In this inductive, qualitative study, we observe how Uber, a company often hailed as being the poster-child of the sharing economy facilitated through a digital platform may also at times represent and reinforce postcapitalist hyper-exploitation. Drawing on the motivations and lived experiences of 31 Uber drivers in Toronto, Canada, we provide insights into three groups of Uber drivers: (1) those that are driving part-time to earn extra money in conjunction with studying or doing other jobs, (2) those that are unemployed and for whom driving for Uber is the only source of income, and (3) professional drivers, who are trying to keep pace with the durable digital landscape and competitive marketplace. We emphasize the ways in which each driver group simultaneously acknowledges and rejects their own precarious employment by distancing techniques such as minimizing the risks and accentuating the advantages of the driver role. We relate these findings to a broader discussion about how driving for Uber fuels the traditional capitalist narrative that working hard and having a dream will lead to advancement, security and success. We conclude by discussing other alternative economies within the sharing economy.

This article surfaces some of the emotional encounters that may be experienced while trying to gain access and secure informants in qualitative research. Using the children’s game of hopscotch as a metaphor, we develop a dynamic, nonlinear process model of gaining access yielding four elements: study formulation with plans to move forward, identifying potential informants, contacting informants, and interacting with informants during data collection. Underlying each element of the process is the potential for researchers to re-strategize their approach or exit the study. Autobiographical stories about gaining access for our PhD dissertation research are used to flesh out each element of the process, including the challenges we experienced with each element and how we addressed them. We conclude by acknowledging limitations to our study and suggest future and continued areas of research.

For many years, the Pygmalion effect has served as a colourful, conceptual reminder of the power of supervisory expectations in enhancing subordinate performance. However, regardless of the myriad of studies that have sought to replicate this effect and identify its parameters, little attention has actually been paid to the processes underlying this phenomenon. Rather, the existing model implies that the subordinate is an 'always-willing', yet somewhat 'passive' recipient of Pygmalion-oriented leader efforts. Our theoretical paper unpacks the role of subordinate perceptions of the leader and considers how it can influence receptiveness to the leader's Pygmalion-oriented efforts. By revisiting and building upon the original Pygmalion model, we attempt to enrich our understanding of this phenomenon, as well as to offer insight into why not all Pygmalion leader efforts are equally successful.

How might the current discourse surrounding good research be re-imagined and reconstituted? We argue that the current criteria and expectations surrounding what constitute good research may actually be restrictive to the potential that lies within qualitative research. The aim of this special issue (SI) is, therefore, to challenge the performative work of doing traditionally accepted good research and offer alternatives. We are pleased to present five contributions that problematize the way in which good qualitative research is traditionally accepted and legitimated within the sphere of doing and publishing organizational research. These five articles draw on a variety of methodological approaches and creatively invoke alternative ways that help us think about how good research can be (re)imagined. Our hope is that this SI creates a space for an ongoing discussion about the alternative ways in which qualitative methods and methodologies can be imagined, evaluated and accepted in the broad research community.

The British medieval population from Wharram Percy, England, has a greater prevalence of isthmic spondylolysis (11.9% of skeletons, 8.5% at the L5 level) than in modern populations (3%–6%). This may in part be due to differences in activity patterns between groups. However, Ward and Latimer (Spine 30 [2005] 1808–1814) proposed that the likelihood of developing and maintaining spondylolytic defects is also influenced by a lack of sufficient increase in mediolateral separation between articular processes in the lowest lumbar segments, given the human lumbar lordosis. Here, we demonstrate that spondylolytic individuals from Wharram Percy tend to have a less pronounced difference between mediolateral facet joint spacing of adjacent segments in the lowest lumbar region than do unaffected individuals, as seen in modern clinical and skeletal populations. These comparisons suggest that regardless of lifestyle, insufficient mediolateral increase in facet spacing predisposes people to spondylolytic defects, and so interfacet spacing patterns may have predictive utility in a clinical context. We also compare the Wharram Percy sample to a modern sample from the Hamann Todd collection with a typically modern prevalence rate. Data do not support the hypothesis that the Wharram Percy individuals had a less pronounced interfacet increase than the Hamann Todd, although they do have narrower lumbar facet spacing at the lowest three levels. Further investigation of anatomical variation underlying population‐specific prevalence rates needs to be conducted. Am J Phys Anthropol 2010. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.