This conceptual paper traces the origins and progress of Open Science and proposes its generative coupling to Open Innovation in the contemporary socio-political context; where universities are re-imaging their civic missions in the face of anti-establishment populist politics. This setting is one of changing knowledge production regimes and institutional pressures that create contradictions identifiable through the prism of the series of scientific norms conceptualised by Robert K. Merton. This paper privileges a sociological perspective to proffer scientific knowledge production as a societally embedded process, which is well illustrated by scholarship in the Science and Technology Studies (STS) and Science in Society fields. In doing so, it identifies the co-evolution, co-existence and co-production of Open Science with Open Innovation; and notes how it shares the attributes of other recent diagnoses of changing knowledge production regimes; in particular Mode 2, postnormal science and the Quadruple Helix. It also argues that Open Science can be coupled with Open Innovation to catalyse positive societal change, but that the rise of a populist post-truth era opposed to objectivity, expertise and technocratic political solutions gives the demand for openness and participation a different complexion. Merton's norms provide a useful lens to observe recent shifts in the delivery of science, knowledge and innovation in society towards more inclusive, ethical and sustainable outcomes; and expose the limited reflection on how the appropriation and exploitation of open scientific knowledge encounters industrial R&D and Open Innovation.
An important contribution to our understanding of management transformation in post-socialist societies has been made by new institutionalism. The strength of this approach derives from its critique of normative models based on neo-classical economics, which has tended towards institutional and management voluntarism. It has been able to grasp complexity in societies undergoing structural change, stressing that path dependence in property, political and social structures helps to define business organization. The limitation of new institutionalism lies in its tendency to overstate institutional stasis, failing to treat (national) institutions as contradictory and transient (localized) expressions of global processes. Based on extensive qualitative data, our article extends the understanding of path-dependence. Rather than dispensing with key insights of new institutionalism, we bridge the notion of path dependence with the contradictory processes of institutional reshaping and adaptation. Using an adapted version of the `system, society and dominance' (SSD) model, we demonstrate that the nature of Russia's insertion into the global market has had a substantial impact on firm ownership and strategies, while simultaneously limiting reforms to management structures and work organization.
Why talk about the global economic crisis today? The topic no longer seems as relevant or fresh as it did two years ago when we issued the call for papers. At that time, the events following the implosion of Lehman Brothers in 2008 seemed to be at the centre of everyday and media discourse: we heard it on the radio, saw it on television, read it in the printed media and spoke about it in public and private places. Our imaginaries and experiences seemed to be saturated by the global economic crisis. The global economic crisis informed or structured discussions about political interventions, bailouts, quantitative easing, the nationalization of financial institutions, and austerity programmes. The emergence of the Indignados in Spain, the public sector workers' protests in Greece, the London Riots, the Occupy Movement, the Arab Spring and the mass demonstrations in Russia and Turkey were often read through the prism of, or shared a common destiny with, the unfolding crisis.Does the decentring of the global economic crisis from public and media attention imply that the crisis is over, or should we understand both the existence and the effects of subsequent events and developments as ongoing expressions of the crisis? These events and developments have included a shift in the dominant discourse from 'crisis' to
Labour market developments in post-Soviet Russia have presented liberal economists with an apparent paradox: the absence of mass compulsory redundancies in the face of substantial collapse in output. The seemingly irrational `labour hoarding' in Russian enterprises has been interpreted as either influenced by workers choosing a wage cut in exchange for job security, or enterprises resisting redundancies in order to obtain state funding, or as a result of rent-seeking firm behaviour. However, systematic research on employment decision-making in industrial enterprises presents another picture. By combining documentary sources with interviews conducted in six industrial enterprises in Russia, this article will suggest that the disproportionate correlation between employment and production decline lies in the fact that the acute technological and structural degradation of the post-Soviet economy has resulted in enterprise adjustment being made through demand for labour.
The 'transition' from state socialism in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, and the substantial economic reforms in China, are two of the most significant economic and social processes in recent history. However, despite a growing literature dealing with management in post-socialist societies, there have been few attempts to establish a paradigmatic overview of the underlying causes and drivers of the transformation processes. In this paper we lay out a framework for understanding the emerging dynamics of management and organization in post-socialist societies. In doing so, we employ three related levels of analysis relating to: 1) the broader political economy in which nations and companies are located within the global hierarchy; 2) the different national level institutions that give form to the nature of management restructuring; and 3) the social relations of production at the level of the workplace, which determine the forms of labour management. Central to our argument is the view that the emerging forms of management, while differing according to the distinct terms and conditions under which they are integrated into the world economy and the institutional means by which they meet the challenges and opportunities offered by the world market, are tending towards the subordination of the work systems to the neoliberal form of world capitalism. In particular, this entails the establishment of the most benign environment possible for the expansion of capital, entailing the augmentation of managerial prerogative and 'low-road' employment practices.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.