ZIB

Hits per page

hits 1 - 2 | 2 hits

Sorting

Electronic Resource

What would Machiavelli think? An overview of the leadership challenges in team-based structures (2004)

Callanan, Gerard A.

Bingley : Emerald

Team performance management 10 (2004), S. 77-83

add to mindlist on the mindlist

Details

ISSN: 1352-7592

Source: Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005

Topics: Economics

Notes: The writings of Niccolò Machiavelli continue to resonate with today's business leaders. Current management literature still focuses on tactics to increase power as a means to ensure a leadership position. This attention to individual accomplishment and the building of power runs counter to what is happening structurally within organizations. The acceleration in the use of team-based structures as a preferred method of organization and decision making reflects the need for timelier processing of information in a world of increased environmental uncertainty. This contrast between the behaviors needed to build individual power and the collaborative skills necessitated by team-based structures creates a number of leadership challenges for individuals and organizations. This article discusses these challenges from both a theory-based and a practitioner standpoint, assesses the implications for organizational managers and individual team members, and offers recommendations for leadership effectiveness in a work world dominated by team-based design.

Type of Medium: Electronic Resource

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13527590410545072

Permalink

Library	Location	Call Number	Volume/Issue/Year	Availability

Others were also interested in ...

Paper (German National Licenses)

Fulltext

Electronic Resource

Methodological rigour within a qualitative framework (2004)

Tobin, Gerard A. ; Begley, Cecily M.

Oxford, UK : Blackwell Science Ltd

Journal of advanced nursing 48 (2004), S. 0

add to mindlist on the mindlist

Details

ISSN: 1365-2648

Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005

Topics: Medicine

Notes: Aim. This paper discusses the literature on establishing rigour in research studies. It describes the methodological trinity of reliability, validity and generalization and explores some of the issues relating to establishing rigour in naturalistic inquiry.Background. Those working within the naturalistic paradigm have questioned the issue of using validity, reliability and generalizability to demonstrate robustness of qualitative research. Triangulation has been used to demonstrate confirmability and completeness and has been one means of ensuring acceptability across paradigms. Emerging criteria such as goodness and trustworthiness can be used to evaluate the robustness of naturalistic inquiry.Discussion. It is argued that the transference of terms across paradigms is inappropriate; however, if we reject the concepts of validity and reliability, we reject the concept of rigour. Rejection of rigour undermines acceptance of qualitative research as a systematic process that can contribute to the advancement of knowledge. Emerging criteria for demonstrating robustness in qualitative inquiry, such as authenticity, trustworthiness and goodness, need to be considered. Goodness, when not seen as a separate construct but as an integral and embedded component of the research process, should be useful in assuring quality of the entire study. Triangulation is a tried and tested means of offering completeness, particularly in mixed-method research. When multiple types of triangulation are used appropriately as the ‘triangulation state of mind’, they approach the concept of crystallization, which allows for infinite variety of angles of approach.Conclusion. Qualitative researchers need to be explicit about how and why they choose specific legitimizing criteria in ensuring the robustness of their inquiries. A shift from a position of fundamentalism to a more pluralistic approach as a means of legitimizing naturalistic inquiry is advocated.