach where dignity is ignored; (2) opportunistic, a strength-based approach where dignity is ignored; (3) paternalistic, a deficit-based approach where dignity is recognized; and (4) humanistic, a strength-based approach where dignity is recognized. The paper also identifies five pathways that service organizations could use to implement these approaches, including two traps (utility and charity) and three opportunities (resourcing, humanizing and full awakening) embedded within these pathways.

This paper provides examples of service industries and specific companies to exemplify the framework developed. Also, it discusses the well-being implications and potential well-being outcomes associated with each type of TSI.

This paper offers a novel framework based on two dimensions that are relatively new to the service literature, i.e. dignity and vulnerability approach. This paper also highlights the importance of including these two dimensions in future service research.

This paper offers a novel framework based on two relatively new dimensions to the service literature: dignity and strengths-based approach. This paper also highlights the importance of including these two dimensions in future service research.

Why has responsible management been so difficult and why is the chorus of stakeholders demanding responsibility getting louder? We argue that management has been framed within the structural confines of corporate governance. Corporate governance in turn has been developed within the frame of agency theory (Blair, 1995; Eisenhardt, 1989). Agency theory in turn is based on ontological assumptions that do not provide for responsible actions on behalf of management (Jensen, 2001; Jensen & Meckling, 1976; Jensen & Meckling, 1994). As such, we argue that managers need to be aware of the paradigmatic frame of the dominant economistic ontology and learn to transcend it in order to become truly response-able.

The purpose of this chapter is to shed light on humanistic knowledge traditions and highlight their value in informing educational administration and leadership curricula designed for graduate students. We argue that, despite their distinctive features, humanist traditions such as the Confucian, Buddhist, Islamic and European share many core values and practices that should be incorporated into the educational administration and leadership curricula. However, these traditions tend to be overlooked or marginalised by curriculum designers. We argue that incorporating these traditions into educational administration and leadership curricula can contribute to greater internationalisation and achieve a greater diversity. The chapter starts with an exploration of the origins, nature and definitions of humanism. The following parts discuss Confucian, Buddhist, Islamic and European humanist traditions and examine how they can contribute to shaping educational administration and leadership curricula.

The financial crisis of 2007/2008 has caused many to question the basic premises of the current business system. Porter and Kramer suggest that the purpose of the corporation needs to be redefined. They posit that the corporation, rather than merely pursuing financial value creation set out to pursue shared value creation. They further declare social entrepreneurs the paragons of said shared‐value creation. The purpose of this paper is to explore that claim.

This paper critically analyzes the pathway of shared‐value creation in three leading social enterprises employing a genealogical perspective.

It is found that very innovative shared‐value creating ventures opted out of balance‐oriented, shared‐value creation strategies and embraced either financial or social‐value primacy strategies over time. The findings thus question the power of the shared‐value creation notion when viewed as balance orientation.

The paper presents a new concept, a new methodology, and interesting case studies.

“Business as usual” has come under heavy scrutiny. The financial crisis has caused many to question the basic premises of the current business system. In the following chapter, I will examine how organizations can cope with the current crisis by creating sustainable value. I propose that businesses learn from a newly emerging field called social entrepreneurship. The concept of social entrepreneurship is discussed and examined for its potential to support for sustainable value creation. A detailed case study of bracNet provides an example of shared-value creation. bracNet is a for-profit enterprise in Bangladesh aiming to close the digital divide globally and regionally. New business models and cross-sectoral partnerships allow bracNet to implement a social and financial value creation strategy. Key for success seems to be the shared ownership of bracNet, by BRAC, a nonprofit organization, and various for-profit entities (including VCs, industrial conglomerates, and hedge funds).

In this volume of Advances in Appreciative Inquiry, leading scholars from the fields of management, organization development, information technology, and education come together to chart new directions in Appreciative Inquiry theory and research as well as new intervention practices and opportunities for design in organizations. While diverse in topic and discipline, each of the following original chapters treats the reader to a view of Appreciative Inquiry's revolutionary way of approaching familiar questions of management, organization design, and sustainability.