Die Frage möglicher Rechtsformen und den damit verknüpften partizipativen und basisdemokratischen Elementen ist bedeutsam für alternative Organisationsformen. Die gemeinnützige Genossenschaft stellt eine Möglichkeit dar – hierzu ein knapper Bericht über den zu den Höfen der solidarischen Landwirtschaft (SoLAWi) zählenden Vauß-Hof in der Zeitschrift contraste:
Im Oktober 2016 wurde die Gesellschaft für sozioökonomische Bildung und Wissenschaft (GSÖBW) (Association for SocioEconomic Education and Research) gegründet. Ziel ist die Förderung einer pluralistischen und interdisziplinären Ausrichtung der Lehre und Forschung in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften. Aus der Gründungserklärung des Vereins:
„Der Ruf nach interdisziplinärem Denken und Forschen steht auf der öffentlichen Agenda seit einigen Jahren weit oben. Die Gesellschaft für sozioökonomische Bildung und Wissenschaft (GSÖBW) trägt den Forderungen nach einer Erneuerung der wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Forschung und Lehre Rechnung. Ihrem Selbstverständnis nach stellt sich sozioökonomische Bildung und Wissenschaft weniger als eine Natur-, sondern vielmehr als eine multiparadigmatische Sozialwissenschaft dar. Sie verpflichtet sich den Prinzipien der Interdisziplinarität, Pluralität und Kontroversität ebenso wie der permanenten ethischen Reflexion. Dies betrifft die Lehre an den Hochschulen ebenso wie den Unterricht an Schulen, verbreitet sich die Forderung nach (mehr) Pluralismus doch vielmehr institutionenübergreifend.“
Zur Tätigkeit des Vereins zählen auch jährliche Fachtagungen. Die 2. Jahrestagung der GSÖBW zum Thema „Historizität und Sozialität in der sozioökonomischen Bildung“ findet vom 27.2-1.3.2018 in Tutzing statt.
Zur Homepage: https://soziooekonomie-bildung.eu/
Als Einstieg in das Feld der Sozioökonomie empfiehlt sich zudem:
Hedtke, Reinhold (Hrsg.) (2015): Was ist und wozu Sozioökonomie? Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Zu unserem Symposium „Partizipationspraktiken in Genossenschaften“ im April in Chemnitz stehen nun die Manuskripte und Foliensätze als Download zur Verfügung. Herzlichen Dank an alle Beitragenden für das zur Verfügung stellen der Manuskripte! Hier die einzelnen Beiträge:
Jürgen Keßler, HTW Berlin: Genossenschaften zwischen unternehmerischer
Effizienz und Teilhabe – eine ökonomische und rechtliche Analyse
Herbert Klemisch, Wissenschaftsladen Bonn: (Post)Demokratie und Unternehmensmitbestimmung in Genossenschaften
Walter Vogt, IG Metall: ‚Mehr Teilhabe wagen‘: Belegschaftsgenossenschaften
als Möglichkeit für die Förderung betrieblicher Partizipation im Kontext von Standort- und
Ronald Hartz, Melanie Hühn, Irma Rybnikova, Markus Tümpel: Partizipationspraktiken in Genossenschaften – Ergebnisse und Diskussion der Fallstudien
Hier der Link zu den Materialien:
Call for Papers
Special Issue of the Journal of Business Ethics
DISSENSUS! RADICAL DEMOCRACY AND BUSINESS ETHICS
Submission Deadline: 4 June 2018
Carl Rhodes, University of Technology Sydney, Australia. email@example.com
Iain Munro, Newcastle University, UK. firstname.lastname@example.org
Torkild Thanem, Stockholm University, Sweden. email@example.com
Alison Pullen, Macquarie University, Australia. firstname.lastname@example.org
INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIAL ISSUE
In an era of prolonged financial crisis, political instability and worldwide injustice, the economic and ethical legitimacy of corporate power requires continued challenge. Scandal after scandal has revealed corporations showing little regard for the institutions of liberal democracy. Whether it be tax evasion, law breaking, political lobbying or outright corruption, corporations are content to flout notions of justice, equality and freedom in an escalating pursuit of profit (see Barkan 2013; Brown 2015). Liberal democracy promises opportunity and inclusion, yet democratic states are complicit in strengthening the power of the corporations they glorify as wealth creators and job securers. In ‘post-democracy’ (Crouch, 2004) politics revolves around the conflated interests of corporations and politicians, reinforcing injustice and inequality on a global scale and resulting in poverty, torture, trafficking, imprisonment, and death. This special issue will investigate and challenge this state of affairs by exploring business ethics as it relates to ‘radical democracy’ (Mouffe, 1996; Robbins, 2011). This is democracy conceived as an ethical alternative to the potent marriage of the liberal democratic state and corporate power. As Rancière (2015) explains, the political dissensus required for democracy bears witness to marginalized voices excluded from the prevailing status quo. Such dissensus also enacts a particular ethics rested in the radical questioning and subversion of the totalizing tendencies of power. In response to what Ziarek (2001) has called ‘the ethics of dissensus’, the political task is to fight against the powers, injustices and inequalities that affect people not just politically, but also materially. This ethics goes beyond the questioning of corporate power, and projects us towards trajectories where people already live and work independently of the corporate-government complex. The ethics and politics of dissensus becomes the radically democratic alternative, directed towards sustainable futures at the level of life itself.
POSSIBLE THEMES AND TOPICS
Papers are called for which explore the ethics and politics of radical democracy as it manifests in dissensus and the subversion of corporate power by alternative democratic practices and realities. This is no fantasy, it is witnessed by struggles in domains as diverse as environmentalism, agriculture, affective labour, domestic work, craftwork, art, and the hacker ethic of the open source community. Acknowledging that contemporary politics have created an inverse relationship between corporate power and democracy, we seek to consider the character of this inversion, how it has been resisted, and the alternatives to it. We do not just ask whether democratic alternatives to the liberalistic reign of corporations, markets and corporate governments are possible, but how they are and can be realized. Required is a profound ethico-political engagement; a struggle that moves from critique, to resistance, to alternative realities. This evokes, in Spivak’s (1993) words, an ‘impossible intimacy of the ethical’ that strives for a genuine respect of the value of difference. Such intimacy can also invoke a politically aware and democratic business ethics built on the potential of dissent, alterity and critique as a means of refusing hegemony of all types. Papers might consider, but are by no means limited to, the following topics:
• The effects of Free Trade Agreements and trade wars on democracy.
• Spaces, places and strategies for ethicso-political democratic dissent.
• The politics, ethics and aesthetics of dissensus, through feminism and critical race theory.
• The ethico-political struggle for alternative ways of life, work and organization in the context of global and nationalist capitalism.
• Alternative economies and the subversion of free market liberalism.
• The development of a heterodox management studies to better imagine alternatives within the field of management studies.
• The ‘depoliticization’ of theory and academic work more generally
• The praxis, organization and effectiveness of anti-corporate movements.
• Business ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility as anti-democratic forms of corporate consensus.
• Inequality, difference and class struggle.
• Critiques of corporate sovereignty, justice and dissent.
• Tensions between the materiality of democracy, neoliberal rationality and neoconservative ideology.
SUBMISSION PROCESS AND DEADLINE
Authors should refer to the Journal of Business Ethics website for instructions on submitting a paper and for more information about the journal: http://www.springer.com/social+sciences/applied+ethics/journal/10551. Submission to the special issue by 4 June 2018 is required through Editorial Manager at: http://www.editorialmanager.com/busi/. Upon submission, please indicate that your sub- mission is to this Special Issue. Questions about potential topics and papers should be directed to the guest editors.
Barkan, J. (2013) Corporate Sovereignty: Law and Government Under Capitalism, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Brown, W. (2015) Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution, New York: Zone Books.
Crouch, C. (2004) Post-Democracy, Cambridge: Polity.
Mouffe, C. (1996) Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism, Citizenship, Community. London: Verso.
Rancière, J. (2015) Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics, London: Continuum
Robbins, J. W. (2011) Radical Democracy and Political Theology, New York: Columbia.
Spivak , G. (1993) Outside the Teaching Machine, London: Routeldge.
Ziarek, E. P. (2001) Postmodernity, Feminism and the Politics of Radical Democracy. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
*Special issue – Putting Critical Performativity to work – 20(1)* Available here: http://www.management-aims.com/index.php?l=en
*Introduction To The Special Issue: The evolving debate about critical performativity*
Isabelle Huault, Véronique Perret, André Spicer, Dan Kärreman.
*Conditions for critical performativity in a polycontextural society*
Morten Knudsen (Copenhagen Business School)
*Abstract.* This paper argues that practice, not science, decides the performativity of science. The argument is inspired by Austin’s question of what it is that gives language its performative force. What are the conditions which connect sentences to certain effects? Advancing this question from the level of sentences to a societal level, and taking inspiration from the failure of Marxist notions of the relation between theory and practice, the paper suggests thinking critical performativity under the conditions of differentiation. This idea is qualified by means of Niklas Luhmann and his theory of a functionally differentiated – or polycontextural – society. Functional differentiation and polycontexturality mean that systems cannot communicate with each other; there is no real transfer of scientific knowledge into practice. Unhappy performativity is the rule. Based on this insight the paper discusses elements of a critical research strategy – under polycontextural conditions – and four guidelines for a critical science are suggested.
*How can performativity contribute to management and organization research? Theoretical Perspectives and analytical framework*
Franck Aggeri (MINES ParisTech)
*Abstract.* The issue of performativity reverse the classical perspective in the social sciences, for they revolve less around describing a pre-existing reality than understanding how reality is produced by intentional interventions. Yet the link between intervention and performativity is by no means automatic. On the contrary, this approach encourages us to focus on the pragmatic conditions that allow this performation to be constructed. In this sense, the aim of this article is threefold. First, it expands the field of performativity, which is structured around three dominant approaches (Austinian, Callonian and Butlerian), to encompass lesserknown research on writing and calculation. Second, it proposes a comparison between theoretical perspectives of research on performativity, and two other research trends in social science and in organizations. These, without using the term performativity, present strong similarities to it from a theoretical and methodological point of view: Foucauldian approaches and instrument-based approaches to organizations. Based on the concepts thus introduced, this article then proposes an analysis framework for performation processes in organizations, articulated around three levels of analysis: i) the study, on an elementary level, of speech acts, acts of calculation, and acts of writing organized around instrumented activities; ii) their insertion within the management dispositifs that give them meaning and contribute to defining their boundaries; and iii) the putting into perspective of these dispositifs in historical transformations in forms of governmentality. This analytical framework is applied in the case of the car project referred to as L, an instance of collaborative research in which a crisis situation characterized by the disalignment between the elementary acts studied and the management dispositif implemented by the company was examine. This case illustrates a more general phenomenon in which management dispositifs produce negative effects on the skills dynamics in a company, and on individuals’ involvement in these collective projects. It also explains the infelicity of certain performative acts.
*Art performance as research, friction and deed*
Emilie Reinhold (Stockholm Business School)
*Abstract.* To extend and enrich the debate on critical performativity, this paper proposes that critical management studies should create a strategic link with organisational aesthetics through an alliance with critical artists doing interventions in organisations. These artists produce social change at the margin of organisations and our task as critical researchers is to give a voice to their artistic action in the field of management. Art performance is presented as a research method and a political action able to give critical performativity a new impulse. Two dance performances in a bank are described and analysed: while the first one is a failure the second produces confusion and embodied tension in the bank’s lounges. The aesthetic tactics used in this art performance are counter-performative: dancers introduce slowness and hesitation of bodies in a context of extreme closure and discipline. Art performance is described as a deed: its only value is that it could be done, which calls for more artistic action in corporate everyday life.
*Critical Performativity and Embodied Performing as materio-socio-cultural Practices – Phenomenological Perspectives on performative Bodies at work*
Wendelin Küpers (ICN Business School)
*Abstract.* One of the most elementary way in which members in organisations are involved in their performances are their embodied and expressed relations and interactions. The paper shows how phenomenology can help to render explicit these incorporated experiences and dimensions of performances in organizational life-worlds. Particularly, Merleau-Ponty`s phenomenology allows to understand the interlacing role of body-related, interrelations of performing processes in and through organising. These embodied dimensions of performance will be demonstrated by examples of performative bodies at work. By concluding some perspectives on embodied performing in organisation are offered.
An interesting blog devoted to the Foucauldian concept of heterotopia: Heterotopian Studies
„The site is devoted to Michel Foucault’s ideas on heterotopia. Foucault outlines the notion of heterotopia on three occasions between 1966-67. A talk given to a group of architects is the most well-known explanation of the term. Overall, Foucault attempts to describe certain relational principles and features of a range of cultural, institutional and discursive spaces that are somehow ‘different’: disturbing, intense, incompatible, contradictory or transforming. In a nutshell, heterotopias are worlds within worlds, mirroring and yet upsetting what is outside. Foucault provides examples: ships, cemeteries, brothels, prisons, gardens of antiquity, fairs, Turkish baths and many more.
Foucault presents a few thumb-nail sketches which he never develops into a coherent idea. And yet his tantalisingly brief words on the subject have provoked a cottage industry, producing dozens of interpretations and applications from many disciplines and professions throughout the world.
The site offers thorough on-going bibliographies, background information and resources, which are updated through my blog, a selection of personal reflections and essays and some of my own specific studies of sites related to gardens and cemeteries.“
Vor einiger Zeit habe ich, auf einen Hausbesuch der taz verweisend, über die Rückkehr des Dorfladens als Genossenschaft am Beispiel des Ortes Bernitt in Mecklenburg berichtet. Im DLF-Magazin des Deutschlandfunk wurde gestern unter der Überschrift „Dorfladen statt Discounter“ über einen anderen, bisher erfolgreich laufenden Fall einer solchen Neugründung in Jagsthausen (Landkreis Heilbronn) berichtet . Hier geht es zur Reportage:
Ein instruktives Feature über Genossenschaften als mögliche Form (nicht nur) bürgerschaftlichen Engagements und über geplante Veränderungen im Sinne von Vereinfachungen der Genossenschaftsprüfung. Angesichts der nicht zuletzt durch die Prüfung bedingten niedrigen Insolvenzrate von Genossenschaften ein nicht unproblematisches Unterfangen …
Hier geht es zur Sendung und zum Podcast:
In collaboration with Diversity in Teams and AlterEcos: Exploring Alternatives to Currently Dominant Forms of Economic Organizing, the Diversity&Difference cluster at CBS invites everyone interested to participate in a two-day international seminar on: Diverse organizing/organizational diversity – Methodological questions and activist practices taking place at CBS Råvarebygning May 2-3, 2017.
In continuation of previous years’ successful workshops on leadership, diversity and inclusion, we now turn to the question of how to study organizational diversity. How do we study different organizations/organizational differences and why do we do it? This issue is both one of methodology and activism. In terms of methodology, the study of organizational diversity and diverse organizing challenges academic orthodoxies of specialization, standardization and incrementalism (Alvesson & Gabriel, 2013). The search for different organizations/difference in organizations demands that we unsettle our ways and reconsider the ins and outs of what we have been, are and will be doing. In terms of activism, a commitment to diversity and difference challenges social and organizational norms of meritocracy, inclusion, recognition, etc. (Fraser, 2000; Castilla & Benard, 2010; Zanoni et al., 2010). Encounters with difference require that we not only consider new sites of investigation, but also new means of intervention; above all, it implores reconsideration of the very purpose of inquiry: How may studies of diverse organizing and diversity in organizations move beyond either passive description or mere critique and, instead, provide practicable redefinitions of organizational realities?
Keynote: Karen Ashcraft
Panelists: Alison Pullen, Christian de Cock, Damian O’Doherty, Patricia Zanoni.
Find more information at the workshop’s website.
The workshop is exploratory in nature, but we acknowledge the importance of publication. Some participants have submitted abstracts and/or full papers and their presentations will, along with a keynote talk and a panel debate, be the main component of the seminar. However, presenting a paper is not a prerequisite for taking part in the workshop. In line with the theme of the workshop, we welcome alternative forms of participation. This could be contributions to the discussions – or taking on the important role as a curious listener.
Sign up to the workshop here.
Die Seite „Community Economies“ bietet zahlreiche Informationen und Ressourcen (Artikel, Videos, Unterrichtsmaterialien, praktische Handreichungen, weitere Links) zu alternativen Formen des Wirtschaftens. Entstanden ist die Seite vor dem Hintergrund der Arbeiten von Gibson-Graham (vgl. Gibson-Graham 2006a, 2006b, 2008) und der Perspektive der ‚diverse economies‘:
Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2006a): The end of capitalism (as we knew it). A feminist critique of political economy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2006b): A postcapitalist politics. Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press.
Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2008): Diverse economies: performative practices for `other worlds‘. In: Progress in Human Geography 32 (5), S. 613–632.