Back to listProgram

Sub-theme 43: Societal Governance in the Face of Grand Challenges: Perspectives from the Global North and South, East and West

Convenors:
Zlatko Bodrožić
University of Liverpool, UK
Paul S. Adler
University of Southern California
Ning Nicole Liu
City University of Hong Kong, China

Call for Papers

Call for short papers (pdf)

Our field has developed conceptual tools for analyzing change in corporate governance in the face of grand challenges (Klein et al., 2019). In contrast, research on change in its macro-level counterpart—societal governance (Kourula et al., 2019)—has not kept pace, even though adaptation efforts at the firm level are enabled and constrained by the “rules of the game” (North, 1990) of the wider societal governance system (e.g., Bodrožić & Adler, 2025; Delmestri & Schüßler, 2025; Nyberg & Wright, 2025). Research on societal governance is challenging because societal governance systems differ qualitatively across sectors and countries. While corporations are the dominant actors in societal governance systems in many—but not all—sectors of the U.S. (Aguilera & Jackson, 2010), in China, we observe that the key actors in many sectors are government agencies and other public-sector organizations (Zheng & Huang, 2018). In other regions of the world—Brazil, some European countries, India, or South Africa—mixed public-private governance of various kinds plays a relatively larger role (Musacchio et al., 2015). This pronounced heterogeneity stands in stark contrast to the extent to which our governance frameworks have been shaped by research in the U.S. and Europe (Aguilera & Jackson, 2010), with the tacit assumption that technological, organizational, and public policy innovations emerge in “developed” Western countries and become models for developing countries (see Banerjee, 2022). This tacit assumption is increasingly untenable in a rapidly changing world where major innovations also emerge in countries such as China, India, or Brazil.

The goal of our sub-theme is to inspire research on societal governance from an international and comparative perspective. Achieving this will require broadening our intellectual resources. Several theoretical perspectives can inform this endeavor, including institutional theory (e.g., Delmestri & Schüßler, 2025; Jepperson & Meyer, 2021), stakeholder theory (Amis et al., 2020), Marxism (e.g., Adler, 2015), neo-Schumpeterian theory (Bodrožić & Adler, 2025; Bodrožić et al., 2025), cultural political economy (Jessop, 2010), and neo-Gramscian theory (e.g., Wright & Nyberg, 2017). Adjacent disciplines such as public management, public policy, political science, and comparative social sciences could further enrich our dialogue. Perhaps most importantly, we need to involve perspectives not only from the Global North and West, but also from the Global South and East, including Asia, Africa, and Latin America. We therefore invite papers from a wide variety of theoretical and disciplinary lenses and, in particular, papers with international and comparative perspectives. We welcome both original empirical studies and conceptual contributions.

Possible topics and questions include, but are not limited to:

  • What conceptualizations and frameworks of societal governance can we build on? Which conceptual and methodological tools can we use to study societal governance in the face of grand challenges (see Kourula et al., 2019)?

  • What frameworks for international and comparative research are most useful in the study of societal governance in the face of grand challenges (see Aguilera & Jackson, 2010)? How can theoretical frameworks and research designs enable the inclusion of perspectives from the Global South and East?

  • Across sectors and countries, who are the key orchestrators of collective action in the face of grand challenges in their respective contexts? What role in this orchestration is played by firms, government agencies, community-based organizations, and other societal actors? Across sectors and countries, what configurations of orchestrators drive more effective responses to these challenges (see Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006; Klein et al., 2019)?

  • How do societal governance systems change over time, and how can existing systems adapt to more effectively address the multiple grand challenges we face? How do incumbent societal actors resist or redirect these adaptation efforts (see Wright & Nyberg, 2017)?

  • How can engaged scholarship provide societal actors with concepts and tools to act more effectively as agents of change?

References
  • Adler, P. S. (2015). Community and innovation: From Tönnies to Marx. Organization Studies, 36(4), 445–471. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840614561566
  • Aguilera, R. V., & Jackson, G. (2010). Comparative and international corporate governance. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 485–556. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2010.495525
  • Amis, J., Barney, J., Mahoney, J. T., & Wang, H. (2020). From the editors – Why we need a theory of stakeholder governance – and why this is a hard problem. Academy of Management Review, 45(3), 499–503. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2020.0181
  • Banerjee, S. B. (2022). Decolonizing management theory: A critical perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 59(4), 1074–1087. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12756
  • Bodrožić, Z., & Adler, P. S. (2025). System change, not climate change: Charting alternative responses to the climate crisis through international comparative research. Journal of Management Studies, 62(1), 3608-3637. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13192
  • Bodrožić, Z., Hartmann, R. K., & Krabbe, A. D. (2025). The ascendance and decline of entrepreneurialism: A neo-Schumpeterian perspective. Academy of Management Perspectives. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2023.0378
  • Delmestri, G., & Schüßler, E. (2025). The mission (im)possible of climate action through quixotic institutional work. Journal of Management Studies, 62(2), 3638-3658. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13209
  • Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659–669. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.21318923
  • George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A., & Tihanyi, L. (2016). Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 1880–1895. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.4007
  • Jepperson, R. L., & Meyer, J. W. (2021). Institutional theory: The cultural construction of organizations, states, and identities. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139939744

Jessop, B. (2010). Cultural political economy and critical policy studies. Critical Policy Studies, 3(3–4), 336–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171003619741

  • Klein, P. G., Mahoney, J. T., McGahan, A. M., & Pitelis, C. N. (2019). Organizational governance adaptation: Who is in, who is out, and who gets what. Academy of Management Review, 44(1), 6–27. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0459
  • Kourula, A., Moon, J., Salles-Djelic, M.-L., & Wickert, C. (2019). New roles of government in the governance of business conduct: Implications for management and organizational research. Organization Studies, 40(8), 1101–1123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840619852142
  • Musacchio, A., Lazzarini, S. G., & Aguilera, R. V. (2015). New varieties of state capitalism: Strategic and governance implications. Academy of Management Perspectives, 29(1), 115–131. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2013.0094
  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.
  • Nyberg, D., & Wright, C. (2025). Confronting the climate crisis: Fossil fuel hegemony and the need for decarbonization, degrowth, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 62(8), 3659–3676. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13198
  • Wright, C., & Nyberg, D. (2017). An inconvenient truth: How organizations translate climate change into business as usual. Academy of Management Journal, 60(5), 1633–1661. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.0718
  • Zheng, Y., & Huang, Y. (2018). Market in state: The political economy of domination in China. Cambridge University Press.



Zlatko Bodrožić is Professor of Digital Enterprise at the University of Liverpool. He is interested in the interaction of technologies, management models, organizational paradigms, and public policy regimes. His work has been published in journals such as 'Administrative Science Quarterly', 'Organization Science', 'Academy of Management Perspectives', and 'Journal of Management Studies'. His current research examines the evolution of societal governance systems in the context of digital transformation and climate change. At EGOS, he serves as lead coordinator of the Standing Working Group “Societal Governance in the Face of Polycrisis” (2028–2031).
Paul S. Adler is the Harold Quinton Chair Emeritus of Business Policy and Professor Emeritus of Management and Organization at the University of Southern California. He has published widely in academic journals and edited several books, including 'The Oxford Handbook of Sociology and Organization Studies: Classical Foundations' (2009), and 'The Oxford Handbook of Sociology, Social Theory, and Organization Studies: Contemporary Currents' (2014). Most recently, he published 'The 99 Percent Economy: How Democratic Socialism can overcome the Crises of Capitalism' (2019). At EGOS, he serves as co-coordinator of the Standing Working Group “Societal Governance in the Face of Polycrisis” (2028–2031).
Ning Nicole Liu is Professor in the Department of Public and International Affairs at the City University of Hong Kong. Her research interests are in the areas of government-business relations, regulation and compliance, and AI governance. Her research has been published in journals such as the 'Academy of Management Journal', 'Public Administration Review', 'Policy Studies Journal', and 'The China Quarterly'. She serves as co-editor of 'Regulation & Governance' and has also guest-edited two special issues on regulatory governance. At EGOS, she serves as co-coordinator of the Standing Working Group “Societal Governance in the Face of Polycrisis” (2028–2031).