Management research on multinational corporations:A methodological critique

In the context of burgeoning research on multinational corporations (MNCs), this paper addresses the issue of the representativeness of databases of MNCs in Ireland. It identifies some important deficiencies in existing databases much used by scholars in the field. Drawing on the international literature, it finds that this problem also characterises research on MNCs in many other countries. In the Irish context, we find that the extant empirical research has generally excluded two key categories of MNCs, namely, (a) foreign MNCs which are not grant-aided by the main industrial promotions agencies and (b) Irish-owned MNCs. The paper outlines our experience in identifying and addressing these deficiencies and describes the methods that might be employed in more precisely defining the MNC population in Ireland. More generally the paper reviews some of the issues and obstacles confronting scholars investigating the MNC sector in Ireland and abroad.

The Postmodernist Critique of Evidence-Based Practice

In this paper, we examine the postmodernist argument that evidence-based practice (EBP) should be rejected by nurses because it restricts the sources of knowledge used by practitioners. Three main postmodernist criticisms are identified and discussed. First, that the notion of ‘best evidence’ implies a hierarchical and exclusivist approach to knowledge. We accept this argument, noting that such a hierarchy is accepted and justified by many of its proponents. Second, that the hierarchy embraced by the evidence-based practice movement damages health care because it excludes other forms of evidence that are needed to understand the complexity of care. We accept that some manifestations of EBP, notably the Cochrane Collaboration, have devalued qualitative evidence. Using our previous experience of conducting Cochrane reviews (McGaughey et al. 2007), we argue that this limits explanatory scope. Third, that it fails to take account of individuals or their experience. Here, we use evidence of the use by midwives of EBP policies and protocols to the detriment of including women in decision-making processes (Porter et al. 2007) to accept that there is also some merit to this critique. We conclude that, while it is not necessary to concur with the total rejection of EBP that postmodernists advocate, it is necessary to address the issues they raise in order to ensure that EBP better fits the requirements of nursing.
McGaughey, J., Alderdice, F., Fowler, R., Kapila, A., Mayhew, A., Moutray, M., 2007. Outreach and Early Warning Systems (EWS) for the prevention of Intensive Care admission and death of critically ill adult patients on general hospital wards. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD005529. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005529.pub2.
Porter, S., Crozier, K., Sinclair, M., Kernohan, W., 2007. New midwifery? A qualitative analysis of midwives’ decision-making strategies. Journal of Advanced Nursing 60 (6), 525-534.

Carrefours de la sociocritique. E´ dite´ par ANTHONY GLINOER. (¼ Texte: revue de critique et de the´orie litte´raire, 45/46). Toronto: E´ ditions Trintexte, 2009. 227 pp. Pb CAD $35.00

French Studies (2012) 66 (1): 125-126 doi:10.1093/fs/knr208

Jonathan Swift's Critique of Consequentialism?

Jonathan Swift’s Modest Proposal for preventing the children of poor people from being a burthen to their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the public can be regarded as a critique of consequentialism, perhaps the finest and most effective that has ever been written. Swift’s argument is not explicit but his use of consequentialist reasoning shows how it is possible to rationally justify a course of action which is grotesque and barbaric. This interpretation of Swift’s pamphlet is supported by considering it in relation to works by Bernard Mandeville and William Petty. Both authors employed consequentialist reasoning and Swift is likely to have been familiar with their work.

L'indicateur EU2020 de suivi de la pauvreté et de l'exclusion: une analyse critique

The reduction of poverty and social exclusion is one of the targets of the European Union's 2020 strategy. The appropriateness and success of such a policy require the choice of relevant indicators that not only highlight poverty gaps between countries but also identify the groups of individuals in each country that need particular attention from social policies. The target retained in the European strategy combines three criteria: people living in households below the monetary poverty threshold, poor people “in terms of standard of living” who live in a situation of severe material deprivation, and those who live in households with very low or zero work intensity. We first show that neither the combination nor the intersection of these three criteria produces an adequate measure of the fight against poverty, or an objective for it. We therefore propose an alternative concept, that of “consistent poverty”, which targets people who simultaneously live below the monetary poverty threshold and above a certain level of material deprivation. The special material deprivation module of the EU-SILC 2009 database allows us to examine two versions of this notion of deprivation: the measurement of “severe” deprivation currently used by the European Union, which adopts a threshold with four items, and an alternative measure of “elementary” material deprivation with a three-item threshold. The intersection between our three-item elementary deprivation criterion and the monetary poverty criterion produces more satisfactory results than those obtained by the European Union approach, in terms of both coherency and profile of the population identified.

Labour Law as Human Rights Law: A Critique of the Use of ‘Dignity’ by Freedland and Kountouris

In their recent book, The Legal Construction of Personal Work Relations, Mark Freedland and Nicola Kountouris present an ambitious study of the personal scope of (what they would not want to call) ‘employment’ law. The book does this within a broader argument that calls for the reconceptualization of labour law as a whole, and it is this broader argument on which I shall focus in this chapter. Their aim, in urging us to see labour law through the lens of ‘dignity’ is to bring labour law and human rights law into closer alignment than has sometimes been the case in the past. Increasingly, dignity is seen as providing a, sometimes the, foundation of human rights law, particularly in Europe. I shall suggest that whilst the aim of constructing a new set of foundations for labour law is a worthy and increasingly urgent task, the concepts on which Freedland and Kountouris seek to build their project pose significant difficulties. In particular, their espousal of ‘dignity’ presents problems that must be addressed if their reconceptualization is not to prove a blind alley.