Schlagwort-Archive: Critical Management Studies

Call for Papers for a Special Issue of Organization: Decolonising Management and Organisational Knowledge

Call for Papers for a Special Issue of Organization
Decolonising Management and Organisational Knowledge

Deadline: 30th November 2019

Guest Editors
Nimruji Jammulamadaka (IIM Calcutta, India),
Alex Faria (FGV, Brazil),
Gavin Jack (Monash University, Australia),
Shaun Ruggunan (University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa)

Excerpt:

„This special issue focuses on decolonising management and organisational knowledge (MOK), a vital and  timely  endeavour. The contemporary  globalised  world  is  experiencing  new  and  continuing conditions of coloniality/decoloniality (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018) organised by forces of transnational capital and the nation-state on the one side, but counter-balanced by resurging, insurging peoples and scholars on the other. The nature and momentum of these axes of neo-colonial power and decolonial praxis-theory (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018) has led Mbembe (2016: 36) to observe that the “decolonizing project is back  on  the  agenda  worldwide”. Decolonial conversations set out to both critique the
“dominant Eurocentric academic model” and “imagine what an alternative to this model could look like” (Mbembe, 2016: 36).  „

CfP: https://journals.sagepub.com/page/org/call-for-papers

ILPC 2019, 24-26 April 2019 Vienna – Fragmentation and Solidarities

Labor Process Theory is one of the most prominent critical approaches in Management and Organization Studies. The 37th International Labour Process Conference will be held in Vienna from 24-26 April. You can find the full programme here:

https://www.ilpc.org.uk/

CfP – CMS 2019 Sub-theme 2: Between subjugation and emancipation: Recognizing the power of recognition

We are pleased to announce that our Call for Papers for the CMS Conference 2019 is now online. Deadline for Abstracts is the 31st January 2019:

http://business-school.open.ac.uk/events/11th-international-critical-management-studies-conference

The 11th International Critical Management Conference 27th – 29th June 2019, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, UK

SUB-THEME 2: Between subjugation and emancipation: Recognizing the power of recognition

Convenors:

Gabriele Fassauer (Dresden University of Technology, Germany)

Ronald Hartz (University of Leicester, UK)

Gazi Islam (Grenoble Ecole de Management, France)

 

Recognition is an important factor shaping individual and collective well-being, dignity and flourishing, both within organizations and in society more generally (Honneth 1996; Fraser and Honneth 2003; Sayer 2007a, 2007b). For many researchers on management and organizations, recognition is an implicit “affirmation of the social-affective bond between members” (Islam, 2012: 38). Recognition is constitutive for people’s identity-building, their sense of dignity and corresponding self-respect (Grover, 2013; Hancock, 2016; Holtgrewe, 2001; Islam, 2013; Sayer, 2007a). Considered as fundamentally interdependent, people are viewed as “needy beings” that are capable of suffering and flourishing depending on other´s recognition (Sayer, 2007b: 23). Recognition is understood as the intersubjective acknowledgement of value of a person´s behaviours, actions and identities, which supports “a feeling that one is living a worthwhile life and a confidence in one’s ability to do what one considers worthwhile” (Sayer, 2005: 954). Recognition is thus inevitably aligned with a moral dimension of society, economy and organizations as it refers to basic notions of how people should treat each other (Honneth 1996; Sayer, 2005). One of the most elaborated ways to anchor the idea of recognition in social theory was provided by Axel Honneth (1996), an intellectual successor of the Frankfurt School and critical theory. For Honneth, the struggle for recognition, as both a cognitive source for subjectivity and an affective basis of self-esteem, is part of the human condition and one of the drivers of social progress and betterment (Honneth 1996; Fraser and Honneth 2003).

However, recognition is also discussed in the French tradition of structuralism and poststructuralism, which conceptualizes recognition as basis of the development of self-consciousness and identity-building inescapable linked to forms of subjugation and power (e.g. Althusser, 2014 [1970]; Foucault, 1982; Butler, 1997). From this perspective, people’s desire for recognition is intermingled with power and control mechanisms that serve the perpetuation of societal as well as organizational power structures and domination. Organizations are one of the important economic and social formations “[w]here social categories guarantee a recognizable and enduring social existence” (Butler 1997: 20). But, as Butler continues, “the embrace of such categories, even as they work in the service of subjection, is often preferred to no social existence at all” (ibid.). Giving voice to the complexities arising from these two traditions of thinking about recognition, our stream aims to develop a more fully-fledged notion of recognition at the workplace. We welcome conceptual and empirical papers that deal with questions of recognition at the societal, organizational or individual workplace level and which pay tribute both to the emancipatory and subjugating character of recognition. Related topics can be various and could address, but are not restricted to the following questions:

  • What are the potentials of different contexts of work and forms of organizing in terms of people´s emancipation and subjugation through recognition? What roles, for example, do people´s age, gender, sexual orientation or cultural background play in recognition dynamics?
  • How is recognition played out at the workplace? What are the desires, practises, and conflicts of recognition? Which consequences can be observed for people´s well-being and suffering?
  • How do issues of recognition relate to current debates around identity-based politics in organizations and society? How can a recognition lens help develop a critical theory to understand diverse forms of domination and resistance?
  • What are the complementarities and/or contradictions between struggles for recognition and struggles for redistribution? How can recognition theorizing help understand tensions between economic and symbolic forms of politics at work?
  • Which differences exist between alternative organizations and conventional forms of organized work in terms of recognition?
  • How do new technologies and emerging forms of organizing work change established orders of recognition?
  • What are the historical paths of struggles for recognition in organizations? How are they related to societal shifts and developments?
  • What are the potentials as well as limits of consolidating different theoretical angles of recognition, especially regarding the ‘camps’ of critical theory and poststructuralism?

Submission of abstracts:

Please send abstracts or any questions to Gabriele Fassauer (gabriele.fassauer@tu-dresden.de).

Abstracts should be a maximum 1000 words, A4 paper, single spaced, 12-point font.  Deadline 31st January 2019.

Notification of paper acceptance: 1st March 2019.

Full papers will be expected by 1st June 2019.

 

Your abstract should include:

– Title

– The focus and objectives of the paper

– How the paper will contribute to the theme

 

References

Althusser, L. 2014. On the reproduction of capitalism. Ideology and ideological state

apparatuses. London, New York: Verso.

Butler, J. 1997. The psychic life of power. Theories in subjection. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.

Foucault, M. 1982. The subject and power. Critical Inquiry 8 (4), 777-795.

Fraser, N., & Honneth, A. 2003. Redistribution or recognition? Verso, London, NY.

Grover St. L. 2013. Unraveling respect in organization studies. Human Relations 67 (1), 27-51.

Hancock, P. 2016. Recognition and the moral taint of sexuality. Threat, masculinity and Santa Claus. Human Relations 69 (2), 461-481.

Holtgrewe, U. 2001. Recognition, intersubjectivity and service work: Labour conflicts in call centres. Industrielle Beziehungen 8 (1), 37-55.

Honneth, A. 1996. The struggle for recognition. Polity Press, Cambridge (MA).

Islam, G. (2012) Recognition, reification and practices of forgetting: Ethical implications of

human resource management. Journal of Business Ethics, 111 (1), 37-48.

Sayer, A. 2005. Class, moral worth and recognition. Sociology 39 (5), 947-963.

Sayer, A. 2007a. Dignity at work: Broadening the agenda. Organization 14 (4), 565-581.

Sayer, A. 2007b. Moral economy and employment. In S. C. Bolton and M. Houlihan (eds.), Searching for the human in human resource management, (pp. 21-40). Palgrave, London.

Teaching alternative forms of work and organization – Audebrand/Camus/Michaux (2017): A Mosquito in the Classroom

To learn and to teach something about alternative forms of work and organization is one of the urgent tasks of critical management and organization studies. However, one of the most striking problems in teaching alternatives is the lack of imagination, that is the idea that these are real and possible alternatives. As Gibson-Graham (2006: XV) write about their own experiences: „In the face of a new discourse of the diverse economy, participants in our projects can easily recognize the activities and enterprises it names, but they cannot readily identify with the alternative subject positions it avails. Most of them get up in the morning wanting a job – and if not wanting one, feeling they need one – rather than an alternative economy”.

One idea to cope with this problem seems to reframe it or to tackle it in a roundabout way. Luc Audebrand and colleagues introduce cooperatives into the classroom via the topic and reflection of paradoxes in organizations. They argue that “despite the absence of the cooperative business model in mainstream management textbooks and curricula, this model can offer a high pedagogical value for management education in that it can foster paradoxical thinking” (Audebrand et al. 2017: 216).

Said this, we can think about several other topics which makes it possible to introduce alternatives. Just think about power, participation, democracy or sustainability and maybe then alternatives are just around the corner or at least are worth to talk about it in the classroom.

References

Audebrand, Luc K., Annie Camus, und Valérie Michaud. 2017. A Mosquito in the Classroom: Using the Cooperative Business Model to Foster Paradoxical Thinking in Management Education. Journal of Management Education 41 (2): 216–248. doi: 10.1177/1052562916682552. [http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1052562916682552]

Gibson-Graham, J. K. 2006. The end of capitalism (as we knew it). A feminist critique of political economy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Neue Veröffentlichung in Managementforschung 27(1): „Von anderen Organisationen – Ein Essay über Perspektiven kritischer Organisationsforschung“

Eine kleine Eigenwerbung: Mein Artikel „Von anderen Organisationen – Ein Essay über Perspektiven kritischer Organisationsforschung“ ist nun in der Managementforschung 27(1) erschienen.

Link zum Beitrag: https://doi.org/10.1365/s41113-017-0018-3

Eine Vorabversion findet sich auf Academia und Researchgate:

https://tu-chemnitz.academia.edu/RonaldHartz

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ronald_Hartz

Zusammenfassung:

Der Essay geht von der Beobachtung aus, dass trotz der Allgegenwart von Kritik die kritische
Praxis sich auf einem notorisch schwankenden Grund befindet sowie angesichts propagierter
gesellschaftlicher  Alternativlosigkeiten  und  eines  herrschenden  zynischen  Bewusstseins  als
ein eher naives und trübsinniges Geschäft erscheint. Mit Blick auf die Organisationsforschung
werden deshalb mit der immanenten Kritik, der an Foucault anschließenden Genealogie sowie
der welterschließenden Kritik drei Perspektiven kritischer Organisationsforschung diskutiert,
welche der kritischen Praxis schärfere Konturen verleihen. Mit der welterschließenden Kritik,
welche sich der Sichtbarmachung von Heterotopien, von anderen und alternativen Formen des
Organisierens widmet, wird eine kritische Praxis vorgeschlagen, welche den Gegensatz von
Affirmation  und  permanenter  Kritik  unterläuft  und  so  zu  einer  Revitalisierung  von  Kritik
beitragen kann.

Schlüsselwörter
Critical  Management  Studies  ·  Foucault  ·  Genealogie  ·  Heterotopie  ·  Immanente  Kritik  ·
Kritische Organisationsforschung · Welterschließung

Abstract

The  essay  starts  with  the  observation  that,  despite  the  omnipresence  of  criticism,  critical
practice  is  on  a  notoriously  fluctuating  ground.  Even  more  the  propagated  lack  of  social
alternatives  and  a  dominant  cynical  consciousness  turns  critique  to  a  rather  naive  and  dull business.  Regarding  organizational  research,  the  perspectives  of  immanent  criticism,
Foucault’s  genealogy,  and  critique  as  world-disclosure  are  discussed  to  give  the  critical
practice sharper outlines. With world-disclosure devoted to the visualization of heterotopies,
that is of alternative forms of organization, a critical practice is suggested which undermines
the  opposition  between  affirmation  and  permanent  criticism,  and  thus  contributes  to  a
revitalization of critique.

Keywords
Critical  Management  Studies  ·  Critical  organization  studies  ·  Foucault  ·  Genealogy  ·
Heterotopia · Immanent critique · World-disclosure

Critical Management Studies – Bibliographie aktualisiert

Nach längerer Zeit habe ich auf dieser Seite die Bibliographie über die Critical Management Studies aktualisiert. Neben der in den letzten Jahren verstärkt geführten Diskussion über das Konzept der Performativität finden sich dort nun weitere zahlreiche neuere Studien mit CMS-Bezug als auch eine Reihe neuer Sammelbände aufgeführt.

Three New Books From the Emerald CMS Books Series

Three new books from Emerald’s CMS Book Series:

The Ideological Evolution of Human Resource Management: A Critical Look into HRM Research and Practices (Critical Management Studies) – Sami Itani

https://www.amazon.ca/Ideological-Evolution-Human-Resource-Management-ebook/dp/B073ZK5CQX/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1502482562&sr=1-1&keywords=sami+itani

Insights and Research on the Study of Gender and Intersectionality in International Airline Cultures – Albert Mills

https://www.amazon.ca/Insights-Research-Intersectionality-International-Cultures-ebook/dp/B06XKC5GBK/ref=pd_ecc_rvi_3

Making Critical Sense of Immigrant Experience: A Case Study of Hong Kong Chinese in Canada (Critical Management Studies) – Rosalie Hilde

https://www.amazon.ca/Making-Critical-Sense-Immigrant-Experience-ebook/dp/B074NW6PKX/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1502482497&sr=1-1&keywords=rosalie+hilde

CfP SI Organization Studies: Organizational control and surveillance of new work practices

Abstract from the Call:

Organization Studies, the official journal of the European Group for Organizational
Studies  (EGOS),  invites  submissions  for  a  Special  Issue  that  seeks  to  advance
research  on  organizational  control  and  surveillance  of  and  through  new  work
practices.

[…]

The emergence of new work practices and workplaces, as shown by the joint search
for  more  mobility,  openness  (e.g.  with  open  innovation),  horizontality  (e.g.  with coworking  practices  and  collaborative  entrepreneurship),  digital  and  collaborative
practices (including more and more external stakeholders, e.g. customers and citizens,
in the co-production of services), has raised new questions of organizational control,
and  surveillance.  In  a  global  context  marked  by  the  invisible  revolution  of
surveillance  capitalism  (Zuboff,  2015)  and  the  resurgence  of  risk  (Beck,  1992),
security fears and terror, which have re-legitimized the need for close surveillance and
control, new work practices and workplaces have transformed the ‘premises of human
involvement in organizations’ (Kallinikos, 2003, p. 595), as well as the mechanisms
and  conditions  of  control  and  surveillance.  In  particular,  work  transformations
(project-based  work,  teleworking,  distributed  work  arrangements,  collaborative
entrepreneurship and the emergence of third and collaborative practices and spaces,
e.g.  coworking  spaces,  maker  spaces,  innovation  labs)  are  revealing  how  work
increasingly  gets  performed  outside  the  typical  physical,  spatial  and  temporal
boundaries of the organization or within the context of third spaces and liminal spaces
(Oldenburg,  1989;  Garrett  et  al.,  2017;  Sewell  and  Taskin,  2015;  Spinuzzi,  2012;
Waber et al., 2014; Johns and Gratton, 2013).

[…]

Guest Editors :  
François-Xavier de Vaujany (Université Paris-Dauphine, France)
Aurélie Leclercq-Vandelannoitte (CNRS, LEM UMR 9221, IESEG School of
Management, France)
Iain Munro (Newcastle University Business School, United Kingdom)
Yesh Nama (RMIT University, Australia)
Robin Holt (Copenhagen Business School)

Deadline for paper submissions: June, 29th 2018

Call for Papers: Call for papers_Proposal Special Issue_Organization Studies_Control_New Work Practices

 

 

CfP „Organisation und Verantwortung“ – Tagung und Pre-Conference der Kommission Organisationspädagogik

Nicht nur für alle an CSR, CMS und kritischer Organisationsforschung Interessierten: Hier der interessante Call der Tagung der Kommission Organisationspädagogik am 1./2. März 2018 an der Universität Linz:

CfP Organisation und Verantwortung 2018

Und hier der Call für die vorausgehende Nachwuchstagung:

Forum Pädagogische Organisationsforschung 2018_Call for Abtsracts

Return to Meaning – A Social Science with Something to Say. New Book by Mats Alvesson, Yiannis Gabriel and Roland Paulsen

Sounds like an interesting and relevant piece of work …

„The  explosion  of  published  outputs,  at  least
in  social  science,  creates  a  noisy,  cluttered
environment which makes meaningful research
difficult, as different voices compete to capture
the limelight even briefly.  Publishing comes to
be seen as a game of hits and misses, devoid
of intrinsic meaning and value, and of no wider
social uses whatsoever. Academics do research
in order to get published, not to say something
socially  meaningful.  This  is  what  we  view  as
the  rise  of  nonsense  in  academic  research,
which  represents  a  serious  social  problem.  It
undermines the very point of social science.
This  book  argues  that  we  are  currently
witnessing not merely a decline in the quality
of social science research, but the proliferation
of meaningless research, of no value to society,
and  modest  value  to  its  authors  –  apart  from
securing employment and promotion“

More information at Oxford University Press: www.oup.com