Role conflicts of family members in family firms

The existence of role conflict among organizational members tends to create tensions inside organizations worldwide. However, in the context of family firms, having a dual role of being a member of a family and a member of the firm can represent interesting differences that make family firms an important form of organization to study. Following the tenets of the stewardship theory, our article develops a model where reciprocal altruism represents an antecedent to role conflict among family members. We further argue that perceptions of collective efficacy among family members have a moderating effect on the relationship between reciprocal altruism and role conflict. Last, we propose that role conflict in family firms reduces the family firm performance. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.     

A community psychology of object meanings: Identity negotiation during disaster recovery

What do material goods intended for personal consumption mean to community? We use the extreme example of natural disaster recovery in a community to explore this question. Our work describes how members make sense of material objects that transition from private to public possessions (damaged goods) and public to private possessions (donated goods). By blending consumer and community psychology perspectives with our narratives, we employ a three-dimensional framework for analyzing object meanings: (1) material objects as agents of communitas (a shared sense of “we”), (2) material objects as agents of individualism (a focus on “me”), and (3) material objects as agents of opposition (the “we” that speaks for “me” and “us” versus “them”). This theoretical frame allows us to show how different conceptions of identity lead to conflicting meanings of objects within community, and to explain how and why object meanings shift as objects move across time and space from private to public and from scarcity to abundance. We also provide implications for coping with disasters that consider collective and individual identities as well as oppositional stances in between.     

Collective moral disengagement: Initial validation of a scale for adolescents

Collective moral disengagement refers to shared group beliefs that morally justify negative actions. This study reports an initial validation of the newly developed Classroom Collective Moral Disengagement Scale (CCMDS) for adolescents. This self-report instrument assesses the degree to which mechanisms of moral disengagement are shared by students in their class. Data were collected from two samples of 486 and 654 adolescents attending middle and high schools in Italy. Through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses the unidimensional structure of the scale was established. Multigroup analyses demonstrated configural, metric and scalar invariance of the model across age and gender groups. The final version of the scale consists of 17 items and it has good internal consistency and validity. It is concluded that the scale is a promising measure for research concerning group level morality.     

Can confidence come too soon? Collective efficacy,conflict and group performance over time

Groups with a strong sense of collective efficacy set more challenging goals, persist in the face of difficulty, and are ultimately more likely to succeed than groups who do not share this belief. Given the many advantages that may accrue to groups who are confident, it would be logical to advise groups to build a high level of collective efficacy as early as possible. However, we draw on Whyte’s (1998) theory of collective efficacy and groupthink, to predict that when confidence emerges at a high level toward the beginning of a group’s existence, group members may be less likely to engage in process conflict; a form of conflict that may be beneficial in the early phase of a group project. We found support for this prediction in two longitudinal studies of classroom project teams.     

Gliding across the liminal space between counsellor and counselling researcher: Using collective biography practices in the teaching of counselling research methodologies

Aims: Drawing on their engagement in a specific collective biography research project, the co-authors aim to demonstrate how the weaving together of creative story-telling and the theory underlining collective biography practices resulted in an understanding of rhizomatic research methodologies from within the process. This paper aims to demonstrate one way in which research methodologies training can become more firmly embedded within counsellor training courses. Method: A collective of counselling students and a session tutor colleague used collective biography practices to research their memories of traversing the liminal space between ‘counsellor’ and ‘counselling researcher’. Alongside the resulting collective stories, a collaborative review of the research process examined our chosen ways of working within the project. Outcomes: Engaging in collective biography practices resulted in an experiential shift from ‘learning to do counselling research’ to ‘becoming counselling researchers’. Weaving together research processes and researcher reflexivity generated personal and professional learning. Ways in which these research methodologies complement core components of counselling training, within and beyond the teaching of research, were identified. Conclusions: Collective biography practices offer a way of introducing non-arboreal creative research methodologies into counsellor training. Careful consideration of potential challenges surrounding the introduction of these practices is required.     

Modal Platonism: an Easy Way to Avoid Ontological Commitment to Abstract Entities

Modal Platonism utilizes “weak” logical possibility, such that it is logically possible there are abstract entities, and logically possible there are none. Modal Platonism also utilizes a non-indexical actuality operator. Modal Platonism is the EASY WAY, neither reductionist nor eliminativist, but embracing the Platonistic language of abstract entities while eliminating ontological commitment to them. STATEMENT OF MODAL PLATONISM. Any consistent statement B ontologically committed to abstract entities may be replaced by an empirically equivalent modalization, MOD(B), not so ontologically committed. This equivalence is provable using Modal/Actuality Logic S5@. Let MAX be a strong set theory with individuals. Then the following Schematic Bombshell Result (SBR) can be shown: MAX logically yields [T is true if and only if MOD(T) is true], for scientific theories T. The proof utilizes Stephen Neale’s clever model-theoretic interpretation of Quantified Lewis S5, which I extend to S5@.     

Intuitive theories of group types and relational principles

Three studies investigated perceivers’ beliefs about the principles by which different kinds of social groups govern interactions among group members. In Study 1, participants rated a sample of 20 groups on a set of group properties, including measures of relational principles used within groups. Results showed that people believe that interactions in different types of groups are governed by different blends of relational principles unique for each type of group. Study 2 experimentally demonstrated that perceivers could use minimal group property characteristics of different types of groups (i.e., extent of group member interaction, group size, duration, and permeability) to make inferences about the relational principles used in different types of groups. Study 3 demonstrated that relational style information influences people’s judgments of a group’s entitativity and collective responsibility.     

Collective self-legislation as an Actus Impurus: a response to Heidegger’s critique of European nihilism

Heidegger’s critique of European nihilism seeks to expose self-legislation as the governing principle of central manifestations of modernity such as science, technology, and the interpretation of art as aesthetics. Need we accept the conclusion that modern constitutional democracies are intrinsically nihilistic, insofar as they give political and legal form to the principle of collective self-legislation? An answer to this question turns on the concept of power implied in constituent and constituted power. A confrontation of the genealogies of modern subjectivity proposed by Heidegger and Blumenberg suggests that there is indeed a metaphysical core to the concept of constituent power developed by various political theorists, including Schmitt and Habermas. By contrast, closer consideration of the paradoxical relation between constituent and constituted power illuminates the ambiguity of collective self-legislation, which means both enactment of a legal order by a collective self and the enactment of a collective self by a legal order. To the extent that constitutional democracies are a way of preserving rather than dissolving this ambiguity, they imply an interpretation of power and human finitude that parries the charge of nihilism.     

Priority setting in health care: on the relation between reasonable choices on the micro-level and the macro-level

There has been much discussion about how to obtain legitimacy at macro-level priority setting in health care by use of fair procedures, but how should we consider priority setting by individual clinicians or health workers at the micro-level? Despite the fact that just health care totally hinges upon their decisions, surprisingly little attention seems being paid to the legitimacy of these decisions. This paper addresses the following question: what are the conditions that have to be met in order to ensure that individual claims on health care are well aligned with an overall concept of just health care? Drawing upon a distinction between individual and aggregated needs, I argue that even though we assume the legitimacy of macro-level guidelines, this legitimacy is not directly transferable to decisions at micro-level simply by adherence to the guidelines’ recommendation. Further, I argue that individual claims are subject to the formal principle of equality and the demands of vertical and horizontal equity in a way that gives context- and patient-related equity concerns precedence over equity concerns captured at the macro-level. I conclude that if we aim to achieve just health care, we need to develop a complementary framework for legitimising individual judgment of patients’ claims on health care resources. Moreover, I suggest the basic structure of such a framework.