Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics
Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has add...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Noha El-Bassiouny [verfasserIn] Ahmed Amin [verfasserIn] Ahmad Jamal [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2020 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences - Emerald Publishing, 2020, 2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:2 ; year:2020 ; number:1 ; pages:33-45 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
DOAJ032018983 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | DOAJ032018983 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230502204151.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230226s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ032018983 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJ19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
050 | 0 | |a H1-99 | |
100 | 0 | |a Noha El-Bassiouny |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics |
264 | 1 | |c 2020 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature. | ||
650 | 4 | |a management research | |
650 | 4 | |a islamic jurisprudence of priorities | |
650 | 4 | |a prioritization process | |
650 | 4 | |a research priorities | |
653 | 0 | |a Social sciences (General) | |
700 | 0 | |a Ahmed Amin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Ahmad Jamal |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences |d Emerald Publishing, 2020 |g 2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45 |w (DE-627)1760610275 |x 2632279X |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:2 |g year:2020 |g number:1 |g pages:33-45 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047/full/pdf?title=individual-choice-of-management-research-agendas-ethical-guidance-from-islamic-prioritization-heuristics |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2632-279X |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2086 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 2 |j 2020 |e 1 |h 33-45 |
author_variant |
n e b neb a a aa a j aj |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:2632279X:2020----::niiulhiefaaeeteerhgnaehcludnermsai |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2020 |
callnumber-subject-code |
H |
publishDate |
2020 |
allfields |
10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 doi (DE-627)DOAJ032018983 (DE-599)DOAJ19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng H1-99 Noha El-Bassiouny verfasserin aut Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature. management research islamic jurisprudence of priorities prioritization process research priorities Social sciences (General) Ahmed Amin verfasserin aut Ahmad Jamal verfasserin aut In Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences Emerald Publishing, 2020 2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45 (DE-627)1760610275 2632279X nnns volume:2 year:2020 number:1 pages:33-45 https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f kostenfrei https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047/full/pdf?title=individual-choice-of-management-research-agendas-ethical-guidance-from-islamic-prioritization-heuristics kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2632-279X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2 2020 1 33-45 |
spelling |
10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 doi (DE-627)DOAJ032018983 (DE-599)DOAJ19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng H1-99 Noha El-Bassiouny verfasserin aut Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature. management research islamic jurisprudence of priorities prioritization process research priorities Social sciences (General) Ahmed Amin verfasserin aut Ahmad Jamal verfasserin aut In Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences Emerald Publishing, 2020 2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45 (DE-627)1760610275 2632279X nnns volume:2 year:2020 number:1 pages:33-45 https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f kostenfrei https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047/full/pdf?title=individual-choice-of-management-research-agendas-ethical-guidance-from-islamic-prioritization-heuristics kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2632-279X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2 2020 1 33-45 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 doi (DE-627)DOAJ032018983 (DE-599)DOAJ19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng H1-99 Noha El-Bassiouny verfasserin aut Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature. management research islamic jurisprudence of priorities prioritization process research priorities Social sciences (General) Ahmed Amin verfasserin aut Ahmad Jamal verfasserin aut In Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences Emerald Publishing, 2020 2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45 (DE-627)1760610275 2632279X nnns volume:2 year:2020 number:1 pages:33-45 https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f kostenfrei https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047/full/pdf?title=individual-choice-of-management-research-agendas-ethical-guidance-from-islamic-prioritization-heuristics kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2632-279X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2 2020 1 33-45 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 doi (DE-627)DOAJ032018983 (DE-599)DOAJ19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng H1-99 Noha El-Bassiouny verfasserin aut Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature. management research islamic jurisprudence of priorities prioritization process research priorities Social sciences (General) Ahmed Amin verfasserin aut Ahmad Jamal verfasserin aut In Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences Emerald Publishing, 2020 2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45 (DE-627)1760610275 2632279X nnns volume:2 year:2020 number:1 pages:33-45 https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f kostenfrei https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047/full/pdf?title=individual-choice-of-management-research-agendas-ethical-guidance-from-islamic-prioritization-heuristics kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2632-279X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2 2020 1 33-45 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 doi (DE-627)DOAJ032018983 (DE-599)DOAJ19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng H1-99 Noha El-Bassiouny verfasserin aut Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature. management research islamic jurisprudence of priorities prioritization process research priorities Social sciences (General) Ahmed Amin verfasserin aut Ahmad Jamal verfasserin aut In Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences Emerald Publishing, 2020 2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45 (DE-627)1760610275 2632279X nnns volume:2 year:2020 number:1 pages:33-45 https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f kostenfrei https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047/full/pdf?title=individual-choice-of-management-research-agendas-ethical-guidance-from-islamic-prioritization-heuristics kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2632-279X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2 2020 1 33-45 |
language |
English |
source |
In Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences 2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45 volume:2 year:2020 number:1 pages:33-45 |
sourceStr |
In Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences 2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45 volume:2 year:2020 number:1 pages:33-45 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
management research islamic jurisprudence of priorities prioritization process research priorities Social sciences (General) |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Noha El-Bassiouny @@aut@@ Ahmed Amin @@aut@@ Ahmad Jamal @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2020-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
1760610275 |
id |
DOAJ032018983 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ032018983</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502204151.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ032018983</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">H1-99</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Noha El-Bassiouny</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">management research</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">islamic jurisprudence of priorities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">prioritization process</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">research priorities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Social sciences (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ahmed Amin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ahmad Jamal</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences</subfield><subfield code="d">Emerald Publishing, 2020</subfield><subfield code="g">2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1760610275</subfield><subfield code="x">2632279X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:2</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:33-45</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047/full/pdf?title=individual-choice-of-management-research-agendas-ethical-guidance-from-islamic-prioritization-heuristics</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2632-279X</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">2</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">33-45</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
callnumber-first |
H - Social Science |
author |
Noha El-Bassiouny |
spellingShingle |
Noha El-Bassiouny misc H1-99 misc management research misc islamic jurisprudence of priorities misc prioritization process misc research priorities misc Social sciences (General) Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics |
authorStr |
Noha El-Bassiouny |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)1760610275 |
format |
electronic Article |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut |
collection |
DOAJ |
remote_str |
true |
callnumber-label |
H1-99 |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
2632279X |
topic_title |
H1-99 Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics management research islamic jurisprudence of priorities prioritization process research priorities |
topic |
misc H1-99 misc management research misc islamic jurisprudence of priorities misc prioritization process misc research priorities misc Social sciences (General) |
topic_unstemmed |
misc H1-99 misc management research misc islamic jurisprudence of priorities misc prioritization process misc research priorities misc Social sciences (General) |
topic_browse |
misc H1-99 misc management research misc islamic jurisprudence of priorities misc prioritization process misc research priorities misc Social sciences (General) |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences |
hierarchy_parent_id |
1760610275 |
hierarchy_top_title |
Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)1760610275 |
title |
Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)DOAJ032018983 (DE-599)DOAJ19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f |
title_full |
Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics |
author_sort |
Noha El-Bassiouny |
journal |
Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences |
journalStr |
Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences |
callnumber-first-code |
H |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2020 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
container_start_page |
33 |
author_browse |
Noha El-Bassiouny Ahmed Amin Ahmad Jamal |
container_volume |
2 |
class |
H1-99 |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Noha El-Bassiouny |
doi_str_mv |
10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
individual choice of management research agendas: ethical guidance from islamic prioritization heuristics |
callnumber |
H1-99 |
title_auth |
Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics |
abstract |
Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature. |
abstractGer |
Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature. |
abstract_unstemmed |
Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
1 |
title_short |
Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 https://doaj.org/article/19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047/full/pdf?title=individual-choice-of-management-research-agendas-ethical-guidance-from-islamic-prioritization-heuristics https://doaj.org/toc/2632-279X |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Ahmed Amin Ahmad Jamal |
author2Str |
Ahmed Amin Ahmad Jamal |
ppnlink |
1760610275 |
callnumber-subject |
H - Social Science |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047 |
callnumber-a |
H1-99 |
up_date |
2024-07-03T23:34:53.699Z |
_version_ |
1803602827621171200 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ032018983</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502204151.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ032018983</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">H1-99</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Noha El-Bassiouny</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose – The main research attempts guiding questions about management research agendas had been relevance questions versus rigor questions. Researchers have also attempted to set management research agendas in particular sectors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research, however, has addressed the infrastructural and foundational questions of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. Because the Islamic theological approach is a “transcendental values integration” approach, it presents a potentially viable source of reference particularly for scholars interested in ethical philosophical paradigmatic approaches. Islamic literature has presented guiding principles as to how to balance priorities through the Jurisprudence of Priorities (Fiqh Al-Awlawiyyat). The purpose of this exploratory conceptual paper is to synchronize the Islamic background literature on the jurisprudence of priorities with management research development and agendas. The research is exploratory in nature. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual, merging Islamic literature with management research for the development of a framework to potentially guide management researchers in prioritizing their research agendas. Findings – The research resulted in the conceptualization of a framework aiding researchers in the prioritization of their research agendas. Research limitations/implications – The research has implications for management scholars who are interested to prioritize their research projects and agendas. The research presents a schematic diagram and guiding framework through which scholars can reflect on their choice of research topics. Practical implications – The research is also relevant to funding agencies as they devise the funding priorities in the management field. Originality/value – This paper addresses the unique and foundational question of what moral priorities and ethical principles should guide the future development of management research. The authors build on a religious-philosophical approach, drawing on the Islamic jurisprudence of priorities as a literature base. The authors, therefore, address the key principles of responsible research regarding how it can be relevant on the infrastructural level to society and how the benefit to key stakeholders should be tackled. To the authors’ knowledge, this was not done in previous literature.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">management research</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">islamic jurisprudence of priorities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">prioritization process</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">research priorities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Social sciences (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ahmed Amin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ahmad Jamal</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences</subfield><subfield code="d">Emerald Publishing, 2020</subfield><subfield code="g">2(2020), 1, Seite 33-45</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1760610275</subfield><subfield code="x">2632279X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:2</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:33-45</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/19c05548d6434490bf76bfc09109589f</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047/full/pdf?title=individual-choice-of-management-research-agendas-ethical-guidance-from-islamic-prioritization-heuristics</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2632-279X</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">2</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">33-45</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.399824 |