BUSM2301 – Organizational Analysis

BUSM2301 – Organizational Analysis

Case 1: Can Marketing contribute to social enterprise?

In this paper, Powell and Osborne (2015) point out that marketing is an important element in strengthening sustainability and evaluates the close connection between economic and social objectives in social enterprises (SEs), offering services to the public audiences. In addition, the authors propose a new model of marketing with a view to supporting sustainability in the context of social enterprises. The proposed model is a result of taking a reliasm approach. Moreover, by tapping upon given data and information and taking all variations into consideration, the authors view the issue as a challenge and expect to solve it.

In this paper, Powell and Osborne (2015) apply a realistic approach, which is to analyze four case studies of four separate enterprises. Furthermore, to make their analysis become more reliable, the authors also integrated interviews with chief executives coming from four companies. This data-collection method is also known as qualitative research, which involves obtaining and analyzing non-numerical insights (Silverman 2016). This is an effective way to examine marketing and its impact on sustainable social enterprises. From the interviews and the insights, the two authors conclude that all 4 enterprises are confronted with a similar challenge. Even though four companies are considered mature companies operating in public services in England, they still struggle to implement sustainability marketing initiatives. To jump into this conclusion, the authors investigate their up-to-date marketing practices and marketing strategies, draw upon direct interviews with chief executives and make careful evaluation.This strategy is also regarded as cross-sectional study, which is a great method to evaluate the performances of the companies. Powell and Osborne look deep into the nature of marketing practices adopted by these four SEs. However, the authors provide conclusions, including four main discoveries, which are open to challenges. As a result of significant implications, in the future, additional research should be implemented by other colleagues to validate these findings.

From the analysis above, it is obvious that the authors write this paper from the social relativism paradigm. Hirschheim and Klein (1989) believe that this paradigm looks at the problem from order and subjectivism perspectives. The theorists who support this paradigm do not value the objectivist approach. In addition, researchers in this paradigm consider themselves as facilitators and cultivate reflection and experiments. In this case, the qualitative data type is adopted, aiming to clarify that the difference in time and place of interviews and case studies may generate different outcomes. Moreover, the writers investigate various perceptions and beliefs of reality and their construction to better make sense of  the reality. This strategy requires individual subjectivity and intensive explanation of reality. On the other hand, the title of the article suggests that social enterprises can be regarded as social relativism, in which the expressions are the culmination of the meaning people attach it to. The interviews are personal-based and cases are chosen to meet up to the requirement.

 

Case 2: “Good” news from nowhere: imagining utopian sustainable accounting

In this article, the authors make an attempt to propose a new model of accounting and accountability in the modern society. Atkins et al. (2015) adopt a four-fold method, combining an “auto-ethnographic approach” and “Morris-inspired utopian metaphor”. The auto-ethnographic approach is adopted as a contextual conversation between academics and lobbyists in the field of accounting. This method is known as qualitative research, in which the writers utilize self-reflection and personal experiences to connect their stories and understand the meanings of the societal issues (Clark & Gruba 2010). By contrast, the Utopian writing style seeks to break the tensions and eliminate the status quo by introducing futuristic society from the authors’ viewpoints. This new world is deemed to be a better place compared to the present. The findings and insights from the article mostly come from a subjective perspective, relying on the results from accounting academics.

The authors strongly uphold that the businesses assume significant responsibility for managing the damaging impacts of climate changes in the short term as the society is having difficulty coping with climate disaster (Atkins et al. 2015). In particular, all organizations should minimize the amount of carbon footprints and keep an eye on climate change risks.  Since the existing annual reports fail to touch upon and address this pressing issue, the writers make an attempt to propose a new model of accounting. To better accomplish this action, the authors build a contextual dialogue among accounting academics and researchers and portray themselves as being present in the talk. It cannot deny that this strategy allows the authors to show their viewpoints in the discussion without explicitly raising their voices. In the conclusion, the authors point out that individuals should place financial paradigms in the center of contemporary organizations. Moreover, Atkins et al. (2015) conclude by emphasizing the efficiency and effectiveness of the suggested model. Atkins et al. (2015) expect that their findings may provoke or stimulate the interests and motivation of future researchers in the topic of sustainability reporting.

Based on the aforementioned analysis, it is indisputable to understand that the authors use the neohumanism paradigm. Hirschheim and Klein (1989) believe that this paradigm looks at the issue from conflict and subjectivism perspectives. The neohumanism paradigm follows radical arrangements, which focuses on broadening human understanding and the rational aspect of human action. This can be accomplished by liberating suppressed interests and overcoming the social and natural barriers. The contextual dialogues presented in the case is an evidence of a qualitative research method, in which the authors measure and evaluate the conversations. Moreover, the data set of narratives and dialogues goes far beyond what scientists normally apply. This paper is highly dependent on the oral songs, obtained dialogues from accounting academics, lobbyists, as well as metaphor. The insights are driven from the personal experiences of numerous stakeholders and those who are involved. The authors also motivate the readers to think beyond the traditional boundaries and adapt to the changes if possible.

 

Case 3: National cultural values, sustainability beliefs, and organizational initiatives

According to Tata and Prasad (2015), the main idea of this research paper is to analyze how the insights of issues connected to perceptions, beliefs and addiction may be applied to alter the behaviors. Tata and Prasad (2015) point out that they made a decision to pick this topic greatly due to the lack of analysis on the close relationship between sustainability activities and national culture in the initiatives. As a result, the two authors decide to explore the theoretical underpinnings of national culture as well as sustainability practices, along with a mechanism to establish connection between these two topics. The authors believe that a solution is an urgent need to construct social reality and demonstrate that the relation between national culture and sustainability exists.

From the research, it can be seen that the authors rely on the results and insights from past research on the similar topic to convince the readers. As a consequence, the authors set an accurate standard based on their evaluation and also take uncovered facts into consideration. Moreover, practical information in relation to sustainability and culture is presented in the report to back up for their work. The authors have a great way to jump into conclusion of this paper. They conclude their work by introducing a brand new model, which indicates the relationship between national culture values and perceptions on the topic of sustainability and sustainability initiatives in the organization. This model is also an answer for the impacts of culture on sustainability. On the other hand, the conclusions from the authors are open to challenges because there are still a few factors that need additional examination to turn this into a valid model into different circumstances.

From the preceding analysis, it is apparent that the authors apply the functionalism paradigm. Hirschheim and Klein (1989) point out that this paradigm contains two factors, which looks at the issue from order and objectivism perspectives. The dimension emphasizes the importance of the status quo and considers everything as it is. The majority of research initiatives in this field provide explanations for social events. Authors who write from the functionalism paradigm are typically realistic and take a practical-focused approach when looking for the solution to a problem. In this paper, Tata and Prasad (2015) discuss all three dimensions, including national culture, sustainability beliefs, and organizational initiatives from an objective perspective and look closely at the truth (status quo). They do that by introducing the definition respectively and rely on genuine information. The finding that there are impacts of national culture on sustainability are well-explained and deeply analyzed from existing descriptions. The explanation journey by the authors is well-constructed because it takes a direct approach to the current issue and illustrates the normal beliefs. Rather than drawing upon other work, this paper aims to uncover hidden truth and facts.

 

Case 4: Organized hypocrisy, organizational façades, and sustainability reporting

Reading through the paper, Cho, along with her co-researchers, find out that with a view to widening the gap between business activities and their statements to the public, in essence, companies should undertake organized hypocrisy and build organizational facades. In addition, the paper illustrates that the combination of organized hypocrisy and facades plays a significant role in doing the research of corporate sustainability reporting. The authors of this paper do not hesitate to include their own points of views to make the tone of the paper become subjective. Besides raising their own voices, to make the work become more reliable, the authors primarily discuss the perspective by taking advantage of the results from Brusson and other researchers’ work, regarding hypocrisy and facades.

At the time of the research conducted, there existed massive differences between the report related to corporate sustainability and what the businesses typically carried out to protect the rights of the stakeholders (Cho et al. 2015). The authors additionally hold the position that the existence of contradictory events in the society and institutional pressures gives rise to the misinformation in corporate sustainability reports. The results obtained from carefully examining the original research on the similar topic are compared to the findings of Patton (2002). In the conclusion, the authors emphasize the need and significance of organized facades and hypocrisy in examining the topic of sustainability reports and accounting literature. Nevertheless, the conclusions are still open to challenges because the authors claimed that to successfully apply the results, it needs further analysis and investigation.

From the analysis above, it is undeniable that this research paper embraces the paradigm of radical structuralism. According to Hirschheim and Klein (1989), this paradigm looks at the issue from conflict and objectivism perspectives. This dimension focuses on removing the constraints from the social context in the modern world and seeks to reject the status quo. Furthermore, taking an objective standpoint, it is vitally important in this paradigm to remove the inequality in power arrangements. In this paper, the authors utilize qualitative data and see the issues from multiple perspectives. Furthermore, to build remarkable insights, this research paper is not constructed by relying on the author’s experiences. By contrast, this paper is highly dependent on external data to collect essential information, based on published reports from other reliable authors. Although the information comes from the organizations themselves, it is obtained from the external sources.

 

Chia sẻ bài viết