Although the attention for neurodiversity in human resource management (HRM) is growing, neurodivergent individuals are still primarily supported from a deficit-oriented paradigm, which points towards individuals' deviation from neurotypical norms. Following the HRM process model, our study explored to what extent a strengths-based HRM approach to the identification, use, and development of strengths of neurodivergent groups is intended, implemented, and perceived in organizations. Thirty participants were interviewed, including HRM professionals (n=15), supervisors of neurodivergent employees (n=4), and neurodivergent employees (n=11). Our findings show that there is significant potential in embracing the strengths-based approach to promote neurodiversity-inclusion, for instance with the use of job crafting practices or (awareness) training to promote strengths use. Still, the acknowledgement of neurodivergent individuals' strengths in the workplace depends on the integration of the strengths-based approach into a supportive framework of HR practices related to strengths identification, use, and development. Here, particular attention should be dedicated to strengths development for neurodivergent employees (e.g., optimally balancing strengths use). By adopting the strengths-based HRM approach to neurodiversity as a means of challenging the ableist norms of organizations, we add to the HRM literature by contributing to the discussion on how both research and organizations can optimally support an increasingly diverse workforce by focusing on individual strengths
DOCUMENT
In this paper, we analyse the development of the term “legal capabilities”. More specifically, we do three things. First, we track the emergence and development of the notion of legal capabilities. The term legal capabilities was used in legal research long before the capability approach was introduced in that field. Early on, its conceptualisation mainly reflected elements of legal literacy. In more recent writings, it is claimed that the notion is based on the capability approach. Second, we critically analyse the current use of the term legal capabilities and show that there is no proper theoretical grounding of this term in the capability approach. This is problematic, because it might give rise to misunderstandings and flawed policy recommendations. Third, we suggest some first steps towards a revision of the notion of legal capabilities. Starting from the concept of “access to justice”, legal capabilities have to be understood as the real opportunities someone has to get access to justice, rather than merely as formal opportunities or internal capabilities.
MULTIFILE
Communities of Practice (CoPs) are social learning systems that can be, to a certain extent, designed. Wenger (1998) proposes the following paradox; “ no community can fully design the learning of another, but at the same time, no community can fully design its own learning” (p:234). My interpretation of Wenger’s statement is that learning environments such as CoPs need to be facilitated in their learning processes, but not their specific design. Approaching CoPs this way allows for the design of interventions that facilitate learning processes within a CoP rather than regulate them. However, empirical studies on facilitating internal processes of CoPs are sparse – most work is anecdotal. This means that one needs to look to other fields for guidance in order to discover how to facilitate CoPs in their learning. This paper describes part of a larger research project that asks the question whether communities of practice can be instituted in higher professional educational organizations as an effective method to facilitate participant learning (professional development) and stimulate new knowledge creation in the service of the organization. Using a more pragmatic approach to cultivating CoPs (Ropes, 2007) opens the possibility to use different theoretical perspectives in order to find and ground interventions that can facilitate learning in CoPs and which are typically used in organizational development trajectories based on learning (de Caluwe & Vermaak, 2002). In this paper I look at how theories of human resource development, workplace learning and social constructivism conceptualize learning and what type of environments promote this. I then map out community of practice theory along these fields in order to come to a synthesized conceptual framework, which I will use to help understand what specific interventions can be used for designing CoPs. Finally I propose several interventions based on the work done here. The main question I consider here can be formulated as follows; ‘what insight can Human Resource Development theories, Workplace Learning theories and Social Constructivist learning theory give in order to design interventions that facilitate internal processes of communities of practice?’
DOCUMENT
