Topic
CLARITY
About: CLARITY is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 3894 publications have been published within this topic receiving 88785 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: Analysis of statistical control in a random sample of 60 articles published in four top journals during 2000 to 2002 found potential problems included a lack of explanations for inclusion, unclear descriptions of measures and methods, incomplete reporting, and other flaws.
Abstract: The author examines statistical control in a random sample of 60 articles published in four top journals during 2000 to 2002. Authors’bases for including control variables, clarity regarding measur...
1,749 citations
TL;DR: This paper argued that the well-worn constructs of firm performance or success and failure of the individual entrepreneur do not provide the field the clarity of purpose and unique domain it desires, and that the context of small business is not what will bring singular clarity for the field.
Abstract: In this chapter an argument is made for a clear articulation for the exclusive domain of entrepreneurship research. To date, the entrepreneurship academic community has neglected to define clear boundaries as to what distinguishes entrepreneurship scholarship from other closely related fields. It is argued here that the well-worn constructs of firm performance or success and failure of the individual entrepreneur do not provide the field the clarity of purpose and unique domain it desires. Similarly, the context of small business is not what will bring singular clarity for the field. Instead, this chapter argues that entrepreneurship research should be focused upon understanding how opportunities to bring future goods and services into existence occur.
1,373 citations
TL;DR: The authors have observed a growth in the number of qualitative studies that have no guiding set of philosophic assumptions in the form of one of the established qualitative methodologies, and they encourage such debate and offer four basic requirements as a point of departure: noting the researchers' position, distinguishing method and methodology, making explicit the approach to rigor, and identifying the researchers's analytic lens.
Abstract: We have observed a growth in the number of qualitative studies that have no guiding set of philosophic assumptions in the form of one of the established qualitative methodologies. This lack of allegiance to an established qualitative approach presents many challenges for "generic qualitative" studies, one of which is that the literature lacks debate about how to do a generic study well. We encourage such debate and offer four basic requirements as a point of departure: noting the researchers’ position, distinguishing method and methodology, making explicit the approach to rigor, and identifying the researchers’ analytic lens.
1,157 citations
TL;DR: The authors argue that strategic ambiguity is essential to organizing in that it promotes unified diversity, facilitates organizational change, and amplifies existing source attributions and preserves privileged positions, and that people in organizations confront multiple situational requirements, develop multiple and often conflicting goals and respond with communicative strategies which do not always minimize ambiguity, but are nonetheless effective.
Abstract: This paper argues that while most teachers, researchers, and practitioners of organizational communication encourage clarity, a critical examination of communication processes in organizations reveals that clarity is both non‐normative and not a sensible standard against which to gauge individual or organizational effectiveness. People in organizations confront multiple situational requirements, develop multiple and often conflicting goals, and respond with communicative strategies which do not always minimize ambiguity, but are nonetheless effective. Strategic ambiguity is essential to organizing in that it: (1) promotes unified diversity, (2) facilitates organizational change, and (3) amplifies existing source attributions and preserves privileged positions.
1,045 citations
TL;DR: The skeptical economist's guide to "tacit knowledge" as discussed by the authors proposes a more coherent re-conceptualization of these aspects of knowledge production and distribution activities for science, technological innovation and long-run economic growth.
Abstract: This paper attempts a greater precision and clarity of understanding concerning the nature and economic significance of knowledge and its variegated forms by presenting "the skeptical economist's guide to 'tacit knowledge."' It critically reconsiders the ways in which the concepts of tacitness and codification have come to be employed by economists and develops a more coherent re-conceptualization of these aspects of knowledge production and distribution activities. It seeks also to show that a proposed alternative framework for the study of knowledge codification activities offers a more useful guide for further research directed to informing public policies for science, technological innovation and long-run economic growth. Copyright 2000 by Oxford University Press.
1,043 citations