Power

This chapter explores ambition for power in politics and the workplace. Control over others can be advantageous in its own right and also in the wealth and recognition that it often confers. Although most politicians link their need for power to the service of public interests, the evidence often suggests otherwise. Drawing on prominent examples, such as Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, John McCain, and Donald Trump, and those who served them, the chapter explores how prioritizing power can subvert principle and the institutional checks necessary to prevent abuse. By contrast, examples such as Nelson Mandela show how those who use power to empower others can serve the highest ideals of social justice. Power in the workplace can also serve stakeholder and societal interests, but it is too often sabotaged by egoistic interests, needs for control, and bullying behaviors. The chapter concludes with strategies to increase accountability for abusive conduct.

(Un)resolving digital technology paradoxes through the rhetoric of balance

The organizational benefits of digital technologies are increasingly contrasted with negative societal consequences. Such tensions are contradictory, persistent and interrelated, suggesting paradoxes. Yet, we lack insight into how such apparent paradoxes are constructed and to what effect. This empirical paper draws upon interviews with thirty-nine responsibility managers to unpack how paradoxes are discursively (re)constructed and resolved as a rhetoric of ‘balance’ that ensures identification with organizational, familial and societal interests. We also reveal how such ‘false balance’ sustains and legitimizes organizational activity by displacing responsibilities onto distant ‘others’ through temporal (futurizing), spatial (externalizing) and level (magnifying / individualizing) rhetorical devices. In revealing the process of paradox construction and resolution as ‘balance’ in the context of digitalization and its unanticipated outcomes, we join conversations into new organizational responsibilities in the digital economy, with implications for theory and practice.

Assessment of Diversity Outcomes in American Medical School Admissions: Applying the Grutter Legitimacy Principles

In the last 30 years, except for female participation, the enrollment of Latinx, African Americans, Native Americans, Alaskan natives, and disadvantaged students in medical school has been constant; however, increasing enrollment of these minority populations is feasible, if admissions committees make two changes in approach. First, the traditional belief that matriculation merit is a linear function of past academic performance must be rejected. Second, once the threshold needed to complete medical school in four years and to pass licensing examinations at the first attempt has been met, all candidates are equally qualified, and matriculation decisions must be based, in part, on societal interests. In Grutter vs. Bollinger, the United States Supreme Court determined that graduate admission committees can and should consider societal interests. Each admission decision represents a substantial government investment in each student, as the Medicare Act directly subsidizes much of the cost of medical education. As Grutter explained, there is a societal interest in the public having confidence in, and access to, the medical school training that will prepare tomorrow’s medical, professional, and political leaders. Our analysis suggests that medical school admissions are biased towards academic achievement in matriculants, beyond acceptable thresholds for graduation and licensure. We believe medical schools must shift their admissions strategies and consider noncognitive factors in all candidates as determinative once minimum acceptable academic standards have been met.

Preferences, Preference Formation and Position Taking in a Eurozone Out: Lessons from the United Kingdom

In the literature on member state position-taking in the eurozone crisis, the debate has mainly centred on whether national preferences are shaped exclusively within the domestic setting or influenced by shared EU-level norms or interaction within EU institutions. This article goes beyond this discussion. Drawing on original data collected by the authors, it uses the UK’s experience to test the claims both of society-centred approaches, including liberal intergovernmentalism, and perspectives that emphasise the importance of shared EU norms or interaction. It argues that while the first overlook the role of institutions as both actors and mediating variables in preference formation, the second have so far focused on the experience of eurozone members, thereby raising the possibility of selection bias. Treating eurozone form as a series of processes rather than a single event, it contests the claim that preference formation is always driven by societal interests, highlights instances where government acts in the absence of or contrary to expressed societal interests, and reveals limitations of the shared norms critique of liberal intergovernmentalism. It shows that the UK government was driven by a scholars concern to protect the UK economy from financial contagion rather than solidarity with its European partners.

A Framework for Reimagining Order and Justice: Transitions in Violence and Interventions in a Global Era

In considering the conception of interventions since the beginning of the 21st century, Chapter Five: Transitions in Violence and Interventions in a Global Era by Michaelene Cox, contrasts the interpretation and redefinition of sovereignty and intervention by Kofi Annan and Ban Ki Moon. Whereas Annan had found opportunity to interject a strong sense of moral authority into the ground-breaking R2P project, Ban instead drew upon mediation and bridge-building skills to shift the spotlight to its actual implementation. In viewing the perspectives of Annan and Ban, Cox argues that there clearly has been evolution in our understanding of state dominion even where it remains ambiguous. In this regard, the chapter is particularly interested in evaluating developments beyond the state-centric model in face of contemporary challenges to order and justice. Cox presents a brief view of systemic shifts precipitating the current era, and then considers transitions in violence and intervention. The chapter concludes with an emphasis on the need for political adaptability during periods of flux, and remind us that whilst considering international, state and societal interests, the welfare and the participation of the human being is indispensable.