Managing workplace neurodiversity for positive outcomes: a mapping review and research agenda

PurposeArchival research is a much under-rated and under-utilized method of research in management studies. Yet multi-disciplinary undertakings being observed in recent times, such as in knowledge management (KM) systems, business history and social network studies, among others, indicate that there is a lot of potential to be explored. The purpose of this paper is to highlight this point and make a case for its inclusion in the researcher’s toolkit in the future.Design/methodology/approachThe authors follow a two-stage method here: the first stage being an improvised process to benchmark articles for this review; while the second stage involves content analysis and synthesis of the same.FindingsThe authors have dealt with the intricacies of the archival research methodology by minutely examining the fieldwork steps, proxies generation, other related processes of triangulation, etc. With the discussion on “multi-disciplinary undertakings,” the authors offer not only a selective bibliography of works that have effectively harvested this family of methods, but also critique the nuances involved. Finally, coming into more contemporary concerns and developments, the authors undertake an in-depth look at technological applications in the domain of KM, in case study mode. Methodological richness leads to substantive granularity. As such, the authors argue that archival methods contribute to the robustness, contextuality and holism of any research endeavor, more so in the study of business and organizations.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper is based on the literature review.Practical implicationsThis paper makes a case for archival method’s contribution toward the robustness, contextuality and holism of any research endeavor, more so in the study of business and organizations.Originality/valueThis paper re-positions the method of archival research as a viable and sophisticated tool for researchers to employ effectively in singular or mixed method studies.

The popular and professional press is filled with discussions of major changes on the organizational landscape, including organizational design experiments at entrepreneurial firms as well as at major corporations, the slashing of corporate staffs, the downsizing, delayering and revitalization of firms, the emerging electronic organization, mergers and acquisitions, failures of high reliability organizations, and time-based competition. Each of these issues has been associated with the redesign of organizations, yet these redesigns seem far removed from academic research, and they do not typically utilize the academic body of knowledge. Although the field has progressed enormously in new methods and insights during a century of research, it seems to us that organization studies have been a source of recurrent disappointment for practitioners and academics alike (Bedian 1989; Cummings 1983; Luthans 1986; Slocum 1984). For example, Miner (1984) analyzed 32 established organizational science theories and concluded that with the exception of theories of motivation there is no relationship between usefulness and validity. Is the field of organization studies irrelevant? Organizations have become the dominant institution on the social landscape. Yet the body of knowledge published in academic journals has practically no audience in business or government. Unlike a field such as economics, research on organizations has not typically focused on problems relevant to business and government organizations, and the real world of organizations has not drawn on the work undertaken by organizational scientists. From colleagues within our field and in allied disciplines, we hear complaints that manuscripts espousing radical ideas, or topics outside the mainstream, are difficult to publish. Reviewers for established journals seem to value papers whose theses are anchored in established theories or that use "legitimate" methods, thus implicitly creating a publication barrier for research that falls outside mainstream topics or methods. Moreover, we observe that scholars with interests in organizations span many disciplines and fields of inquiry such as anthropology, economics, history, information science, communication theory, artificial intelligence, systems theory, psychology, sociology, political science, policy sciences, as well as organization behavior, strategic management and organization theory. We sense that a new discipline of organization science is evolving and we envision that a new journal can become a forum for a discipline defined more broadly. The purpose of this essay is to discuss these issues and the need for reorienting research away from incremental, footnote-on-footnote research as the norm for the field. Although current research approches have made solid contributions, they do not

Introduction The information systems (IS) field has historically limited itself to design, use and implementation of information technology (IT) in organizations. Consequently, it is no surprise that IS field has become constrained by this straitjacket since its inception. Dickson (1981, p. 20) acknowledges that much of [management information systems] MIS research that has been performed has been done in an organizational setting. Markus (1999) was first to highlight tendency of field to be constrained by its roots in organizational science. The IS field, she warns, is at a crossroads and in order to avoid possible extinction, needs to go beyond its traditional areas of study by revisiting its mission and its customers. Markus notes that core concerns of IS field are no longer limited to needs of IS department and organization that it serves. IT is so prevalent today that its benefits and dangers are felt beyond organizational or disciplinary boundaries. Galliers (2003) emphasizes need for a transdisciplinary approach to IS, one that is neither limited to locus of organization nor to parochial needs of IS field itself. For instance, Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action at World Summit on Information Society, held in Geneva in 2003, asserts that benefits of IT are global and are no longer limited to organizational concerns. Conversely, repercussions of failures of IS are equally far-reaching. For example, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and Intelligence Community within U.S. government blame, among other reasons, ineffective IS for not being able to avert tragedy of September 11, 2001 (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, 2004). The repercussions of this IS failure is felt beyond intelligence community. This paper contends that IS field needs to widen its focus beyond its traditional foundations in organization studies (OS) by theorizing about its core concern--information technology (IT). Based on a philosophy of technology and a philosophy of information, a framework that embraces societal concerns in studying IT is proposed. Escaping Organizational Straightjacket The close relationship between IS and organizational studies (OS) is engendered by OS background of many IS authors. Consequently, IS research is performed hand-inhand with OS research, even though, epistemologically, they are different (Orlikowski & Barley, 2001). Not only is field of IS epistemologically different from OS, it is ontologically different from OS. The arguments presented by Orlikowski and Barley (2001) to support epistemological difference between IS and OS research also support ontological differences between two fields. In their opinion, because IS studies development of systems and their consequences, and provides practical solutions to real-life problems, agenda of IS research closely resembles agenda of architecture and other design sciences rather than of OS research. OS is closer to traditional science because it provides parsimonious explanations to broad classes of organizational phenomena. As a result, OS discovers generalities, sets down general principles and identifies causal relationships. Therefore, subject matter (ontology) studied in IS is very different from subject matter studied in OS. A field that is ontologically and epistemologically different from another cannot hope to flourish if it remains within constraints of latter. That is why remaining with OS approaches places IS field in an straightjacket. Both epistemological and ontological differences between IS and OS support need for a fresh look at how IT should be studied. Additionally, in limited context of organization, OS may study the best way of managing people in order to improve productivity, whereas IS studies how technology can be designed and implemented to improve organizational productivity. …

PurposePositive experiences with working from home (WFH) during the Corona pandemic (COVID-19) have motivated many employees to continue WFH after the pandemic. However, factors influencing employees' WFH intentions against the backdrop of experiences during pandemic-induced enforced working from home (EWFH) are heterogeneous. This study investigates factors linked to information technology (IT) professionals' WFH intentions.Design/methodology/approachThis mixed-methods study with 92 IT professionals examines the effects of seven predictors for IT professionals' WFH intentions. The predictors are categorized according to the trichotomy of (1) characteristics of the worker, (2) characteristics of the workspace and (3) the work context. Structural equation modeling is used to analyze the quantitative survey data. In addition, IT professionals' responses to six open questions in which they reflect on past experiences and envision future work are examined.FindingsQuantitative results suggest that characteristics of the worker, such as segmentation preference, are influencing WFH intentions stronger than characteristics of the workspace or the work context. Furthermore, perceived productivity during EWFH and gender significantly predict WFH intentions. Contextualizing these quantitative insights, the qualitative data provides a rich yet heterogeneous list of factors why IT professionals prefer (not) to work from home.Practical implicationsReasons influencing WFH intentions vary due to individual preferences and constraints. Therefore, a differentiated organizational approach is recommended for designing future work arrangements. In addition, the findings suggest that team contracts to formalize working patterns, e.g. to agree on the needed number of physical meetings, can be helpful levers to reduce the complexity of future work that is most likely a mix of WFH and office arrangements.Originality/valueThis study extends literature reflecting on COVID-19-induced changes, specifically the emerging debate about why employees want to continue WFH. It is crucial for researchers and practitioners to understand which factors influence IT professionals' WFH intentions and how they impact the design and implementation of future hybrid work arrangements.

Social and economic activities, like religion, entertainment, education, research, and the production of other goods and services, are carried on by different types of organizations, for example, corporations, proprietorships, partnerships, mutuals and nonprofits. There is competition among organizational forms for survival. The form of organization that survives in an activity is the one that delivers the product demanded by customers at the lowest price while covering costs. The characteristics of residual claims are important both in distinguishing organizations from one another and in explaining the survival of organizational forms in specific activities. This paper develops a set of propositions that explaim the special features of the residual claims of different organizational forms as efficient approaches to controlling agency problems. © M. C. Jensen and E. F. Fama, 1983 Michael C. Jensen, Foundations of Organizational Strategy Chapter 6, Harvard University Press, 1998. Journal of Law & Economics, Vol XXVI (June 1983) This document is available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) Electronic Library at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/paper.taf?ABSTRACT_ID=94032 AGENCY PROBLEMS AND RESIDUAL CLAIMS

The objective of this study was to explore the research carried out and the existing scientific information on remote work and its influence on the work stress of workers in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The specific objectives were as follows: to determine the factors of remote work that influence the work stress of workers in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and to analyze the findings obtained in the study (which was achieved by referring to the influence of remote work and the labor stress of the workers in the same context). The research was of a documentary type with a bibliographic design, and was conducted as a systematic review. The articles indexed in the Scopus database were reviewed through the use of the following descriptors and search limits: remote work, work stress, pandemic, as well as those studies published between 1 January 2020 and 27 February 2023. Through this process, 280 publications were obtained. The following inclusion criteria were applied: original articles that addressed the subject in English and/or Spanish, and which were open access. This left a sample of 17 publications, and these are presented via a PRISMA diagram. The main factors of remote work that influenced work stress were the organizational climate, job satisfaction, family–work conflict, social isolation, the use of digital platforms, work autonomy, and changes in the workplace.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to evaluate the contributions of the so-called “Historic Turn” in Organization Studies through the attempt by Cummings et al. (2016) to offer a new and alternative approach to teaching and researching the history of management ideas. A New History of Management is intended to be a provocation rather than a practical plan, and by their own admission, Cummings et al. (2016) prefer controversy to detailed analysis.Design/methodology/approachThis paper offers a comment and reinterpretation of a single contribution to highlight deficiencies which are symptomatic of the post-modernist research agenda around the “Historic Turn” in Organization Studies. The argument develops through a critical reading of Cummings et al. (2016) to determine whether theirs is a thoughtful and serious piece of work.FindingsCummings et al. (2016) invite us to revise and re-evaluate the genesis of management ideas available across textbooks. This by questioning some of the beliefs regarding the origins of management thought within textbooks aimed at both general management and the history of management thought. The premise of Cummings and colleagues is a timely and welcomed suggestion. So is their attempt to broaden the debate to alternative epistemological positions. They can potentially help to improve the emergence of conceptual and theoretical understandings of the history of managers’, business and management thought. Although far from being exhaustive, the paper points to the large number of inconsistencies and poor historiography in Cummings et al. (2016). This is in line with other contributions to the so-called “Historic Turn” in Organization Studies. The central argument presented by this paper is the myopic and technically poor approach of the “Historic Turn”. It is the case that Cummings et al. (2016) fail in their attempt to offer an alternative to established textbooks or explain the development of different approaches to construct systematic studies that, over time, consider the evolution of management, managers and those who have conceptualized their performance.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper does not present new (archival) historical evidence.Originality/valueThe central contribution/ambition of this paper is to incentivize an advance of the current understanding of the origins and evolution of systematic thinking on management, managers and business organizations. The ambition of this paper is in line with Cummings et al. (2016) aim to incentivize research into how textbooks address the origins of management and management thought. Textbooks in both general management and the history of management thought, and the story told in them are important tools that speak directly to the ability of historical research to help advance the different disciplines that form general studies in business and management.

Film festival research from an organizational studies perspective

The purpose of this paper is to argue for an ontological investigation into very nature of organizations and their leadership, in tradition of Heidegger's hermeneutic phenomenology.1 Organizations in general, and corporations in particular, play an ever-more prominent role in contemporary society and, given their pervasive influence in all spheres of life, it seems surprising that this has not led to a vibrant ontological inquiry into what they are in their very nature. In choosing a guide for engaging in such an ontological inquiry, Heidegger's hermeneutic phenomenology seems promising, as he made most prominent contribution to ontological project in twentieth century - a time that coincides not only with rise of corporations, but also with corporatization of many other aspects of contemporary society.2 Real progress in any science takes place when fundamental assumptions of very nature of entities to be researched are acknowledged as untenable, and are revised in a more or less radical manner.3 In such instances - as Michael Inwood4 points out, with reference to Heidegger5 - inquiry, strictly speaking, is no longer scientific but philosophical - or, more precisely, ontological. Ontology is defined as the branch of metaphysics dealing with nature of being,s and is also understood to be the 'study of beings as such,' but it can be a 'regional' ontology, concerned with being or nature of e.g. numbers, space, ora work of literature.7 In this essay, I want to submit phenomenon and, by implication, field of organizational studies to such an ontological investigation, with goal of making such a contribution. An ontological investigation is itself prescientific and serves to build a foundation for establishing and developing appropriate theory-generating and scientific approaches, and, consequently, research agendas and research methodologies. Just like any other academic discipline, organizational sciences and studies necessarily rest on assumptions about very nature of entity with which they are concerned, namely, organization - whether these assumptions are specifically articulated or not.8 As Heidegger himself points out, science and ontology are, therefore, inherently inseparable.1* Any science presupposes an understanding of very nature of entity that is being researched, and can only research and understand that which is inherently permissible in its way to ascertain entities. 10If fundamental ontological assumptions of very nature of organization as entity that organizational studies is concerned with turn out to be untenable, all hard work built on these assumptions would turn out to be of limited validity, or even to be misleading. Concerns about an Ontology for Organizational Studies Thomas C. Powell has made a foundational contribution to academic field of strategic management - and, by implication, organizational studies - by explicitly confronting these fields of investigation with philosophical questioning and inquiry.12 His arguments against an ontological discourse are not novel from a philosophical perspective. They deserve their prominence in following argument, however, as they are a rare occurrence in field of strategic management, in two ways. First, they articulate implicit, but until then largely unarticulated, empiricist and pragmatist philosophical foundation of vast majority of prominent scholarly work in these academic disciplines, especially in Englishspeaking world. Second, by doing so, Powell's papers provide opportunity to engage with this philosophical bias and expose it to further scrutiny and development where this is clearly relevant, even according to Powell himself.11 Unlike many other academic fields - for example, political science or law - which were generated by philosophical insight and are guided by an ongoing, more or less vibrant philosophical discourse, academic fields of strategic and organizational management and organizational studies have, for most part, started out as a result of pragmatic need to give guidance to management of a relatively young phenomenon - namely, modern organization in general, and corporation in particular. …

For the 3.5 million workers with CHD, daily self-care (i.e., treatment adherence, symptom monitoring and symptom management) must take place within the context of work. Objective: To describe the self-care practices of aging workers (>age 50 years) with CHD and examine the relationship of work organization (work processes and organizational practices), job-level factors and self-care. Methods: In this mixed methods study, 125 working adults with CHD completed valid and reliable instruments about organizational and job-related factors (job stress, job control, and work-life balance (WLB)), individual-level factors (mood, physical functioning) and self-care. A purposively selected subsample (n=40) participated in interviews about self-care within the context of work. Multiple regression examined the determinants of self-care. Then, qualitative data were analyzed using thematic content analysis, followed by data integration. Results: In this sample (69% Male, 85% White; mean age 59±5 years), 49% reported a recent myocardial infarction, 67% were overweight/obese and 60% had depressive symptoms. Overall, 68% reported adequate self-care (Self-Care Heart Disease Index mean 76±14) with significant differences in self-care by age, ethnicity and job type. There were significant interaction effects of job control and job type on self-care ( F 2.097, p =.038); and WLB and job type on self-care ( F 2.53, p =.024). Narrative accounts of self-care revealed that most struggled with diet and exercise due to job demands. These older workers with CHD reported competing WLB issues (e.g., as caregivers to adults vs. own health) for which they felt ill-equipped to manage. Those with poor self-care measured quantitatively reported feeling stressed and fatigued which they attributed to their job. Few interpreted the symptoms as related to CHD. Workers were selective in whom they discussed their CHD, self-care needs and daily symptoms, articulated as fear of discrimination and quantified as workplace injustice (mean 23±6). Conclusions: Self-care is challenging for many older workers with CHD and influenced by multi-dimensional factors. In this population with CHD, WLB encompasses balancing self-care with job and daily life responsibilities.

John Dunning’s Eclectic Model, introduced in 1976 (Dunning, 1977) and refined by him several times since then (1988, 1993), is a key contribution to the separation of international business studies (IBS) from international economics and trade theory and to the development of global strategy. Dunning’s proposed model was preceded by Stephen Hymer’s (1960) application of industrial organization economics to the study of international trade and investment, and Ray Vernon’s (1966) definition of an international product lifecycle, both critical steps for IBS away from macro-economic trade theory. He was contemporaneous with the work of McManus (1972) and Buckley and Casson (1976) that introduced Coasian economics to the study of international markets and multinational firms. He was also working at the same time that Stopford and Wells (1971) began the work that led to much of the modeling of global industries at Harvard University. These and related works were important to the development of IBS. However, these other models tended to take a narrowly defined perspective and therefore to examine only a part of the rapidly expanding phenomenon of the global firm. They also tended toward industry-level analysis. Dunning’s Eclectic Model, however, by its inclusive nature, opened up the study of multinational firms to broader influences from organizational studies and business strategy. Its strong grounding in economic theory provided a basis for further development and for the integration of strategic models based on similar theories, while its focus on firm-level characteristics provided opportunities to incorporate new ideas from organizational studies into the study of international strategy. For this reason, I see it as the key theoretical model in the process of turning IBS from a mix of macro-level theoretical approaches to national differences and case-based analysis of industry effects into theoretically grounded studies of business organizations functioning in extra-national markets. While Dunning himself makes the point that the Eclectic Model is aimed at the study of multinational firms (1988), not at evaluating individual firm decisions, it does provide a framework for both descriptive and normative studies of individual firms. This shift in emphasis brought much new insight to the study of international business and added considerable richness to developing theory in strategic management and other business disciplines. It has also led to the incorporation of IBS into most business disciplines and a concomitant decline in the study of international business as a separate area for scholarly endeavor – a sometimes disconcerting example of the law of unintended effects.

Building on emerging research on ‘gay-friendly’ organizations, this article examines if and how work contexts understood and experienced as ‘gay-friendly’ can be characterized as exhibiting a serious breakdown in heteronormativity. Taking the performing arts as a research setting, one that is often stereotyped as ‘gay-friendly’, and drawing on in-depth interview data with 20 gay male performers in the UK, this article examines how everyday activities and encounters involving drama school educators, casters and peers are shaped by heteronormative standards of gay male sexuality. Adopting a queer theory perspective and connecting with an emergent queer theory literature in organization studies, one concern articulated in this article is that heteronormative constructions of gay male sexualities constrain participants’ access to work; suggesting limits to the abilities and roles gay men possess and are able to play. Another concern is that when gay male sexualities become normalized in performing work contexts, they reinforce organizational heteronormativity and the heterosexual/homosexual binary upon which it relies. This study contributes towards theorizing the heteronormative dynamics of ‘gay-friendly’ places of work, arguing that gay male sexualities are performatively instituted according to localized heteronormativities which reinforce contextually contingent, restrictive heteronormative standards of gay male sexuality which performers are encouraged to embody and perform both professionally and personally.

Treatment for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in South Asia

This Handbookbrings together pioneering, original work on organisational entrepreneurship. It provides a broad coverage and rich agenda for future research and teaching on the entrepreneurship-organisation relationship.Organizational entrepreneurship represents an interdisciplinary field of research that relates organisation, entrepreneurship and innovation studies in new ways. This Handbookestablishes the scope of this interdisciplinary domain, challenges our perception of relationships between organization(s) and entrepreneurship, and asks new questions central to our capacity to describe, analyze and understand organizational entrepreneurship.Providing a broad and rich set of examples of interdisciplinary research and bridging the fields of strategic management, organization studies, entrepreneurship, innovation, art and aesthetics, this important compendium will prove invaluable to graduate students and scholars in these fields.

Although research involving biospecimens is essential in advancing cancer research, minorities, especially African-Americans, are underrepresented in such research. We conducted a mixed-method (qualitative focus groups among African-Americans and quantitative cross-sectional surveys) study on factors associated with biospecimen knowledge and donation intent in the medically underserved urban communities in Southeast and Southwest Washington, DC. Focus groups were conducted among 41 African-Americans and survey data was available from 302 community residents of different races/ethnicities using convenience sampling. We used logistic regression to model the association between biospecimen knowledge and donation intent with selected sociodemographic variables using survey data. Only 47% of the participants had knowledge of the different types of biospecimens. In multivariate logistic regression models, male gender, African-American race, and low education levels were significantly associated with lower knowledge about biospecimens. Compared to Whites (79%), fewer African-Americans (39%) and Hispanics (57%) had knowledge of biospecimens but the difference was significant for African-Americans only. Positive intent to donate biospecimens for research was observed among 36% of the survey respondents. After multivariate adjustment, only biospecimen knowledge was associated with donation intent (odds ratio = 1.91, 95% confidence interval 1.12, 3.27). Contrary to popular opinion, "mistrust of the medical community" was not the most commonly reported barrier for biospecimen donation among African-Americans. "Not knowing how biospecimens will be used" and "lack of knowledge of biospecimens" were the most common barriers. Our study highlights the importance of education on biospecimens among community residents to increase minority participation in biospecimen research.