No abstract

This chapter surveys methodologies employed in the study of management ideas. It emphasizes the field’s rich variety of data collection, measurement, and inferential strategies. To map this landscape, the authors group studies by the number of cases they examine, from large N event history analyses based on archival data to ethnographies of a single organization. They give particular attention to bibliometrics and discourse analysis because these methods grapple with the interpretive and communicative processes that are central to management ideas and because techniques for capturing and analysing text are currently being revolutionized across the social sciences.

No abstract

Denne artikkelen utforsker utbredelsen av tillitsbasert styring og ledelse (TBSL) og hvordan tillitsbasert styring og ledelse påvirker tillit mellom ledere og ansatte og organisasjoners resultater i offentlig sektor i Norge. Idéen om tillitsbasert styring og ledelse springer ut fra reformer i København kommune i 2012 og har siden spredd seg til den offentlige sektoren i Norge og Sverige. Tillitsbasert styring og ledelse blir av mange oppfattet som en innovasjon og forskjellig fra tradisjonell styring og kontroll. Det er nå kommet en del studier av tillitsbasert styring og ledelse i Danmark og Sverige, men det er så langt få empirisk baserte studier av tillitsbasert styring og ledelse utover case-studier. Analysen bruker spørreskjemadata fra 143 ledere og ansatte i offentlig virksomhet, og dette er den første analysen av utbredelsen av tillitsbasert styring og ledelse og dens virkninger i Norge. Resultatene viser at det har vært lite endring i tillitsbasert styring og ledelse de siste årene, og kommunene hadde mer tillitsbasert styring og ledelse enn statlige organisasjoner. Multivariate analyser med PLS-SEM viser at økt tillitsbasert styring og ledelse har en direkte positiv sammenheng med organisasjonsresultater så vel som en positiv indirekte sammenheng med organisasjonsresultater gjennom tillit, som forventet fra teorien.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to analyze reported good institutional responsible research and innovation (RRI) practices from an organizational and learning perspective to discuss the usefulness of RRI as a broad umbrella concept. Design/methodology/approach This study connects neo-institutional and translation accounts of diffusion to different modes of learning and discusses reported best practices from 12 reports, including in total 23 organizations in the research system worldwide, in light of this theoretical framework. This study categorizes the good practices identified in the reports and discusses how the nature of the practices influences the potential learning from them. The authors then apply the results from the discussion of this study to current policy developments on RRI. Findings The two most often mentioned good practices overall are organizational policies and the establishment of organizational units, but the type of good practices recommended differs across the various aspects of the RRI umbrella concept. This diversity within the RRI construct is a practical argument against the effectiveness of RRI as an umbrella concept. Originality/value This study is novel in the fact that the authors, building on Wæraas (2020), systematically relate types of good practice to neo-institutional theory and translation perspectives explicitly combined with learning approaches and apply this approach in the field of research organizations. The policy implications from the empirical and theoretical analyses are novel and timely in these early phases of the EU funding framework programme Horizon Europe and can also be relevant for the increasingly important umbrella concept of Open Science.

No abstract

In this Chapter, we give an overview of structural, cultural and interchange related barriers to implementing RRI in organisations, using a framework derived from neo-institutional theory. We discuss barriers related to different types of organisations, such as research funding and research performing organisations. Finally, we provide overall reflections on the role of barriers, and discuss how barriers to RRI intersect. Keywords Responsible research and innovation • Structural barriers • Cultural barriers, interchange related barriers • Implementation • Neo-institutional theory

In this Chapter, we give an overview of drivers furthering the implementation of RRI. We analyse drivers as structural, cultural and interchange related, using a framework derived from neo-institutional theory. We include a discussion based on types of organisation (such as research funding versus performing organisation) and we provide overall reflections the role of on drivers in implementing RRI. Keywords Drivers for RRI • Responsible research and innovation • Structural drivers, cultural drivers, interchange drivers • Implementation • Neo-institutional theory Organisational drivers are those that support the uptake of RRI in organisations and that alert organisational members to the merits of RRI. Each country report was set up to discuss drivers for RRI under the five keys and the four process dimensions. In this chapter we discuss the structural, cultural and interchange drivers, focusing on the following questions: 1. What are the drivers across the RRI keys and dimensions? 2. What is the interplay between drivers that are structural, cultural and interchange related? 3. How do drivers relate to research funding and research performing organisations respectively, and what are the differences? 4. How do drivers relate to small and large organisations? 5. How do drivers relate to different fields of research and funding? 6. How do drivers and barriers relate to groupings of countries? 7. From an organisational perspective, does use of RRI as a phrase make a difference, and how?