Discussion: View Thread

Workshop on Organizational Stigma - 18-19 Sep 2019- in preparation of the JMS Special Issue

  • 1.  Workshop on Organizational Stigma - 18-19 Sep 2019- in preparation of the JMS Special Issue

    Posted 04-04-2019 13:00
    In prevision for the special issue on Organizational Stigma in the
    Journal of Management Studies, we are calling for the submission of
    long abstracts (1500 words) for a seminar to take place at IESEG in
    Paris, 18-20 September 2019.
    The objective is for participants to get feedback on their paper as
    they prepare it for submission to the special issue (due on 2 December
    2019).

    Deadline for submission of the abstract of 1500 words: 15 June 2019
    Notification of acceptance: Early July 2019
    Deadline for submission of the full paper for the workshop (in case of
    acceptance): 15 August 2019

    The workshop will take place on 18-20 September 2019 at the IESEG
    campus in Paris.

    Please submit your 1500 words abstract to our common email address:
    JMS.stigma@gmail.com




    Call for Papers for a Special Issue
    ORGANIZATIONAL STIGMA:
    ANTECEDENTS, PROCESSES, AND CONSEQUENCES

    Submission Deadline: 2nd December 2019
    Submissions to: business.jms@durham.ac.uk



    Guest Editors:
    Bryant A. Hudson (IESEG, France)
    Kimberly D. Elsbach (University of California Davis, USA)
    Wesley S. Helms (Brock University, Canada)
    Karen D. W. Patterson (University of New Mexico, USA)
    Thomas J. Roulet (University of Cambridge, UK)

    JMS Editor:
    Daniel Muzio (University of York, UK)


    Background

    Organizations and those that engage them are evaluated by a range of
    diverse audiences and can be stigmatized by them to varying degrees.
    This special issue seeks to address and invite authors to contribute
    to the still emergent but growing literature on organizational stigma,
    including fields, industries, or a single stigmatized organization. We
    are interested in various levels of analysis, whether organizational,
    industry, field, or the micro- or meso-level antecedents and
    consequences of organizational stigma. We also hope to extend this
    stream of work by addressing the multi- and cross-level processes of
    stigmatization, stigma transfer, and their implications for
    organizations.

    Historically, definitions of stigma at the organizational level are
    inspired from the extensive work at the individual level (Link &
    Phelan, 2001). While individual-level stigma has received a great deal
    of attention (for a recent review, see Pescolido & Martin, 2015)
    organizational stigma, defined as “a label that evokes a collective
    stakeholder group-specific perception that an organization possesses a
    fundamental, deep-seated flaw that deindividuates and discredits the
    organization” (Devers et al. 2009), is garnering greater attention.
    This type of stigma occurs at both the organization (Hudson, 2008;
    Hudson, 2016) and at the industry or field levels of analysis (Galvin
    et al. 2004; Vergne, 2012). First applied at the organizational level
    by Hughes (1984) and Sutton and colleagues (Elsbach & Sutton, 1992;
    Sutton & Callahan, 1987), a stream of stigma centered research has
    proceeded on tainted occupations (Ashforth & Kreiner, 1999); the
    transfer of stigma from failed organizations to managers (Sutton &
    Callahan, 1987) and other stakeholders (Vergne, 2012).

    Multilevel and cross-level, i.e., stigma that affects or is
    transferred across organizational members (Hudson & Okhuysen, 2009),
    groups and teams, and upper echelons, has received scant attention to
    date (Paetzold et al. 2008). At the individual level, recent work on
    individual level stigma has looked at the management of concealable
    stigma (Jones & King, 2014; Stenger & Roulet, 2018) and the
    temporality of stigmatization, but those questions have not been
    explored for meso- and macro-stigma, which may take very different
    forms for organizations or fields. While scholars have begun to
    examine some of these and related processes, several problems
    substantially limit our ability to study organizational and cross
    level stigma and to build a body of knowledge about it.

    Existing work is grounded in different theoretical assumptions of
    regarding organizations and actors including categories (Vergne,
    2012), framing (Carberry & King, 2012), identity (Tracey & Philips,
    2016) as well as institutional (Roulet, 2015; Hampel & Tracey, 2016).
    Across those different theoretical lenses, it has been shown that
    organizational stigma has a range of adverse and contrary consequences
    such as stakeholder disengagement (Durand & Vergne, 2014; Piazza &
    Perretti, 2015), identity clashes (Tracey & Phillips, 2016) or tainted
    employees (Sutton & Callahan, 1987). While some studies focus on
    de-stigmatization processes (Hampel & Tracey, 2016), and others
    examine stigma that is unavoidable (e.g., Hudson & Okhuysen, 2009),
    stigma and stigmatization as a benefit or how it might be embraced has
    also received scant attention, though some work has explored the
    benefits of stigma (Helms & Patterson, 2014). Embracing stigma however
    remains to be explored from the perspective of audiences that support
    or interact with the stigmatized organization.


    Aims and Scope

    We believe that the lack of theory on how stigma and stigmatization
    emerges, spreads, and shapes organizational contexts of theory on how
    stigma functions in contexts is due to three challenges persistent in
    the literature:
    1. Overlapping definitional and conceptual problems that obstruct
    our ability to understand what organizational stigma is and is not.
    2. A lack of a general understanding of the multi- and
    cross-level antecedents of organizational stigma, their qualities, and
    those processes.
    3. The consequences of these conceptual and empirical challenges
    in limiting the potential application and implications of stigma as a
    theoretical construct to broader organizational contexts and theories.

    We hope to publish a set of papers contributing to the organizational
    stigma literature addressing those three issues. We hope to develop
    new frameworks to understand organizational stigma that deliver an
    agenda for future study and for addressing a diverse set of issues
    that include, but are not limited to:
     How can organizational stigma be characterized? What are the
    dimensions of organizational stigma? How does organizational stigma
    differ from one case to another? How does the concept of
    organizational stigma differ from other negative social evaluations
    (Mishina & Devers, 2011)?
     The sources of organizational stigma: why and how does
    stigma emerge? What causes stigma and what role is played by
    audiences? (Roulet, 2015) How does misconduct, deviance, and scandal
    lead to organizational stigma?
     Responses to stigmatization: how can organizations manage
    and react to different types of stigma? How do stakeholders of the
    organization respond to stigmatization? How can organizational
    contexts lead to stigmatization?
     Understanding and exploring the experience of being a
    stigmatized individual organization: How can we better conceptualize
    the stigmatized solo actor? What are the dynamics of stigmatization
    and stigma management for solo organizations (Hampel & Tracey, 2017)?
     Stigma transfer and courtesy stigma (Hudson & Okhuysen,
    2009): how is stigma transferred to other organizations, stakeholders
    and society, as well as to individuals?
     Multi-level and cross-level issues in stigma theory: How
    does organizational stigma affect individuals and employees? How do
    stigmatized employees affect the evaluation of their organization?
    o Given the rich and expansive literature on stigma at the
    individual level, what insights can be drawn from this literature for
    organization level and cross-level stigma processes and responses.
    o What are the relationships and differences between stigma at the
    individual level and the organizational level of analysis? How are
    stigma and stigmatization multi-level and cross-level of analysis
    phenomena and processes?
    o How can the literature on deviance at multiple levels of analysis
    (Warren, 2003) inform our understanding of stigma?
    o Can organizations be more or less stigmatized within contested
    industries? (Vergne, 2012).
     The positive implications of stigmatization (Helms & Patterson, 2014).



    Submission Process and Deadlines

    The deadline for submissions is 2nd December 2019

    Submissions should be prepared using the JMS Manuscript Preparation
    Guidelines (http://www.socadms.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/JMSManuscript-Preparation-Guidelines.pdf).

    Manuscripts should be submitted by e-mail to Margaret Turner at
    business.jms@durham.ac.uk

    Papers will be reviewed according to the JMS double-blind review process.

    Informal enquiries relating to the Special Issue, proposed topics and
    potential fit with the Special Issue objectives are welcomed. Please
    direct any questions to the Guest Editors on the following email
    address: JMS.stigma@gmail.com

    Special conference and manuscript development workshop:
    The guest editors of this Special Issue are planning to hold a special
    conference and manuscript development workshop in Paris in the Fall of
    2019 before the submission deadline.

    Please note that participation in the workshop does not guarantee
    acceptance of the paper in the Special Issue. Furthermore, attendance
    is also not a prerequisite for submission to the special issue or
    publication.


    References
    Ashforth, B. E. and Kreiner, G. E. (1999). ‘“How can you do it?”:
    Dirty work and the challenge of constructing a positive identity’.
    Academy of Management Review, 24, 413-34.
    Carberry, E. J. and King, B. G. (2012). ‘Defensive Practice Adoption
    in the Face of Organizational Stigma: Impression Management and the
    Diffusion of Stock Option Expensing’. Journal of Management Studies,
    49, 1137-67.
    Devers, C. E., Dewett, T., Mishina, Y. and Belsito, C. A. (2009). ‘A
    General Theory of Organizational Stigma’. Organization Science, 20,
    154-71.
    Durand, R. and Vergne, J.-P. (2014). ‘Asset Divestment as a Response
    to Media Attacks in Stigmatized Industries’. Strategic Management
    Journal, 36, 1205-23.
    Elsbach, K. D. and Sutton, R. I. (1992). ‘Acquiring organizational
    legitimacy through illegitimate actions: A marriage of institutional
    and impression management theories’. Academy of Management Journal,
    35, 699-738.
    Galvin, T. L., Ventresca, M. J. and Hudson, B. A. (2004). ‘Contested
    industry dynamics’. International Studies of Management &
    Organization, 34, 56-82.
    Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled
    Identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Hampel, C. E. and Tracey, P. (2016). ‘How Organizations Move From
    Stigma to Legitimacy: The Case of Cook's Travel Agency in Victorian
    Britain’.Academy of Management Journal, 60, 2175-207.
    Helms, W. S. and Patterson, K. D. (2014). ‘Eliciting acceptance for
    “illicit” organizations: The positive implications of stigma for MMA
    organizations’.Academy of Management Journal, 57, 1453-84.
    Hudson, B. A. (2008). ‘Against all odds: A consideration of
    core-stigmatized organizations’. Academy of Management Review, 33,
    252-66.
    Hudson, B. A. and Okhuysen, G. A. (2009). ‘Not with a Ten-Foot Pole:
    Core Stigma, Stigma Transfer, and Improbable Persistence of Men's
    Bathhouses’.Organization Science, 20, 134-53.
    Hudson, B. A. (2016). ‘Organizational Stigma’. In Carroll, C. E.
    (Ed.), SAGE Encyclopedia of Corporate Reputation. Thousand Oaks, CA:
    SAGE Publications Inc., 808-10.
    Hughes, E. C. (1984). Bastard Institutions, The Sociological Eye:
    Selected Papers. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
    Jones, K. P. and King, E. B. (2014). ‘Managing concealable stigmas at
    work: A review and multilevel model’. Journal of Management, 40,
    1466-94.
    Link, B. G. and Phelan, J. C. (2001). ‘Conceptualizing Stigma’. Annual
    Review of Sociology, 27, 363-85.
    Mishina, Y. and Devers, C. E. (2011). ‘On being bad: Why stigma is not
    the same as a bad reputation’. In Pollock T. G and Barnett, M. L
    (Eds). The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation. Oxford: Oxford
    University Press, 201-20.
    Paetzold, R. L., Dipboye, R. L. and Elsbach, K. D. (2008). ‘A new look
    at stigmatization in and of organizations’. Academy of Management
    Review, 33, 186-93.
    Pescolido, B. A. and Martin, J. K. (2015). ‘The stigma complex’.
    Annual Review of Sociology, 41, 87-116.
    Piazza, A. and Perretti, F. (2015). ‘Categorical Stigma and Firm
    Disengagement: Nuclear Power Generation in the United States,
    1970–2000’. Organization Science, 26, 724-42.
    Roulet, T. (2015). ‘“What Good is Wall Street?” Institutional
    Contradiction and the Diffusion of the Stigma over the Finance
    Industry’. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(2), 1-14.
    Slade Shantz, A., Fischer, E., Liu, A. and Lévesque, M. (2018).
    ‘Spoils from the Spoiled: Strategies for Entering Stigmatized
    Markets’. Journal of Management Studies, forthcoming.
    Stenger, S. and Roulet, T. J. (2018). ‘Pride against prejudice? The
    stakes of concealment and disclosure of a stigmatized identity for gay
    and lesbian auditors’. Work, employment and society, 32, 257-73.
    Sutton, R. I. and Callahan, A. L. (1987). ‘The stigma of bankruptcy:
    Spoiled organizational image and its management’. Academy of
    Management Journal, 30, 405-36.
    Tracey, P. and Phillips, N. (2016). ‘Managing the Consequences of
    Organizational Stigmatization: Identity Work in a Social Enterprise’.
    Academy of Management Journal, 59, 740-65.
    Vergne, J.-P. (2012). ‘Stigmatized categories and public disapproval
    of organizations: A mixed-methods study of the global arms industry,
    1996–2007’.Academy of Management Journal, 55, 1027-52.
    Warren, D. E. (2003). ‘Constructive and destructive deviance in
    organizations’. Academy of management Review, 28, 622-32.
    Zavyalova, A., Pfarrer, M. and Reger, R. (2016). ‘Celebrity and
    infamy? The consequences of media narratives about organizational
    identity’. Academy of Management Review, 42, 461-80.

    _______________________________________________________________________

    To send a message to the list, send your email to SIM@aomlists.pace.edu

    _______________________________________________________________________

    Visit the SIM Division website at: http://sim.aomonline.org
    _______________________________________________________________________

    If you wish to unsubscribe from this list or change your delivery
    options, you can do so online at: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=sim&A=1