Reducing energy consumption in urban households is essential for reaching the necessary climate research and policy targets for CO2 reduction and sustainability. The dominant approach has been to invest in technological innovations that increase household energy efficiency. This article moves beyond this approach, first by emphasising the need to prioritise reducing energy demand over increasing energy efficiency and, second, by addressing the challenge of energy consumption at the level of the community, not the individual household. It argues that energy consumption is shaped in and by social communities, which construct consciousness of the energy implications of lifestyle choices. By analysing a specific type of community, a digital community, it looks at the role that communication on online discussion boards plays in the social process of questioning energy needs and shaping a “decent lifestyle”. The article explores three social processes of community interaction around energy practices – coercive, mimetic, and normative – questioning the ways in which they contribute to the activation of energy discursive consciousness. In conclusion, the article reflects on the potential implications of these social processes for future research and interventions aimed at reducing energy demand. To illustrate how the three selected social processes influence one another, the article builds on the results of a research project conducted in Amsterdam, analysing the potential contribution of online discussion boards in shaping energy norms in the Sustainable Community of Amsterdam Facebook group.
This study explores how non-executive directors are challenged by management while they seek to improve the effectiveness of supervisory boards in the Netherlands. A combination of semi-structured interviews and a questionnaire among non-executive directors indicates that supervisory board members mainly experience boardroom challenges in three core areas: the ability of non-executive directors to ask management critical questions, information asymmetries between the management and supervisory boards and the management of the relationship between individual executive and non-executive directors. The qualitative in-depth analysis reveals the complexity of the main contributing factors to problems in the boardroom as well as the range of process and social interventions non-executive directors use to address boardroom issues. The findings highlight the need to better understand boardroom processes and the need of non-executive directors to carefully manage relationships in and around the boardroom.
LINK
Talk by members of executive hospital boards influences the organizational positioning of nurses. Talk is a relational leadership practice. Using a qualitative‐ interpretive design we organized focus group meetings wherein members of executive hospital boards (7), nurses (14), physicians (7), and managers (6), from 15 Dutch hospitals, discussed the organizational positioning of nursing during COVID crisis. We found that members of executive hospital boards consider the positioning of nursing in crisis a task of nurses themselves and not as a collective, interdependent, and/or specific board responsibility. Furthermore, members of executive hospital boards talk about the nursing profession as (1) more practical than strategic, (2) ambiguous in positioning, and (3) distinctive from the medical profession. Such talk seemingly contrasts with the notion of interdependence that highlights how actors depend on each other in interaction. Interdependence is central to collaboration in hospital crises. In this paper, therefore, we depart from the members of executive hospital boards as leader and “positioner,” and focus on talk— as a discursive leadership practice—to illuminate leadership and governance in hospitals in crisis, as social, interdependent processes.
MULTIFILE
