Securing the Youth Vote: A Comparative Analysis of Digital Persuasion on TikTok Among Political Actors

In the context of "pop politics" and "politainment," the irruption of TikTok has changed the landscape of social media and become the fastest-growing application among young people. Based on the peculiarities of the social platform's affordances and the political personalization approach, we explore the differences between political parties and political leaders in terms of digital persuasion on TikTok in Spain and Poland. This work contributes to the scarce knowledge about the strategic use of TikTok for political purposes. It also attempts to fill the gap in the comparative research into the practical uses of TikTok in different political contexts. The study explores the three classical persuasion appeals - pathos, ethos, and logos - based on a visual, quantitative analysis of N = 372 videos posted on the official TikTok profiles of the main political parties and leaders from January 1st to March 31st, 2022. Differences were found in how political parties and political leaders used TikTok's affordances as well as in the main rhetorical resource they use to persuade. We noted the use of more rational resources (logos) in the case of political parties and more emotional resources (pathos) for political leaders. Further, the rare presence of the personality in the videos of the political actors (ethos), along with their unusual privatization role, indicate that personalization on TikTok is far from being considered as part of their digital persuasion strategy

Evaluating m-government applications: an elaboration likelihood model framework

Mobile government application and services refer to governmental functions that are available to mobile devices, such as smart phones or personal digital assistants, to the users anytime/anywhere. M-Government and m-Participation are emergent concepts used to represent the evolving field of public administration functions provided as mobile services and the provision of participation to public consultations via mobile devices accordingly. In this paper we present an evaluation framework for m-government tools. The evaluation approach is grounded on the assumption that m-government tools should not only provide access to governmental information and functions, but they should also motivate users to participate to public policy making processes. The evaluation approach is based on the Elaboration Likelihood Model. Its novelty lies on a) its ability to capture the actual performance of a system instead of the users’ perceptions, and b) its capacity to assess the motivational and persuasive ability of a system.EU FP7 Marie Curie People Project “CEES - Citizen oriented Evaluation of E-Government Systems (reference IAPP-2008-230658) and EU FP7 Project “UbiPOL- Ubiquitous Participation Platform for Policy Making” (Reference INFSO-ICT-248010)

So What? : HR Measurement as a Change Catalyst

[ Excerpt] There is unprecedented recognition among top managers throughout the world that people make the difference. Reading the professional business press, one would think that the battle for measuring the impact of human resources has already been won. Emerging flexible organizations are seen as requiring increased attention to vision, style, cooperation and teamwork (Ghoshal & Mintzberg, 1994; Halal, 1993). Business writers tout the essential role of world-class training that values people skills and fosters entrepreneurship (Dumaine, 1995; Rau, 1994). We even see the latest pair of best-selling authors, Michael Hammer and James Champy chiding managers that the biggest lie told by most organizations is that \u27people are our most important assets \u27, and calling for dramatically increased investments in people (Lancaster, 1995). It is also apparent that some of the most admired managers say managing people as their most important role. Jack Welch, of General Electric Corporation is quoted as saying Anybody who gets this [CEO] job has got to believe in the gut that people are the key to everything (Tichy, 1993). There is also growing evidence that organizational success is correlated with the existence of combinations of high-performance work designs and highperformance human resource practices (MacDuffie, 1995; Arthur, 1994; Huselid, in press)

Informal Authority in the Workplace

{Excerpt} In most types of organizations, formal authority is located at the top as part of an exchange against fairly explicit expectations. In networked, pluralistic organizations that must rapidly formulate adaptive solutions in an increasingly complex world, its power is eroding as its functions become less clear. In the 21st century, the requirements of organizational speed demand investments in informal authority. Formal authority—the power to influence or command thought, opinion, or behavior—is the defining characteristic of societal and organizational hierarchy. Ideally, after Ronald Heifetz, it is expected to serve five functions that most will agree are indispensable to social life. They are to (i) provide direction, (ii) offer protection, (iii) orientate roles, (iv) control conflict, and (v) maintain norms. Then again, in practice, there is a darker side to what formal authority can do on any given day: for instance, a boss can restrict a subordinate’s actions, invalidate his or her decisions, or move for dismissal