Educating Marketing Students to Understand Designers’ Thought-Worlds

Marketers and designers are likely to work together on innovation teams as they both have customer satisfaction as their end goals. Collaboration between these disciplines in innovation teams is often impaired due to the different thought-worlds that drive decision making: intuitive versus rational. To facilitate collaboration between design and marketing it is valuable to teach marketers about designers’ ways of thinking. Approaches to teaching design thinking to marketing students often focus on students becoming more creative, intuitive, and innovative themselves. However, the integration of the two disciplines does not require that marketers become designers, and vice versa, as both bring unique skills necessary for successful innovation. An educational framework is presented that aims to teach marketing students an understanding of the thought-world of design thinking rather than to become design thinkers themselves. The focus is on recognizing how the others’ approach to the same goals are complementary to their own approaches instead of being different or “wrong.” This framework is unique in aligning design thinking phases with critical thinking phases—marketing students’ dominant thinking style—through specifically chosen aictivities to scaffold the understanding of an intuitive, divergent, and creative thinking approach to the development of innovative marketing ideas.

The Path to Sales Center Leadership: Key Differences Between Academic and Practitioner Leaders

More universities are teaching sales to meet growing employer demand, thereby increasing the prominence of university sales centers. Sales center directors tend to be a PhD or a non-PhD faculty member. While there are advantages to both backgrounds, we know little about how sales center directors view their roles and what behaviors they enact to satisfy demands. The purpose of this research is to investigate the activities of sales center directors and gain deeper insights into their thought worlds. Leveraging job demands–resources theory and a work-based identity perspective, we posit that sales center directors with versus without a PhD will emphasize different job demands. Using a web survey to examine sales center director behaviors and in-depth interviews to explore their thought worlds, we find twice as many sales center directors with a PhD spend time on research activities than their non-PhD counterparts. Sales center directors with a PhD spend twice as much time on research activities than their non-PhD counterparts. Sales center directors without a PhD spend a quarter of their time coaching individual students while those with a PhD express strong desire to impact the sales profession, suggesting that their attention is broader than coaching students.

Archival Utopics: Annamarie Jagose's Slow Water

Annamarie Jagose’s Slow Water (2003), a novel which looks back to the period before Pākehā occupation of these islands solidified into formal colonial rule, begins, curiously and somewhat provocatively, with a scene of settler absence: “All the night, from the darkness of my blanket, I watch the dead houses, Mr Clarke’s house, Mr Williams’s house, Mr Davis’s house, all dead. Still dead, in the first curve of daylight. . . . The church roof points at the sky and you are gone from here.”[i] Stressing reciprocity of desire as one of the relations made possible by colonial “entanglement,”[ii] this letter, narrated by Philip Tohi, intimates the spectacle of eradication by which the expulsion of the missionary William Yate from the Church Missionary Society (CMS) was both expressed and enacted: “All your books are burned, your bed, even the picture of your sister. . . . Ashes from the fire fill my mouth and again I cry” (2). NOTES [i] Annamarie Jagose, Slow Water (Wellington: Victoria UP, 2003), 1. Subsequent citations given parenthetically in text. [ii] The term is Tony Ballantyne’s, who notes that “while thinking about empires through the metaphors of ‘meetings’ and ‘encounters’ allows us to imagine stable and discrete cultural formations existing after cross-cultural engagements,” the term “entanglement” better evinces the ways in which the period preceding formal colonisation drew together and integrated cultural thought-worlds in “new and durable, if unpredictable, ways.” Tony Ballantyne, Entanglements of Empire: Missionaries, Māori and the Question of the Body (Auckland: Auckland UP, 2015), 17.

A Parallel Formulation of Whorfian and Neo-Whorfian Linguistic Relativity

The claim of linguistic relativity, broadly, contains two components: (i) languages differ in the way they divide the world into meaningful units, and (ii) the way a language divides the world into meaningful units influences habitual thought. The conjunction of these two components yields the central claim of linguistic relativity: Speakers of different languages live in different habitual thought worlds. Theorists have addressed linguistic relativity in two different domains of linguistic meaning: symbolic and indexical. Roughly, these two domains can be understood as context- independent and context-dependent meaning, respectively. Benjamin Lee Whorf is the central figure in the symbolic domain of linguistic relativity (“Whorfian linguistic relativity”). Michael Silverstein is responsible for the extension of linguistic relativity into the indexical domain (“Neo-Whorfian linguistic relativity”). While theoretically parallel, the two theories are framed in terms that mask their underlying commonality. The present project is thus to formulate both theories within a single coherent framework. I present a framework that rests on a semiotic principle proposed by Silverstein in the Neo-Whorfian domain: The principle of unavoidable referentiality. This principle states that speakers will be less susceptible to the ‘thought grooves’ of their language when the form of the meaning at issue coincides with a form with denotational value. By framing linguistic relativity in the symbolic realm in terms of metaphor, I argue that the principle of unavoidable referentiality can be applied to Whorfian theory. A formulation of the two theories within a common framework highlights their inter-relationship and, ultimately, allows both to be situated within a single theory of culture.

the self in Greek literature

The notion of “self” is a non-technical one, bridging the areas of psychology and ethics or social relations. Criteria for selfhood include psychological unity or cohesion, agency, responsibility, self-consciousness, reflexivity, and capacity for relationships with others. “Self” is a modern concept with no obvious lexical equivalent in Greek (or Latin); the question therefore arises of the relationship between the modern concept and ancient thinking, as embodied in Greek literature. Three approaches to this question can be identified. One focuses on the idea that there is development within Greek literature towards an understanding of the self or person as a cohesive unit and bearer of agency and responsibility. Another approach sees certain aspects of Greek literature and philosophy as prefiguring some features of the modern concept of self. A third approach underlines the difference between the Greek and modern thought worlds in the formulation of concepts in this area, while also suggesting that Greek ideas and modes of presenting people can be illuminating to moderns, in part because of the challenge posed by their difference. These approaches draw on a range of evidence, including psychological vocabulary, characterization in Greek literature, and Greek philosophical analyses of ethical psychology. There are grounds for maintaining the credibility of all three approaches, and also valid criticisms that can be made of each of them.