Expanding Knowledge (Asynchronous Session)
Social Justice Philanthropy and the Science of Social Movements View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Timothy Wyman-McCarthy
The past two decades have witnessed a paradigm shift in progressive grantmaking. While in the old paradigm a crowded field of NGOs offered direct services or advocated for changes in laws on behalf of disaffected groups, in the new paradigm—called variously impact investing, social justice philanthropy, participatory grantmaking—the NGO middle-man is cut out and ‘social movements’ are funded directly. These grassroots social movements promise the kind of structural change the old paradigm has been condemned for failing to realize. Intriguingly, in their efforts to fund movements, a range of philanthropic, development, and human rights organizations including CARE, American Jewish World Service, New World Foundation, Ayni Institute, Ford Foundation, and Solidaire are working together to develop an in-house ‘science of social movements’. This paper explores these new analytical tools for understanding, measuring, and intervening in social movements, such as the ‘social change ecosystem’ (which accounts for the multiple kinds of political action—legal reform, protest, lobbying—that make up social movements) and the ‘social movement lifecycle’. In developing such concepts, these organizations are also defining what social movements are or should ideally be: natural, organic, authentic, fluid, spontaneous, and possessing valuable local (rather than expert) knowledge. What does it mean that funders elevate the authenticity and organic qualities of social movements while simultaneously producing knowledge meant to help them intervene in those movements? Why produce new analytical tools rather than turn to the existing sociology of social movements? What are the motivations, stakes, and contradictions of this newly developing science of social movements?
Knowledge Communication and Organisational Entry: An Approach to Organisational Socialisation View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Mia Rasmussen
This paper focuses on the intersection between organisational socialisation and organisational knowledge communication. Although knowledge is central in organisational socialisation as the process of settling-in in organisations it remains a ‘black box’. I therefore develop a framework integrating organisational socialisation and organisational knowledge communication, to begin to unravel knowledge as a ‘black box’ in organisational socialisation, and I identify how and where relevant links between organisational socialisation and organisational knowledge communication can be made, answering the research question: How can the field of organisational knowledge communication be integrated in organisational socialisation to help us better understand and work with organisational socialisation as a process where knowledge communication takes place? The theoretical framework I present is a synthesis of organisational socialisation and organisational knowledge communication based on relevant interfaces. I show how organisational socialisation can be understood as a knowledge process, I argue that the interactionist perspective in organisational socialisation is a central anchor for integrating organisational knowledge communication in organisational socialisation, and I show that organisational knowledge communication can nuance the way we understand knowledge communication in organisational socialisation, by helping us understand organisations and organisational phenomena as dynamic, appreciate knowledge as complex (being situated, contextual and relational), and model communication as transactional. I point to the explainability value of integrating knowledge communication insights in organisational socialisation, in that it provides a specific framework for approaching knowledge and knowledge communication in organisational entry and ongoing socialisation processes.
A Values-based Process for Promotion of Knowledge Creation Process in Climate Change Adaptation Plan: A Multi-case Study from Botswana View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Yanyan Huang
Originating from organizational studies, the concept of knowledge management has increasingly adopted and developed in wider fields, one of them is climate change adaptation. As a global challenge which both academic and empirical understandings are constantly desired, climate change has taken significant considerations of various stakeholders, from academic scholars to policy makers, from local practitioners to external experts. Motivated by this very need, we aim to draw insight from a successful local climate change adaptation plan case in Botswana in terms of the knowledge interaction processes happened within it. A values-based process named WeValue In-Situ was used as a bolt-on process with the classical climate change adaptation plan process named Vulnerability Risk Assessment. This design was implemented and evaluated with the village development committees for three villages in Botswana. We adopted a well established and applied theory, namely Knowledge Creation Theory, to enable us in learning about knowledge interactions in empirical settings in the context of climate change adaptation. Our analysis showed that the WeValue In-Situ can effectively promote the Socialization and Externalization modes in the whole knowledge creation process of the planning making, through which the Combination and Internalization modes were enhanced accordingly in the later stage, as the shared tacit and explicit knowledge of the decision making group were better converted in WeValue In-Situ process. In this study, we present a hybrid knowledge management process which positively contributes to local climate change adaptation plan and share theoretical and empirical insights gained from this study.
Featured Employees as Lifelong Learners: Characteristics and Promotion in Thai Organizations View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Kotchaworn Chuymanee
This qualitative study offers multiple perspectives on the lifelong learner characteristics of employees in Thailand Sustainability Investment Companies and how the organizations promote lifelong learning effectively. Fourteen interviewees of lifelong learning scholars, university lecturers and practitioners in the human resource development field, and experienced employees from Thailand sustainability investment companies were interviewed individually. The findings are presented in two aspects. The first aspect is the lifelong learner characteristics which consist of three main components: attributes, knowledge, and skills. The attributes of a lifelong learner are a growth mindset, grit, curiosity, eagerness to learn and unlearn, openness to change, and searching for possibilities. The knowledge of lifelong learners is current and future career-related and life-related such as financial literacy, digital literacy, physical and psychological health. The skills of lifelong learners include knowing themselves, self-directed learning, and learning how to learn. In addition, the second aspect is the organization support which mainly relates to formal and informal learning systems, learning organization and knowledge management, career planning and development, leadership support, recognitions, and rewards. Last, the results also provide suggestions for further implications in the organizational context; including educating employees on why and how to create personal lifelong learning goals and plans, providing more engaging blended learning activities and rewards, promoting learning ambassadors among employees, and sponsorship of leaders and executives.
The Social Identity Dynamics of Gramscian Hegemony Construction: Building Public Goods Through Nation State Creation, Commodification and Institutionalization of Status Stereotypes View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Benedict Edward DeDominicis
The creation of public goods is a concomitant with constructing a primary, terminal self-identity community whose authorities in the form of the government the modal citizenry grants legitimacy. Those authorities have the rhetorical and persuasive leadership capacity to create authoritative institutions and policies. The recognition of those goods as public signifies that the modal member of the public functionally views the authoritative output of the policy making process as morally acceptable. Such an observer functionally views the policy’s utilitarian distribution of resources within polity and society as representing the public interest. By being functionally perceived as serving the public interest, the authorities’ distribution of goods is functionally accepted as public goods. The policies are functionally or actively perceived as reinforcing the common welfare, the public interest. Public health is one of these public goods. The characterization of the political regime typifies the control relationship between the authorities and the public. Generating public goods is uniquely problematic for each polity due to their respective dynamic constellation of values, attitudes and norms that are systemically interrelated. Effective legitimation public performance requirements by state authority figures vary across polities. Acknowledgment of effective control maintenance over and mobilization of societal resources constitutes effective leadership.
