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 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. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Noha El-Bassiouny [verfasserIn] Ahmed Amin [verfasserIn] Ahmad Jamal [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2020

Schlagwörter:	management research islamic jurisprudence of priorities prioritization process research priorities

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:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1108/JHASS-09-2019-0047

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ032018983

Internformat


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

Indexfelder

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

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Individual choice of management research agendas: Ethical guidance from Islamic prioritization heuristics

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?