Call for Papers

Corporate governance holds a profound responsibility for the future of the world. However, current debates about corporate governance predominantly center on paradigms rooted in 20th-century organizations and societies, limiting our ability to address contemporary challenges (Starbuck, 2014). Governance-westernised (Grosfoguel, 2013) policies optimised for immediate corporate effectiveness can incur long-term harm to humanity and the environment, necessitating a paradigm shift where protecting humanity becomes the most important concern within corporate governance (Ferrarini, 2021). This transformation cannot be realized if scholars are hesitant to embrace alternative epistemologies, particularly those originating from the Global South (Santos, 2014).
 
This imperative is especially relevant in addressing critical grand challenges such as global peace (Ford, 2015) and sustainability (Nacity et al., 2022). Corporate governance must pivot its main focus toward sustainability, with boards undertaking the responsibility of crafting organizations dedicated to the long-term survival of all individuals and fostering the exchange of local wealth and ideas across national boundaries. While some corporations do exhibit a forward-looking global citizenship, their numbers remain inadequate. Hence, enhanced governance is required.
 
Instilling humble and contextualized leadership into corporate governance becomes pivotal in navigating these challenges. As new technologies and associated developments reshape the business landscape, entirely novel forms of governance must be developed. This is where management and organization scholarship might aid (Filatotchev, 2008; Pandey, et al., 2023). By investigating leadership, innovative decision-making processes, and fostering a culture of continuous questioning and learning, scholars can contribute valuable insights that guide the evolution of corporate governance structures. Exploring how organizations can strategically integrate cutting-edge technologies while maintaining ethical standards is a key facet of this research. Furthermore, the scholarship can illuminate the role of humble and contextualized leadership in promoting resilience and sustainable practices. As the global community grapples with interconnected issues such as climate change, leveraging management and organization scholarship becomes not only an academic pursuit but a strategic goal for boards aiming to address multifaceted challenges and contribute meaningfully to the preservation of humanity.

In this sub-theme, we call for justice in pursuit of systemic sustainability, as eloquently articulated by Manuel Castells Oliván’s call for structural transformation, encompassing shifts in production relations, power dynamics, and interpersonal connections since the late 1980s. Regrettably, the response to the plea for sustainable development remains sluggish, marked by entrenched corporate and individual instrumentalised habits that often prioritize opportunism over genuine transformation. The challenge posed to both the Western and "other" worlds is profound – breaking free from the clutches of consumerism, stepping out of comfort zones, and overcoming the detachment from our cosmic and collective unity. Khlif et al. (2022) assert that states, and large and self-interested entities, fall short in ensuring the democratic representation of Earthbound people. Instead, they propose that groups of individuals serve as the vital link between the collective and local actions.
 
Re-evaluating the dominance of the ego in defining “individuality” in both societal and natural ecosystems emerges as a pivotal consideration. The second point emphasizes a re-evaluation of liberalism within the framework of a war economy, advocating for a society that reconsiders individuals to control their lives and move freely. Krishnamurti’s 1925 proposal that individuals must transcend ego-centricity to attain universal harmony resonates, highlighting the centrality of free traders and democrats working to eradicate political domination by states or monopolies (oligopolies) and secure the complete freedom of movement for people more than goods.
 
The third point aligns with Santos et al.’s (2007) call to broaden the canon of knowledge and acknowledge difference. It urges the recognition of diverse forms of sociability, emphasizing the conscious elimination of various knowledge-building and sharing practices by dominant Northern perspectives. In essence, the call is for scholars to integrate broader and innovative non-Western paradigms, acknowledging the richness that lies beyond conventional canons of knowledge.
 
Through this Call for Papers, we invite contributions to advance research on boards of directors, general corporate governance, and related areas, including (ESG) performance, social activism, board decision-making, and collaboration. We encourage submissions adopting diverse epistemological, theoretical, and methodological perspectives to address pertinent questions. Potential areas of focus include socio-psychological approaches, institutional theory, power, political or cultural perspectives, communication theory, linguistics, narrative, discourse, decolonised or rhetorical analysis.
 
Papers may explore the performative or useful effects of codes and rules, language, and framing on executives and non-executives, attending to the interactive and communicative construction of institutions, and employing retrospective and prospective approaches in studying board governance processes.

• How can management and organizational thinking unleash the creative potential of corporate governance to preserve humanity?

• How do existing regulatory frameworks, compliance standards, and the organizational capacity (or lack thereof) to foster creativity impact the role of boards in addressing the challenges?

• To what extent do (emerging) technologies, such as artificial intelligence and blockchain, influence the governance structures of corporations and their ability to address socio-economic and environmental challenges?

• How can organizations leverage partnerships with non-governmental organizations (NGOs), governmental bodies, and other stakeholders to amplify their contributions to climate resilience, (bio)diversity equality and sustainable development?

• What role can corporate boards play in promoting a culture of continuous learning and adaptability within organizations to respond effectively to rapid technological advancements and societal shifts?

• What new roles or portfolio of roles should boards embrace to navigate the myriad challenges they are likely to encounter in diverse contexts?

• Are concepts such as earthbound human identity and enhanced humans useful for reframing corporate governance? Are they part of the problem or part of the solution in the evolution of governance debates?

• How could local governance practices of the ‘Big South’ economies help to address new forms of reflective and informed (corporate) governance with regard to systemic sustainability?

References

• Castells, M. (1978): “City, Class and Power.” In: M. Castells: City, Class and Power. London: Palgrave, 167–173.

• Ferrarini, G. (2021): “Redefining Corporate Purpose: Sustainability as a Game Changer.” In: Busch, D., Ferrarini, G., Grünewald, S. (eds.): Sustainable Finance in Europe. EBI Studies in Banking and Capital Markets Law. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 85–150.
• Filatotchev, I. (2008): “Developing an organizational theory of corporate governance: comments on Henry L. Tosi, Jr. (2008) ‘Quo Vadis?’ Suggestions for future corporate governance research.” Journal of Management & Governance, 12, 171–178.
• Ford, J. (2015): “Perspectives on the evolving ‘business and peace’ debate.” Academy of Management Perspectives, 29 (4), 451–460.
• Grosfoguel, R. (2013): “The Structure of Knowledge in Westernized Universities. Epistemic Racism/Sexism and the Four Genocides/Epistemicides of the Long 16th Century.” Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge, XI (1), 73–90.
• Khlif, W., Kariou, L., & Ingley, C. (2022): Systemic sustainability: toward an organic model of governance – a research note.” Journal of Management and Governance 26, 11–25.
• Naciti, V., Cesaroni, F., & Pulejo, L. (2022): “Corporate governance and sustainability: a review of the existing literature.” Journal of Management and Governance, 26, 55–74.
• Pandey, N., Andres, C., & Kumar, S. (2023): “Mapping the corporate governance scholarship: Current state and future directions.” Corporate Governance: An International Review, 31 (1), 127–160.
• Santos, B.S. (2014): Epistemologies of the South. Justice Against Epistemicide. New York: Routledge.
• Santos, B.S., Nunes, J.A., & Meneses, M.P. (2007): “Introduction: Opening Up the Canon of Knowledge and Recognition of Difference.” In: B.S. Santos (ed.): Another Knowledge is Possible: Beyond Northern Epistemologies. London: Verso, XIX–LXII.
• Starbuck, W.H. (2014): “Why corporate governance deserves serious and creative thought.” Academy of Management Perspectives, 28 (1), 15–21.
•