This paper aims to examine a range of unintended consequences in Irish society both historical and present-day, with a view of presenting the structure of society as a dynamic…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to examine a range of unintended consequences in Irish society both historical and present-day, with a view of presenting the structure of society as a dynamic system with both homeostatic or autopoietic aspects.
Design/methodology/approach
The approach taken in this work is in the examination of the concept of institutionalisation and whether the public perception of life in Ireland can be compared between two widely separated periods, in this case, 1800s and 2000s, and then taking one example from this model and determining the validity of single case isolation: autism units in mainstream primary schools.
Findings
Even initiatives in society for the “common good” appear to have unforeseen consequences which are negative. Irish society has the appearance of a homeostatic system but on closer examination is autopoietic. The term “better” is misplaced when comparing two time frames, and argument can be made to agree or disagree.
Research limitations/implications
There are serious limitations in using historical data in the first place, but secondarily problematic when correlating with the equivalent modern data, for example, how questions are termed and answers given, how data are collected and validated are different across different time frames. Even when one finds comparable data, it is difficult to validate and selection does itself create a bias.
Originality/value
The value of this work is to evaluate the commonplace distinction policymakers make when comparing two periods in time; for the lay person, this is a means to say whether modern Irish society could be said to be “better” than that in the nineteenth century.
Details
Keywords
Ricardo Martins, Janaina Siegler, Jonathan Simões Freitas, Laysse Fernanda Macêdo dos Santos, Marina Bastos Carvalhais Barroso and Roberta de Cássia Macedo
This paper aims to explain and demonstrate how the Repertory Grid Technique (RGT) and Honey’s Content Analysis (HCA) can make new contributions to the field of Operations and…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to explain and demonstrate how the Repertory Grid Technique (RGT) and Honey’s Content Analysis (HCA) can make new contributions to the field of Operations and Supply Chain Management (OSCM). The proposition involves integrating these complementary analyses to fortify the rigor of qualitative research and establish robust data analysis protocols to identify the main attributes of interviewees regarding a phenomenon while understanding in their perspective how these attributes impact the desired analysis outcome.
Design/methodology/approach
This study uses examples with rich empirical data from 40 interviewees across two organizations. The examples use a protocol that allows the grouping of meanings from different knowledgeable individuals and capturing relevant constructs related to an outcome.
Findings
The combination of RGT and HCA permits researchers to effectively identify and analyze the constructs individuals and groups utilize to comprehend the subject matter under investigation. Consequently, these techniques present a structured means to conduct grounded theory investigations and interpretive research, thereby enabling the iterative development of the preliminary conceptual models necessary for OSCM field advancement.
Originality/value
We present two examples in which the protocol is applied to the field of OSCM. These examples illustrate that the techniques provide valuable opportunities for OSCM research, particularly for addressing the limitations related to sample size. Ultimately, RGT and HCA complement quantitative methodologies by uncovering nuanced variations and micro-foundations within firm- and network-level phenomena, offering insights essential for advancing our understanding of OSCM dynamics in specific contexts.
Details
Keywords
Leah Gillooly, Christos Anagnostopoulos and Simon Chadwick
The purpose of this paper is to thematically categorise sports sponsorship-linked Twitter content and, by drawing on uses & gratifications theory, to map the extent to which these…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to thematically categorise sports sponsorship-linked Twitter content and, by drawing on uses & gratifications theory, to map the extent to which these categories cohere with known user motivations for consuming social media.
Design/methodology/approach
Qualitative content analysis of a sample of 1,502 tweets by London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games sponsors posted between January 2011 and September 2012 was used to develop the typology of sponsorship-linked Twitter content.
Findings
From the data, a typology is developed, comprising 17 categories grouped under four main types: informing, entertaining, rewarding and interacting. The majority of sponsor tweets (68 per cent) fell into the informing type, with 17 per cent categorised as interacting. While few (2 per cent) tweets were categorised as entertaining, the link to the sponsored event implies a degree of entertaining content even in ostensibly informative, rewarding or interactional sponsorship-linked tweets. Therefore, the typology categories highlight Twitter content produced by sponsors which engages customers, fostering dialogue alongside providing informative and entertaining content.
Practical implications
The typology can inform practitioners’ future sports sponsorship activation planning decisions and can also aid rights holders in tailoring appropriate sponsorship opportunities to potential sponsors, based on an appreciation of the nature of content sought by brand followers.
Originality/value
The typology extends existing understanding of the use of social media within sponsorship activation campaigns by thematically categorising content and mapping this against known user motivations for consuming brand-related social media content.