Diversity and Dissent in the Social Sciences
Title: Diversity and Dissent in the Social Sciences: The Case of Organization Studies
Author: Kristina Rolin
Abstract: I introduce a case study from organization studies to argue that social epistemologists’ recommendation to cultivate diversity and dissent in science is unlikely to be welcomed in the social sciences unless it is coupled with another epistemic ideal: the norm of epistemic responsibility. The norm of epistemic responsibility enables me to show that organization scholars’ concern with the fragmentation of their discipline is generated by false assumptions: the assumption that a diversity of theoretical approaches will lead to fragmentation and the assumption that an imposed consensus on a theoretical approach is needed to maintain the unity of the discipline.
“Samuel hurried in and grabbed the first seat available. Having quickly sat down he slowly looked up. What was going to happen? To his relief the group leader welcomed him to the meeting as did others. “
What makes leadership “good enough”?
“…the “good enough” leader (GEL), like the “good enough” mother, does not try to be obsessively and compulsively
perfect, machine-like, in his or her attunement with and response to the organisation…The “good enough” style of leadership contrasts with two culturally widespread and familiar styles of leadership…“hard” and “soft.”
Trust at Work: What it Means for Identity
“What has been referred to as generalized trust has been advanced as a condition for self-identity and the absence of such trust has been found to lead to a corroded sense of self…This study advances the idea that trust may play a similar role in organizations…”