Search results

The use of social media by collaborative organizations has been studied in a variety of contexts, including virtual teams, enterprise organizations, and social movements. However, social media are not often examined within the context of scientific organizations. This article explores how an organization of 122 life scientists and science-related professionals—anonymized as Science City Network (SciCity)—combine monthly symposia with social media, including Twitter, Facebook, and blogs. Using an online survey, we found that younger SciCity members are more interested in using social media to support a collaborative community, whereas older members are more interested in social applications. Social media use was not found to significantly differ by gender. Using social network analysis, we found several individuals who act as hubs of information who keep the SciCity Twitter network alive. However, the hierarchical structure of the network reveals that it is better suited for information dissemination than innovation and collaboration. Our examination of this scientific organization ultimately offers insight into how a coalition of multiple social media technologies is used differentially by organizational members and that there is ultimately no general consensus of the utility of social media to scientific collaboration. This finding tempers some claims of the utility of social media for scientific collaboration.

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to explore intersectionality as accomplished in interaction, and particularly national difference as a component of intersectionality.Design/methodology/approach– The authors use ethnographic, shadowing methods to examine intersectionality in-depth and developed vignettes to illuminate the experience of intersectionality.Findings– National difference mitigated the common assumption in scientific work that tenure and education are the most important markers of acceptance and collegiality. Moreover, national difference was a more prominent driving occupational discourse in scientific work than gender.Research limitations/implications– The data were limited in scope, though the authors see this as a necessity for generating in-depth intersectional data. Implications question the prominence of gender and (domestic) race/gender as "the" driving discourses of difference in much scholarship and offer a new view into how organizing around identity happens. Specifically, the authors develop "intersectional pairs" to understand the paradoxes of intersectionality, and as comprising a larger, woven experience of "intersectional netting."Social implications– This research draws critical attention to how assumptions regarding national difference shape workplace experiences, in an era of intensified global migration and immigration debates.Originality/value– The study foregrounds the negotiation of national difference in US workplaces, and focusses on how organization around said difference happens interactively in communication.

In this article we examine the processes of academic potential reproduction, taking into account the main threats from scientific migration. Historically, since the 1990-s the amount of researchers in Russian Federation decreased by 58%. Under these conditions it is necessary to estimate the scale of further scientific migration and the outflow of researchers to other spheres of economy. For this purpose we developed a synthetic construction of dynamic models of labor migration and proportional economic growth with two-level optimization. The basis of this model is presented by the classical problem of optimal investments into capital management, expanded by the control unit of total costs directed to the labor resources. This model construction allows us to describe the migration movement between scientific organizations and institutes, taking into account the difference in working conditions. The pricing mechanism in this model is based on the assumption of organization's output maximization at a fixed cost. As result we obtained a multi-level model for the prediction of scientific personnel migratory flows between organizations. © 2018 ; The research was supported by Act «211 of the Government of the Russian Federation, agreement № 02.A03.21.0006».