Access to Assistive Technology,Systems Thinking,and Market Shaping: A Response to Durocher et al.

Fairness of access to assistive technology is important for its allocation on an equitable basis and for broader social justice and rights issues. Although the use of Daniels’s notion of “justice as fair opportunity” is helpful to the context of assistive technology, other aspects of Daniels’s broader conceptualisation of “just health” are not appropriate in this context. It is argued that fairness of access to assistive technology is crucial for the equitable attainment of the sustainable development goals; however, such access will be achieved only by the sector developing a much stronger systems thinking and market shaping perspective.     

Becoming a leader: catalysts and barriers to leader identity construction

ABSTRACT

In response to increased calls for research that can provide greater understanding of the relational and contextual issues surrounding leader identity construction processes, this qualitative study aims to provide insights into the subjective experience of constructing a leader identity within the context of organizations. Drawing on data from 50 semi-structured interviews, this paper focuses on significant sub-themes, which were grouped into two categories, namely identity catalysts (e.g. issues that participants identified as positively aiding in their leader identity construction process) and identity barriers (e.g. issues that participants identified as negatively impacting their leader identity construction process). These catalysts and barriers will be elaborated upon and their relationship to leader identity explained. This paper provides new insights into the leader identity construction process by using Leadership Identity Construction Theory as a lens for interpretation, and offers notable implications for theory, research and practice.     

Embracing the Challenges and Opportunities of Mixed‐Media Relationships

Social relationships unfold face‐to‐face and across an increasingly diverse set of mobile, Internet‐based media. Research on these mixed‐media relationships (MMRs) offers a unifying focus for understanding of how media use reflects and drives social relationships. Impediments to research on mixed‐media interaction include an over‐reliance on research focused on a single medium, incomplete and conceptually problematic classifications of media, and limited theoretic approaches. An alternative approach to understand MMRs, grounded in the challenges of managing complex, recurring interpersonal demands, is proposed. These demands include social coordination, impression management, regulating closeness and distance, and managing arousal and anxiety. Implications of MMRs for mediatization and mass communication are briefly examined.