PDW “New Histories of Business Schools…” AMLE Special Issue

Lloyd Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, Fertitta Hall 5th floor, room 502, 610 Childs Way, Los Angeles, CA 90089

Workshop date: Friday, January 31, 2020, 9:30am-4pm PST

Submission deadline: Friday, January 17, 2020, midnight PST

The editors of Academy of Management Learning & Education (AMLE) invite applications for a Paper Development & Reviewing Workshop (PDW) to be held at the University of Southern California on January 31, 2020. The purpose of this event is to improve papers that authors intend to submit for review at AMLE, with a special focus on the special issue “New Histories of Business Schools and How They May Inspire New Futures”. Deadline for final submissions to this special issue is March 31, 2020. For details, see the official call for papers: https://aom.org/uploadedFiles/Publications/AMLE/History_of_bus_schools_for_web.pdf and the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gO8BgNjpWw&t.

We encourage submissions from faculty members, post-doctoral researchers and doctoral students who want to develop their papers for publication in the journal. Consistent with the mission of AMLE, draft manuscripts can be submitted on all management learning and management education topics, using all types of theory, at all levels of analysis, and using all empirical methods. The main focus of the workshop will be on paper development. This part of the workshop will consist of roundtable presentations by authors followed by discussions of authors’ work led by at least one of the members of the AMLE editorial team/special issue editors. The intent is for authors to receive actionable feedback that can then be incorporated into their papers.

Submissions approved for inclusion in the workshop will be working papers with the potential to make important and novel contributions to management learning and education scholarship. Papers can be theoretical or empirical in their focus, or they can be aimed at the essays section of the AMLE journal. Workshop participants will be placed with facilitators whose work and areas of expertise are closely aligned. 

An additional focus will be on what makes a good, developmental review, as well as a discussion of some of the main problems that the editorial team encounter in papers submitted to the journal. The workshop is open to all scholars working on any topics that are relevant to management learning and education. As space is limited, preference will be given to participants who are presenting working papers.

For a registration form for the Los Angeles PDW go to: 

http://aom.org/Publications/AOM-Paper-Development-Workshops.aspx

Scroll down to AMLE and click on “Register” to be directed to the registration form.

You can click on “Learn more” to see a version of this announcement.

The deadline for submission of full working papers is Friday, January 17, 2020. We may have places available for students and scholars who wish to attend without submitting a working paper. In this instance, please submit your CV by the submission deadline (Friday, January 17, 2020). Such attendees will be accommodated if there is space on a first come, first served basis. There is no fee for attending the workshop. Participants will be responsible for their own travel and accommodation costs.

If you have any questions and inquiries, please contact: amle@aom.org.

If you have questions for the editorial team, then email the AMLE Editor, Bill Foster (wfoster@ualberta.ca); or the local host Associate Editor, Christina Lubinski (clubinsk@marshall.usc.edu).

We look forward to seeing you in Los Angeles!

Save the Thomas Cook Archive!

Please pass this on to anyone who has used, or who has an interest, in the Thomas Cook Archive!

You will have seen the news about the collapse of Thomas Cook and it is obviously a dreadful time for the staff and for holidaymakers caught up in all of this. Some of you will be aware that the company has a hugely important Archive covering over 170 years of the company’s existence. The Business Archives Council, through the Crisis Management Team for business archives, is coordinating a response to ensure that the Archive is secured for the future. To this end we need letters and statements of support from those who have used, or who have an interest, in the Thomas Cook Archive. Please contact me if you can help in making the case for the value and significance of these records and for the need for them to be properly maintained and made available to current and future users.

Thank you.

Mike Anson

ABH Archives Representative

michael.anson@bankofengland.co.uk

Jobs: Assistant, Associate and Full Professor of Clinical Entrepreneurship

The Lloyd Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies at the Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, is seeking applicants for a clinical faculty position in entrepreneurship. The position may be at the assistant professor, associate professor, or full professor ranks. We strongly encourage applications from candidates with both a dedication to teaching and a track record of research and/or scholarly contributions to entrepreneurship. The typical teaching load is four courses per year. The job represents a full-time, multi-year academic appointment that is renewable. The job will commence in August 2020.

The Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies is a national leader in entrepreneurship education and research. Our faculty is composed of a diverse mix of highly regarded researchers and practitioners. We are a co-sponsor of the West Coast Entrepreneurship Research Symposium and the Greif Entrepreneurship Research Impact Award – awarded annually at the Academy of Management Conference. The Greif Center also prioritizes teaching excellence: our faculty have won multiple USASBE Entrepreneurship Educator of the Year awards and an AOM award for Innovation in Entrepreneurship Pedagogy. Our undergraduate and graduate programs each ranked #9 in the most recent US News and World Report lists. In addition to offering courses in the Marshall School’s undergraduate and MBA programs, we offer specialized graduate degree programs in social entrepreneurship (MSSE) and entrepreneurship and innovation (MSEI).

Preferred qualifications include:

  • Doctoral (or another terminal) degree with entrepreneurship or business-related emphasis.
  • Superior communication and teaching skills, with demonstrated excellence in teaching entrepreneurship courses to undergraduate and/or MBA students.
  • Track record of scholarly contributions to the field of entrepreneurship (e.g., journal articles for academic or practitioner audiences, books or book chapters, teaching cases or other published pedagogical materials, conference presentations).
  • Practical work experience relevant for entrepreneurship (e.g., as founder, manager, or investor in start-ups or as a corporate or social entrepreneur). 

If applicable to your background, please highlight experience in emerging technologies and interdisciplinary work in STEM as well as expertise in venture bootstrapping/finance/investment and negotiation/deal-making. Greif faculty take pride in our work to promote diversity and inclusion in the classroom, and we welcome candidates who help students explore the intersection of entrepreneurship with their unique personal experiences!

Salary and rank are dependent on qualifications, and initial contract length ranges from two to four years based on rank, with the strong expectation that the contract will be renewed if performance expectations are met or exceeded. Employee benefits for full-time faculty are excellent and include tuition assistance for qualifying children and spouses at USC and other participating Universities.

Qualified candidates should apply on-line by midnight PST November 11, 2019. Required documents include 1) cover letter; 2) curriculum vitae that specifies teaching, research, and work experience alongside education; 3) evidence of teaching effectiveness (please include student evaluation results and sample syllabi); 4) two examples of scholarly contributions, and 5) contact information for three references.  Specific details for uploading documents are provided after clicking on the “apply” link.  For questions about the position, please contact the search committee chair, Professor Pai-Ling Yin at pailingy@marshall.usc.edu

USC is an equal opportunity educator and employer, proudly pluralistic and firmly committed to providing equal opportunity for outstanding persons of every race, gender, creed, and background. The University particularly encourages women, members of underrepresented groups, veterans and individuals with disabilities to apply. USC will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities unless doing so would result in an undue hardship.

USC Marshall is renowned for its high-ranking undergraduate, graduate, international and executive education programs, an exceptional faculty engaged in leading-edge research, a diverse and creative student body, and a commitment to technological advancement. The research productivity of Marshall’s 200 full-time faculty ranks among the top 10 business schools in the world. For more information about the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California, please go to http://www.marshall.usc.edu.

The University of Southern California (USC), founded in 1880, is located in the heart of downtown L.A. and is the largest private employer in the City of Los Angeles. As an employee of USC, you will be a part of a world-class research university and a member of the “Trojan Family.”

AMLE SI: New Histories of Business Schools and How They May Inspire New Futures

Guest Editors:

  • Patricia Genoe McLaren, Wilfrid Laurier University
  • JC Spender, Kozminski University
  • Stephen Cummings, Victoria University of Wellington
  • Ellen O’Connor, Dominican University of California
  • Todd Bridgman, Victoria University of Wellington
  • Christina Lubinski, Copenhagen Business School
  • Gabrielle Durepos, Mount Saint Vincent University

Deadline for Submissions: March 31, 2020

Potential Publication: June 2021

See http://aom.org/Publications/AMLE/Special-Issues-Coming-from-AMLE!.aspx for more information and resources!

Call for Papers

We might do well to re-examine what we are doing and show the executive judgment and courage necessary to implement radical change (Khurana & Spender 2012: 636). Business schools are the institutional locus of management learning and education. In recent years, we have gained a greater understanding of how their structures, processes, and power dynamics influence pedagogy and curricula, management theory and research, faculty, students, graduates and society more broadly. We are also witnessing growing research into, and discussion about, the relative lack of innovation in management theory development, research, pedagogy, and curricula (Alvesson & Sandberg, 2012).

While there have been a small number of inspirational works that have sought to push us towards changing business schools (Augier and March, 2011; Hassard, 2012; Khurana 2007; Spender, 2016), they have not yet spurred the change we might have hoped for. One under-explored route to encourage innovation in this regard is examining how our historical understanding of the formation and form of the business school may be limiting change. Histories highlight particular characters and plots but what we do not include, or write out of, history, is just as important as what is written in (Jenkins, 2003). History is constitutive, in that our own interpretations of the past define and shape our present and our future (Wadhwani & Bucheli, 2014). Compared with other stochastic fields of study, histories of management and business are simplistically linear and monocultural. This constrains how we see them in the present, and can subsequently limit their future development (Cummings & Bridgman, 2016).

The conventional history of the business school tends to follow the emergence of American business schools: from the founding of the Wharton School in 1881, to the rapid growth of business school enrolment within American universities leading up to the 1950s, to the standardization of the schools after the publication of the Gordon-Howell and Pierson reports in 1959 (Hommel & Thomas, 2014). This history has been crafted over many years and now goes largely unchallenged. But it begs the questions: why is this the story we tell, who gains and loses from its telling, and what events and people are missing from a narrative that should be inspirational for a broad range of people?

North American business schools have been studied at various points in a straightforward assessment style – what are they do, how could they “improve” (Bossard & Dewhurst, 1931; Gordon & Howell, 1959; Pierson, 1959; Porter & McKibbin, 1988), and also with a more complex analysis of context, history, power, and influence (Engwall, Kipping, Usdiken, 2016; Khurana, 2007; Pettigrew, Corneul, & Hommel, 2014). Work has also been done on the history of European management education (cf. Engwall, 2004; Harker, Caemmerer, & Hynes, 2016; Kieser, 2004; Kipping, Usdiken, & Puig, 2004; Tiratsoo, 2004; Usdiken, 2004), and some have looked at the global South (Cooke & Alcadipani, 2015). We are beginning to see alternative histories of the development of management theory and education (Bridgman, Cummings, & McLaughlin, 2016; Dye, Mills, & Weatherbee, 2005; Hassard, 2012; Peltonen, 2015).

However, what about histories of schools of business and commerce from other parts of the world (Asia, Africa, Australasia, South America) in more detail? Or from earlier centuries? Or different examples from North America or Europe that did not survive or later morphed toward the standard form? This special issue seeks to move things forward by looking differently when we look back. It encourages submissions that explore emerging interests, historical barriers to change, and their interrelationships by focusing on the emergence and development of business schools as complex entities that are interwoven with universities, the business community, government, and civil society.

It also seeks submissions that explore how these broader understandings may stimulate innovation in the way we configure business schools and, consequently, how we teach, conduct research, view our profession, and relate to our stakeholders. In this call for papers, we – professors/educators, researchers/inquirers, sufferers/critics, and aspirational as well as actual change agents – are the organizational actors, and business schools are our reflective historical setting; more importantly, they are our actual environment. We have a unique opportunity to push management theory, research methods, and interdisciplinarity to better understand and, more importantly, to reinvent business school(s) in light of what is socially or personally meaningful. We have contextual richness, personal and professional stakes, and a sense of crisis. Being able to change our practices from within, we are uniquely situated to bring scholarship, formal positioning, and inhabited experience to bear. Better historical scholarship could, therefore, help us to change ourselves. To engage historical sensibilities and methods, and empirical richness, to push theory and change institutions.

As a call for spurring this process we welcome contributions that address the following questions:

1. What people and events of business schools’ past have been overlooked by conventional historical narratives?

2. What role could new histories play in debates about how business schools should develop? Can new understandings of the past inspire us to think differently for the future?

3. How can we write reflexive or critical histories of business schools that expose the power and politics of business education and what we teach, or do not teach, students?

4. Are histories being used within business schools or other organizations, such as accreditation bodies, academies and societies, to perpetuate traditional structures and/or norms? Why and to what effect?

5. What are the ‘invented traditions’ that support the institution of business schools and what purpose were they invented to serve?

6. What are the stories of the development of business education outside of North America or prior to the late 19th century? Are these different or the same as current norms? How, why, and what can we learn from these alternative histories?

7. How has history traditionally been taught in business schools? What are the positive and limiting effects of this pedagogy? How could we teach history differently?

8. Why should business school students learn more (or less) history? Or learn it differently?

References

Alvesson, M,. & Sandberg, J. 2012. Has management studies lost its way? Ideas for more imaginative and innovative research. Journal of Management Studies, 50(1): 128-152.

Augier, M. and March, J. 2011. The roots, rituals, and rhipping etorics of change: North American business schools after the second World War. Stanford University Press.

Bossard, J. H. S., & Dewhurst, J. F. 1931. University education for business: A study of existing needs and practices. Philadelphia. PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Bridgman, T., Cummings, S., & McLaughlin, C. 2016. Restating the case: How revisiting the development of the case method can help us think differently about the future of the business school. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(4): 724-741.

Cooke, B., & Alcadipani, R. 2015. Toward a global history of management education: The case of the Ford Foundation and the São Paulo School of Business Administration, Brazil. Academy of Management Learning & Education,14(4): 482-499.

Cummings, S. & Bridgman, T. 2016. The Limits and possibilities of history: How a wider, deeper and more engaged understanding of business history can foster innovative thinking. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 15(2): 250-267.

Dye, K., Mills, A. J., & Weatherbee, T. 2005. Maslow: Man interrupted: Reading management theory in context. Management Decision, 43(10): 1375-1395.

Engwall, L. 2004. The Americanization of Nordic management education. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(2): 109- 117.

Engwall, L., Kipping, M., & Usdiken, B. 2016. Defining management: Business schools, consultants, media. New York: Routledge.

Gordon, R. A., & Howell, J. E. 1959. Higher education for business. New York: Columbia University Press.

Harker, M. J., Caemmerer, B., & Hynes, N. 2016. Management education by the French Grandes Ecoles de Commerce: Past, present, and an uncertain future. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(3): 549-568.

Hassard, J. 2012. Rethinking the Hawthorne Studies: The Western Electric research in its social, political and historical context. Human Relations, 65(11): 1431-1461.

Hommel, U., & Thomas, H. 2014. Research on business schools. In A. M. Pettigrew, E. Corneul, & U. Hommel (Eds.), The institutional development of business schools: 8-36. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jenkins, K. 2003. Refiguring history: New thoughts on an old discipline. London, U.K.: Routledge.

Khurana, R. 2007. From higher aims to hired hands: The social transformation of American business schools and the unfulfilled promise of management as a profession. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Khurana, R., & Spender, J. C. 2012. Herbert A. Simon on What Ails Business Schools: More than ‘A Problem in Organizational Design’. Journal of Management Studies, 49: 619–639.

Kieser, A. 2004. The Americanization of academic management education in Germany. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(2): 90-97.

Kipping, M., Usdiken, B., & Puig, N. 2004. Imitation, tension, and hybridization: Multiple “Americanizations” of management education in Mediterranean Europe. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(2): 98-108.

Peltonen, T. 2015. History of management thought in context: The case of Elton Mayo in Australia. In P. G. McLaren, A. J. Mills, & T. G. Weatherbee (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Management and Organizational History. Abindon, UK: Sage.

Pettigrew, A. M., Corneul, E., & Hommel, U. 2014. The institutional development of business schools. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pierson, F. C. 1959. The education of American business men: A study in university-college programs in business administration. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Porter, L. W., & McKibbin, L. E. 1988. Management education and development: Drift or thrust into the 21st century? New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Spender, J.C. 2016. How management education’s past shapes its present. BizEd. Tiratsoo, N. 2004. The “Americanization” of management education in Britain. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(2): 118-126.

Usdiken, B. 2004. Americanization of European management education in historical and comparative perspective. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(2): 87-89.

Wadhwani, D., & Bucheli, M. 2014. The future of the past in management and organization studies. In D. Wadhwani, & M. Bucheli (Eds.), Organizations in Time: History, Theory, Methods. New York: Oxford University Press.

New Paper on How Firms Use History

Reblogged from The Past Speaks:

New Paper on How Firms Use History

Paresha N. Sinha, Peter Jaskiewicz, Jenny Gibb, and James G. Combs. “Managing history: How New Zealand’s Gallagher Group used rhetorical narratives to reprioritize and modify imprinted strategic guideposts.” Strategic Management Journal.

Research Summary
Imprinting theory predicts that organizations are imprinted with multiple intersecting imprints that persist. Evidence suggests, however, that imprints are sometimes reprioritized or modified, implying that they can be strategically managed. We draw upon rhetorical history research and an in‐depth historical case study of New Zealand’s Gallagher Group to describe how one firm managed its imprints. Our inductive theorizing links historically imprinted strategic guideposts to decision‐making via two rearranging processes—that is, prioritizing and suspending—wherein managers use narratives to rearrange guideposts’ influence and two scope modifying processes—that is, constraining and expanding—wherein managers change where guideposts apply. As a first explanation of how imprints are managed, these processes add nuance to existing theory and open new research avenues regarding additional processes and boundary conditions.

Managerial Summary
Imprints are elements of culture, strategy, structure, or decision‐making that emerge when the firm is founded or during times of turmoil. Imprints resist change and make organizational adaptation difficult. This study explains one way that managers manipulate imprinted decision‐making rules so that organizations can adapt. Using an in‐depth historical case study of New Zealand’s Gallagher Group from 1938 to 2015, we follow four imprinted decision‐making rules that we call strategic guideposts and show how managers rhetorically revised these rules to adapt organizational decision‐making to changing environments. Managers prioritized some decision‐making rules while deemphasizing others or they changed their claims about the kinds of decisions where a decision‐rule applied. Knowing these rhetorical processes can help managers leverage their organization’s history to facilitate necessary organizational change.

You can access the paper here. You can download the supporting documentation here.

Blog on new research project Cooling for Life Sub-Saharan Africa

This week my co-investigator and I are launching new blog for our research project on solar driven cold stores employing adsorption cooling technology in Rwanda. Historically, the low penetration of electricity has limited economic development because food chains and small-scale subsistence entrepreneurs did not have access to reliable cool chains. Having researched the provision of electricity in Ghana as part of the Volta River Project, it is clear that access to electricity, which is much lower in sub-Saharan African countries than elsewhere (under 30% of population have access), is a key constraint.

So I was really pleased to start talking to one of my colleagues at Aston from engineering, Dr Ahmed Rezk, who wanted to start a project with colleagues in Rwanda on providing off-grid reliable refrigeration for the agro-processing industry. Solar power is obviously plentiful in Africa, but photovoltaic panels actually become less efficient with greater heat. The technology Ahmed proposes is based largely on solar heat (for us less technically versed, think heat pumps running supermarket fridges) which is can be reliably and efficiently exploited in tropical countries.

And in another analogy to the history of development, technologies such as these are not as developed because the creators of technology and products are in countries where the climate makes this a less efficient solutions, while the potential consumers of such technology are in countries with limited technological and manufacturing capacity.

So the other side of our project, which I lead, will look at how we can design business models that will make this new technology user-friendly and affordable to consumers in Africa. Agro-processing is an important area for African countries with a large agricultural sector, for two reasons: it allows exporting and upgrading to other types of products (juices, wines etc.) and it creates more resilient food chains with less spoilage, hence more and better food available locally.

The unparalleled success of mobile phones, micro-finance and bottom of pyramid approaches to expand across sub-Saharan Africa demonstrates that the right business models can lead to significant changes in terms of the products and infrastructure available to producers and consumers. We will blog about our aims and progress at Cooling for life. Any comments or suggestion are very welcome!

EGOS 2020 Hamburg Call for Short Papers

“Call for Short Papers” for the sub-themes at the upcoming 36th EGOS Colloquium in Hamburg, Germany, July 2-4, 2020.

To view the Call for each sub-theme, please go to the EGOS website.

DEADLINE for submission of short papers:

Tuesday, January 14, 2020, 23:59 Central European Time (CET)

Like this year, there are a lot of opportunities to submit historical and retrospective research to EGOS – see for example the following tracks:

Convenors: David Chandler, Majken Schultz, Roy Suddaby
Convenors: Christopher Marquis, Georg Schreyögg, Jörg Sydow
Convenors: Hugh Gunz, Nathalie Louisgrand, Wolfgang Mayrhofer

Further helpful information:

Please follow the instructions given in the “Guidelines and criteria for the submission of short papers at EGOS Colloquia”:

https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.egosnet.org%2Fjart%2Fprj3%2Fegos%2Freleases%2Fde%2Fupload%2FUploads%2FEGOS-Colloquia_Submission-of-SHORT-PAPERS_2020.pdf&data=02%7C01%7Cs.decker%40aston.ac.uk%7Cb8425a9da0e446b68ab608d7343c037f%7Ca085950c4c2544d5945ab852fa44a221%7C0%7C1%7C637035304670086906&sdata=AXU%2F5RwJ62QH6iT8nnc46pt%2B%2BaGssiVztDKQOQHeZRU%3D&reserved=0

Please take note of “Short Paper Submission: Important Information” at:

https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.egosnet.org%2F2020%2Fhamburg%2FImportant-Information_Paper-Submission&data=02%7C01%7Cs.decker%40aston.ac.uk%7Cb8425a9da0e446b68ab608d7343c037f%7Ca085950c4c2544d5945ab852fa44a221%7C0%7C1%7C637035304670086906&sdata=2a1GWF%2F4WJj%2FGAdltKyXHeAgIcgAtNn8ZGOJc7ICjdQ%3D&reserved=0

GDPR & Historical Archives Workshop

Archival workshop

eabh in cooperation with the European Central Bank

23 March 2020
European Central Bank
Sonnemannstrasse 20
Frankfurt am Main, Germany

Call for papers

This workshop aims to look at the impact of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) on historical archives, in particular, but not exclusively, in the financial sector. Since May 2018, the GDPR has set common standards of data protection within the European Union and, to a certain extent, beyond. This regulation received critical acclaim by the public and scholars alike, however, not without facing widespread criticism for the severity of the changes it requires. Without a doubt, it has been successful in getting the topic of data protection on the political agenda as well in the public and business sphere. The ever-increasing collection of digital data has required common actions to limit the usage of personal data.

To read the full call, click here