The Virtues of Equality and Dissensus: MacIntyre in a Dialogue with Rancière and Mouffe

Couch, Robert B.; Bernacchio, Caleb

doi:10.1007/s10551-019-04400-8

Cited by 17 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When the percentage distribution of the 12 most frequently cited categories was examined closely, the most frequently cited four categories of this distribution were found to be directly related to MacIntyre’s virtues‐goods‐practice‐institution schema as expounded and applied by Moore and Beadle (2006). This finding is in‐line with previous studies that emphasized the importance of the virtues‐goods‐practice‐institution schema (Bernacchio, 2018; Bernacchio & Couch, 2015; Couch & Bernacchio, 2020; Sinnicks, 2014). This study, a very intriguing one indeed, revealed that the most frequently cited four categories only accounted for 37% of all the citation contexts in the AV book.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

The influence of Alasdair MacIntyre’s “After Virtue” book on business ethics studies: A citation concept analysis

Akgün

Keskin

Fidan

2021

Business Ethics Env & Resp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alasdair MacIntyre’s title, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory (AV), is a thought‐provoking, influential, ground‐breaking title that contributes much to business ethics studies. However, to date, there has not been any systematic and comprehensive study that has examined AV’s overall impact on the business ethics landscape. This study thus offers specific and rich information about AV’s realized contribution to business ethics over the past 20 years. First, using citation concept analysis (CCA), which refers to a content analysis of statements surrounding in‐text citations of AV in articles referring to the primary source, we reveal which AV contents have been either frequently cited or rarely cited. Our findings indicate that although researchers have cited considerably rich and diverse content from AV, there remains a discrepancy for citation contexts when compared to AV’s original content related to MacIntyre’s multi‐level virtue conceptualization. Secondly, using citation depth analysis for how citations of AV spread through a primary source in one of the three categories, for example, limited, intermediate, and comprehensive, we find that AV content has been increasingly cited in both an intermediate and a comprehensive way. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of this offered study in the management and organization studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

The influence of Alasdair MacIntyre’s “After Virtue” book on business ethics studies: A citation concept analysis

Akgün

Keskin

Fidan

2021

Business Ethics Env & Resp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, many studies have been published on "agonistic dialogue" and the question of "dissent" in business and society (Barthold and Bloom, 2020;Brand et al, 2020;Couch and Bernacchio, 2020;Dawkins, 2019;Fougère and Solitander, 2020;Rhodes et al, 2020;Sorsa and Fougère, 2020). They suggest that there is resistance to the "one way fits all" SDG 17 narrative.…”

Section: Key Learningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-sector dialogue for sustainability: to partner or not to partner?

Louche

Young

Fougère

2021

SAMPJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce the topic and review the contributions of the special issue papers on cross-sector dialogue for sustainability. The paper also presents avenues for further research. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on a review of the current literature on cross-sector partnership and dialogue. It explores the current issues in cross-sector partnerships through a discussion of the papers accepted for the special issue, their focus, findings and key contributions. Findings It highlights three main key research themes and learnings from the special issue papers: a high level of “hybridity” of collaboration forms, which involve important tensions; a need to understand partnership in its context and the importance of the individual level in cross-sector collaboration. Practical implications The authors call for attention to be paid to two forms of myopia: a tendency to view partnerships primarily from a resource-based view (without much attempt to measure societal impact) and a reluctance to be explicitly critical (despite empirical evidence of some suboptimal aspects of partnerships). Social implications The authors call for researchers to move away from a resource-based approach to one that is situated in exploring the value derived from partnerships in the broader societal context. The authors suggest some avenues for further research to move the discussion beyond the partnership imperative. Originality/value The paper outlines the need to critically revisit the very essence of what real partnership means and whether dialogue is really taking place.

show abstract

“…This analysis is echoed by Parker and Parker (2017: 1378), who proffer the view that[i]n contrast to a theoretical position that explains away struggle in order to get close to management, or that refuses struggle in order to maintain purity, what is needed is an explication of struggle that will gain purchase with allies and adversariessuggesting that agonism could allow for a critical management scholarship that is more engaged in action and moves beyond mere critique for its own sake. In a related vein, recent work in business ethics has used agonism as a way of analysing discourses within environmental sustainability (Barthold and Bloom, 2020), the relationship between virtue ethics and agonism (Couch and Bernacchio, 2020), and the problems of power and democratic governance within multi-stakeholder governance initiatives (Fougère and Solitander, 2020).…”

Section: Agonism and Dissensus In Stakeholder And Employment Relationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agonising over industrial relations: Bringing agonism and dissensus to the pluralist frames of reference

Buren

Greenwood

Donaghey

et al. 2020

Journal of Industrial Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The construct of pluralism has allowed us to see a world where parties could pursue divergent interests, sometimes to the point of conflict, and still work together to realise goals. In response to changing models of employment that are threatening many of the values and interests core to workers and society, new readings of pluralism have emerged that we will argue oscillate between antagonism and consensus. In response, we proffer the concepts of agonism and dissensus as bridging different schools of pluralist thought. Our article commences with a review of affordances and limitations of new pluralism. We then introduce the political philosophy of Chantal Mouffe – in particular her conceptualisations of agonism and dissensus – and discuss how these have been employed in consideration of the employment relationship. Next we describe a case salient to our argument, the ready-made garment industry’s stakeholder engagement responses to the Rana Plaza tragedy in Bangladesh, into which we bring an understanding of agonism with the possibilities of dissensual engagement. We conclude with our contribution, the development of a nuanced view of pluralism based on dissensus and agonism, which better accounts for the co-existence of cooperation and conflict.

show abstract

The Virtues of Equality and Dissensus: MacIntyre in a Dialogue with Rancière and Mouffe

Cited by 17 publications

References 41 publications

The influence of Alasdair MacIntyre’s “After Virtue” book on business ethics studies: A citation concept analysis

The influence of Alasdair MacIntyre’s “After Virtue” book on business ethics studies: A citation concept analysis

Cross-sector dialogue for sustainability: to partner or not to partner?

Agonising over industrial relations: Bringing agonism and dissensus to the pluralist frames of reference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About