This article provides a critical review of scientific, peer reviewed, articles on Facebook between 2006 and 2012. The review shows that while there are yet numerous articles on various aspects of the social network site, there are still many gaps to be filled. Also, due to the limited scope of many articles (in sample sizes as well as in the number of countries included in the studies) and frequent changes to Facebook’s design and features, it is not only necessary to revisit many of these articles but also to integrate their research findings. The review ends with a critical discussion and directions for future research.
While curricular assessments can give insight as to the extent sustainability is integrated into higher education study programs, issues remain regarding how assessments are conducted. Previous research has identified and compared various sustainability assessment tools for higher education, but there is a gap in literature studying issues arising from measurement. This paper highlights the need for discussions on this topic by exploring validity issues arising from a case study and discusses the potential of utilizing a supplementary course file during curricular assessments. To achieve this objective, a KU Leuven Faculty of Economics and Business program has been assessed using two different approaches, namely 1) a scan of a European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) file and 2) an instructor self-assessment via a supplementary course file. Based on this research, these two approaches to curricular assessment yield substantially different results, which gives rise to the need to further consider the validity of such assessments. While utilizing an instructor self-assessment (e.g., a supplementary course file) during assessments can help overcome some potential shortcomings and biases of ECTS file scans, both approaches are flawed in assessing true sustainability integration into a program. The varying conceptualizations of sustainability and the lack of uniformly adopted assessment approaches has the potential to create validity issues with the assessment of sustainability in higher education. Acknowledging sustainable development as a contested concept, and developing a faculty-specific conceptualization, can help in approaching assessments in a meaningful way.
PurposeThis study analyzes which worldviews on the interrelatedness of the economic, environmental and social systems are adopted in the literature on responsible management education (RME) and explores how this affects the way business schools educate future responsible managers.Design/methodology/approachThe sustainability-focused relational worldviews of Kurucz et al. (2014) were used to perform a content analysis on 100 articles from the field of RME to understand which worldviews are adopted and to distill potential implications of the prevalence of such worldviews in the RME field.FindingsIn the sample, the most adopted view was the intertwined view that imagines a balance between the economic, environmental, and social system (61% of the articles). The subsuming worldview (highlighting the business case for sustainability) accounted for 8% of articles in the sample. The embedded worldview (a new paradigm that respects the limitations of the environmental and social systems) accounted for 31% of the articles in the sample. The disparate view (representing classic economic views of discrete systems) was not adopted, indicating a rather uniform belief that RME is about moving management education away from this view. Examining the evolution of views over the last 20 years, it can be observed that the embedded view is growing in popularity. The continuing prevalence of the ambiguous and malleable intertwined view in the RME literature could explain why so many RME initiatives have been taken in the last two decades, while simultaneously critics remain vocal that business schools are not preparing future managers to engage with ethics, responsibility, and sustainability (ERS).Originality/valueWhile sustainability-focused relational worldviews have been introduced in the RME literature, this study provides empirical evidence of the prevalence of such worldviews in the literature, allowing an exploration of the implications for the field. The presence of multiple — and at times competing — worldviews adds tension to the field of RME. Seen on the trajectory of increasingly progressive worldviews, the intertwined view is not limited by economic rationalism (like the subsuming view) but also stops short of requiring a full paradigm shift (like the embedded view).
During the last decade, the public healthcare sector has had to deal with increased competition, a growing influence of patient associations, and a necessity to deliver health services more efficiently and effectively. Despite recognising the patient participant’s role as a critical stakeholder in value creation, there is a limited body of research on the influence and power of patient participants. This article focuses on regional health improvement collaboratives that aim to develop coordinated, multi-stakeholder solutions to their healthcare cost and quality problems. They meet regularly and include health professionals, health insurance providers, and patient participants. In this article, we explore the relationships between these stakeholders and patient participants’ interpersonal dimensions regarding empowerment and valuable collaboration. Data were collected through stakeholder observations during meetings of three regional health improvement collaboratives, as well as through semi-structured interviews with the patient participants involved in these cases. Results show that patient participants can be empowered on a personal level. However, this does not imply that patient participants are empowered within the group dynamics. Interpersonal relationships constitute a crucial hidden aspect of building trust. More dialogue and inquiry are needed to examine how patient engagement is enacted and positioned within healthcare collaboratives.
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.