Institutt for kommunikasjon og kultur

Journal of Communication Management Doi: https://www.emerald.com/jcom/article/doi/10.1108/JCOM-10-2025-0291/1369809/Excellence-through-learning-exploring-managerial

Purpose Chief communication officers (CCOs) face increasingly complex challenges due to dynamic developments in the technological, sociopolitical and economic spheres. Consequently, they are forced to continuously develop their competencies to innovate at a high speed, future-proof their teams and create communication excellence. While learning on the leadership level is well-studied from a management perspective, little is known about how CCOs practice managerial learning, the challenges they experience and how they manage and evaluate these obstacles. This study tries to fill this knowledge gap. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative approach was applied to explore this under-researched topic. In-depth interviews with a sample of 30 CCOs from the 300 largest European companies were conducted, covering 10 different countries. The qualitative design was supported by a standardized pre-questionnaire. Findings The interviewees recognize the need for continuous learning, but their activities are mainly limited to peer exchange and experimentation. While the professional discourse is often driven by agency studies that many do not take seriously, academic research is seen as disconnected from practice. Structured learning opportunities for experienced communication leaders are scarce, which might explain why most interviewees acquire additional competencies in general management but not in corporate communications. Originality/value This empirical study is the first to examine how CCOs develop their competencies. It highlights the significance of managerial learning for advancing corporate communications and explores the challenges leaders face in adopting different learning styles. The findings reveal both strengths and gaps in existing learning practices, offering valuable insights for academic research and professional discourse.

Personnel Review s. 22-22 Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/pr-02-2025-0130

Purpose In the contemporary digital landscape, managers are increasingly leveraging digital tools to facilitate both coordination and autonomy within their distributed teams. This research sought to understand the optimal balance between these seemingly competing forces – team member autonomy and team coordination – and its influence on critical team outcomes. Specifically, the primary purpose of this study was to investigate how this balance impacts the perception of manager effectiveness by team members and the overall coordination levels within the team itself. By exploring these relationships, the research aimed to provide valuable insights into the effective management of distributed teams. Design/methodology/approach This research employed a two-pronged approach to examine the dynamics of autonomy and coordination in distributed teams. The first study utilized a time-lagged, multisource field design, collecting data from 34 managers and 151 of their respective distributed team members. This design allowed for the examination of the relationships over time and incorporated perspectives from both managers and team members. The second study adopted a diary study methodology, tracking the experiences of 150 distributed team workers over a period of two weeks. Participants completed daily reports on their experiences with autonomy, coordination and communication within their teams. These complementary methodologies allowed for a robust and nuanced understanding of the research questions. Findings The research results revealed a complex relationship between team member autonomy and key outcomes. Contrary to a linear expectation, the findings indicated curvilinear effects of autonomy on both manager effectiveness and team coordination. This suggests that there is an optimal level of autonomy; too little or too much autonomy can negatively impact these outcomes. Furthermore, these curvilinear relationships were found to be contingent on specific contextual factors. In Study 1, the effect of autonomy on manager effectiveness was moderated by the manager’s own role clarity, suggesting that clearly defined roles are crucial for leveraging autonomy effectively. In Study 2, the daily communication patterns within the team moderated the impact of autonomy on team coordination, indicating the importance of open and frequent communication in managing the effects of autonomy on collaborative efforts. Originality/value The study highlights a curvilinear relationship between autonomy and both manager effectiveness and team coordination. This suggests that the study is moving beyond a simple “more autonomy is better” or “less autonomy is better” paradigm. Moreover, the finding that the autonomy–outcome relationship is contingent on managerial role clarity and daily team communication suggests a nuanced understanding of the conditions under which autonomy is beneficial. This focus on contextual factors adds to the theoretical understanding of autonomy in distributed teams.

Journal of Management & Organization s. 34-34 Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2026.10100

Abstract People with disabilities represent a large, underutilized labor force, and while disability employment is increasingly recognized as a strategic human resource opportunity, reports on its value are fragmented. Existing research often emphasizes benefits for firms or employees with disabilities, overlooking other stakeholders and potential accompanying costs. This systematic review synthesizes 45 empirical studies published between 2000 and 2025, examining both benefits and costs across multiple stakeholders, value dimensions, and organizational positions. Findings reveal that most reported values were gain-related and firm-centered. Meanwhile, patterns of intra-stakeholder clustering and inter-stakeholder linkages highlighted the complex dynamics of shared outcomes. Four benefit–cost dynamics were identified, alongside evidence of occupational segregation in low-value job roles. By applying a multi-stakeholder framework, this review advances the human resource management literature, showing how disability employment can be leveraged strategically to create interconnected values, foster inclusion, and support sustainable workforce practices.

Gender and Intersectional Inequalities in the Platform Economy s. 116-141 Doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003627753-7

Extant research on the platform economy has largely focused on worker perspectives, the nuances of platforms’ individual labour processes, and client dynamics. However, the broader social embeddedness of platform work is under-researched, especially regarding how these new forms of work are societally perceived in terms of their value to society and overall prestige. In recent empirical research, we showed that digital economy occupations (broadly defined beyond the platform economy) suffer from a prestige and social value deficit compared to comparable but more established occupations. In this contribution we explore further the intersectional dynamics at play, particularly how gender and ethnicity impact the social structuration of work. Thus, we ask in this chapter: How are perceptions of the prestige and social value of platform economy work gendered? How do these perceptions depend on social categories such as age, ethnicity and socio-economic status? To answer these questions, we rely on high-quality and comprehensive survey data on the prestige and social value landscape of 576 occupations in the United Kingdom, including many platform economy occupations such as Online Freelance Care Worker (e.g., Care.com), App-Based Ride-Hail Driver (e.g., Uber), App-Based Food Delivery Courier (e.g., Deliveroo), and Social Media Travel Influencer. We use descriptive statistics and regression analyses to relate prestige and social value scores to demographic information, contextualize our analyses within literature on inequalities and intersectionality in the platform economy, and discuss the policy implications of our findings.

Human Arenas Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42087-026-00630-1

Recently, Majority World scholars have decried the exclusion of indigenous knowledge systems and lived experiences from the global knowledge economy. There have been persistent calls, particularly in psychology, to decolonize the field by centering knowledge frameworks and indigenous perspectives from Majority World contexts. One barrier to decolonizing efforts in post-colonial settings is the challenge associated with epistemic agency: the systematic denial of Majority World scholars’ capacity to draw from their own indigenous resources to conceptualize and theorize from their given epistemic locations. Scholars have suggested that Minority World researchers practice epistemic humility by realizing that their way of knowing is merely a way of knowing, and by actively recognizing and engaging with other ways of knowing. Such practices are crucial to avoid enfolding Majority World scholars into dominant Western ontological and epistemological frameworks, which contributes to reproducing and perpetuating dominant Western knowledge frameworks in former colonies. In this article, we ask the question: how can we foster the habit of speaking up for other ways of knowing to achieve decolonization of knowledge? To address this, we introduce the concept of academic boldness to this debate—the willingness and confidence to be innovative and articulate one’s unique knowledges, theories and concepts even if this may lead to pushback, questioning or being ignored—as one such critical resource required to contest and resist received Western knowledge systems. We trace the origin of the exclusion of Majority World knowledges, the hegemony of Western epistemologies, the gatekeeping powers of Minority World scholars, and the presumed authority of universalist knowledge claims to the history of colonization. We draw from our own experiences of working with African and Western researchers to show how challenges related to academic boldness could unintentionally recolonize Majority World scholars by enfolding them into Western default knowledge structures.