Suchergebnisse

Authors -- Introduction: engagement : what is it and why do it? -- Step 1: Find something to improve : something that makes your job easier -- Step 2: Offer ideas on how to improve a process, product, or service and ask your co-workers for their help -- Step 3: Test your ideas -- Step 4: Recognize your co-workers for their help -- Step 5: Share skills needed for the improved process -- Appendices -- Definitions -- Resources -- Index

Foreword -- What is engagement? -- Why engage, involve, and motivate employees? -- 5-step method to engage, involve, and motivate employees -- Step 1 -- Find projects to pull people -- Step 2 -- Ask for ideas on specific improvements -- Step 3 -- Set time targets to test ideas and complete action steps -- Step 4 -- Motivate actions with positive recognition -- Step 5 -- Coach with feedback: verbal, data and graphs -- Tabx001 -- Complete, then repeat -- How many people to engage? : let the project pull the number of people -- How project teams create motivation -- Build a culture of trust with your actions -- How to measure your success -- When correcting is needed : deal with negatives and move on -- FMMS (frequently-made mistakes) : troubleshooting and preventing them -- Grow more leaders -- Appendices -- Launch guide for engaging, involving, and motivating employees -- Pinch point warnings : the collection -- Engagement WD-40 tips : the collection -- Find a project and pick the team -- Brainstorming for solutions -- Leveling ideas -- Forms -- Glossary -- Resources -- About the authors -- Index

This article offers three interrelated critiques of Bourdieusian class analysis. First, Bourdieu replaces classes on paper with capitals on paper. He offers a false break from Marx in an effort to make capital more 'relational' via a theory of social space, but in doing so he neglects capital's fundamental relation to labor. Second, Bourdieu offers a theory of domination without exploitation. Bourdieu's classes live against one another, but it remains unclear how some classes might also live off of others. Third, and as a consequence of the first two missteps, he emphasizes position over production. Bourdieu typically sees 'production' as a form of 'position-taking' and as something best examined toward the top of social hierarchies. By largely ignoring labor and exploitation, he generates a theory of positions at the expense of a theory of production.

A significant group of sociologists entering graduate school in the late 1960s and 1970s embraced Marxism as the foundation for a critical challenge to reigning orthodoxies in the discipline. In this review, we ask what impact this cohort of scholars and their students had on the mainstream of American sociology. More generally, how and in what ways did the resurgence of neo-Marxist thought within the discipline lead to new theoretical and empirical research and findings? Using two models of Marxism as science as our guide, we examine the impact of sociological Marxism on research on the state, inequality, the labor process, and global political economy. We conclude with some thoughts about the future of sociological Marxism.