Dear Reader,
To read this week's post, click here: https://teachingtenets.wordpress.com/2025/07/30/aphorism-18-this-is-a-journey/
It is a 1-minute read.
Wednesday, 30 July 2025
Business, Ethics and Collective Memory
Journal of Business EthicsSubmission deadline: 31 October 2025 Guest Editors
Introduction to this Special IssueThe ‘historic turn’ (Durepos & Mills, 2017; Rowlinson et al., 2014) and ‘historical consciousness’ (Suddaby, 2016) in business and management studies have fuelled a rising interest in why and how the past is socially (re)constructed, and its consequences for individuals, organizations, and societies in general. This interest is accompanied by mounting criticisms levelled against the silencing, inaction, and cover-up of organizational wrongdoings and historic irresponsibility (Phillips et al., 2020; Yapici & Dheer, 2024); and of concerns relating to the omnipresent role that major tech companies play in processes of memory formation (Whelan, 2021). In seeking to reveal the use of the past, collective memory emerges as a pivotal construct and practice of scrutiny (Olick, 2008; Olick & Robbins, 1998). Collective memory influences us through selection and re-creation of our knowledge of the past (Decker et al., 2021; Zerubavel, 2003). It is thus best understood as a contingent choice that captures a series of selected moments that shapes the what, how and why of memory, and that creates different, and differently perceived, historical trajectories for individuals and organizations (e.g., Aroles et al., 2024; Fan & Liu, 2022; Mena & Rintamäki, 2020; Wadhwani et al., 2018). This special issue invites critical examination of the moral agency and ethical complexity of collective memory. We call for interdisciplinary and philosophical research that spans the boundaries of this field by expanding the theoretical and empirical groundwork surrounding the processes of (re)constructing, preserving, and reproducing the past, and of how such (re)constructed pasts impact on individuals, organizations, and societies, in the present and future (Whelan, 2021). In conceiving of collective memory as a perspective, a practice, and also a process, we recognise that collective memory is not necessarily controlled by one specific set of actors: e.g., historians, curators, museums (Coraiola et al., 2018; Wadhwani et al., 2018). It is not the sole privilege of any set of organizations, and can be developed through the (un)coordinated actions of (otherwise disconnected) individuals and organizations. Reconstructing the past thus involves various mnemonic communities (Zerubavel, 2003), and its performance frames how social actors navigate their world (Wadhwani et al., 2018). Although there has been growing research on the performativity of memory and its materiality, critical facets of these elements constitute a largely unfilled agenda. One particularly important aspect relates to the advent of social hyperconnectivity and the digital shift, which introduces new technologies and powerful corporate actors (Trittin-Ulbrich et al., 2021), along with new experts and social practices for recording, reconstructing and disseminating the past (Garde-Hansen, 2011). Indeed, it is only with recent work that we have begun to explore how digital environments and tech companies are altering how collective memories are (re)constructed, preserved and reproduced (Whelan, 2021). Further work on such transformations seems vital as we are in a ‘society of memory’ that provides a political and moral framework of appropriate social meanings about the past as the formation of what Durkheim called ‘conscience collective’ and Assmann ‘culture’. This sense of mnemonic community can promote the moral responsibilities of sustaining certain collective memories. As Halbwachs (1992: 43) suggested, “no memory is possible outside frameworks used by people living in society to determine and retrieve their recollections”. We also call for further research regarding what should be remembered, deleted, or forgotten (Mayer-Schönberger, 2009). There is, for example, a desire from some to remove memories of dark pasts from the collective conscious (Decker, 2013; Walsh & Ungson, 1991). To create this blind spot, some individuals and organizations try to construct their narratives so as to bury problematic memories and thus present themselves in a favourable light (Schmidt & Cohen, 2013: 38; Schrempf-Stirling et al., 2015). Yet not all ‘forgetting work’ is well hidden, as certain ways of concealment provide openings and bases for further disclosure (Fan & Christensen, 2024; Fan & Liu, 2022). Some of those revelations are made deliberately, for example, through ‘politics of regret’ (Olick, 2007) to legitimize particular organizational decision-making in the present. This performance of an ethic of self-conviction can arguably be mistaken as an ethic of responsibility (Weber, 1946), constituting a paramnesia, rather than merely amnesia, of an organizational reality in and through the organizing of collective memory. However, more research is needed to better understand how such (par)amnesia might form habitualised mentalities and practices that enable discrimination, marginalization, or violence. Type of papers and suggested topicsWe encourage imaginative and interdisciplinary submissions that address the three broad themes listed below. Conceptual Development- How do different philosophical perspectives and moral traditions frame the tensions that underlie collective memory? - How can we understand collective memory as a constructive practice and process that constitutes social justice and fosters alternative movements in/through organizations? - How can we understand space, or spatialization, of collective memory as the architecture of moral reasoning for remembering and forgetting? - How do our predictions about how contemporary organizations will be remembered in the future influence our decisions to engage or not engage with these organizations today? - What novel insights do specific individuals or corporate actors (such as activists, NGOs, or secret organizations) bring into conceptualizing ethics-centred collective memory? Collective Memory within and beyond organizations- How are narratives, storytelling and material-discursive practices used to (de-)politicize certain aspects of remembering and forgetting in collective memory? - What is the role of mnemotechnologies (e.g., digitalization) in voicing, silencing, or recreating historic (ir)responsibility? - How do extant collective memories of organizations shape engagement with them once these memories are ‘established’? - How do multiple stakeholders construct collective memory in organizations? What are the ethical tensions, issues and implications of such co-construction of collective memory? - How are digital transformations and tech companies transforming how collective memories are (re)constructed, preserved and reproduced by individuals, organizations, and society? Individual Experiences and Collective Memory- What might be the ethical tensions and implications of the conflicts between the value, judgement, and/or identity of an individual member and the collective memory of an organization? Can these tensions be resolved? If so, how? - How is collective memory used to shift blame of an organizational wrongdoing to specific individuals as scapegoats? - How are individuals commemorated as part of collective memory for moral legitimation purposes of an organization? Do these individuals change over time? Or do their roles of moral legitimation change over time? - How are particular groups marginalized in and through collective memory? - How do social hyperconnectivity and the digital environment impact our individual collective memory capacities and perceptions, and how does this factor influence the deliberate and strategic construction of our collective memory of organizations? Paper development workshopPre-submission: Interested authors will be invited to submit a 500-word extended abstract for consideration to participate in an online Special Issue Paper Development Workshop before 17th January 2025. This workshop itself will take place over approximately two hours. In the first one-hour session, we will introduce the special issue and explain what we are looking for in terms of submissions. In the second hour, groups of authors will attend one hour breakout sessions with a facilitator to discuss their proposed papers and the fit with the special issue as well as receive feedback from other authors. The digital format will ensure that attendance is possible for as many authors from around the world as possible. Attendance is not a precondition for submission. For further information on the workshop email Ziyun Fan Submission instructionsAll submissions must be original, not published or under consideration for publication elsewhere. The authors should follow the Journal of Business Ethics guidelines. Please submit manuscripts through the Editorial Manager® by 31 October 2025. The online submission system will be opened 60 days prior to this submission deadline. Please contact the guest editors through the contact details provided above for any informal enquiries related to the Special Issue. Submitted manuscripts will go through a double-blind peer-reviewed process as indicated in JBE’s submission guidelines. Journal’s editorial procedures (Peer Review Policy, Process and Guidance) and how reviewers are selected (Peer Reviewer Selection). This journal offers the option to publish Open Access. You are allowed to publish open access through Open Choice. Please explore the OA options available through your institution by referring to our list of OA Transformative Agreements. ReferencesAroles, J., Morrell, K., Granter, E., & Liang, Y. (2024). Representing, Re‐presenting, or Producing the Past? Memory Work amongst Museum Employees. Journal of Management Studies, Epub ahead of print, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13059. Böhm, S., Carrington, M., Cornelius, N., de Bruin, B., Greenwood, M., Hassan, L., Jain, T., Karam, C., Kourula, A., Romani, L., Riaz, S., & Shaw, D. (2022). Ethics at the centre of global and local challenges: Thoughts on the future of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 180(3), 835-861. Coraiola, D., Suddaby, R., & Foster, W. (2018). Organizational fields as mnemonic communities. In J. Glückler, R. Suddaby, & R. Lenz (Eds.), Knowledge and institutions (pp. 45–68). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Decker, S (2013). The silence of the archives: business history, post-colonialism and archival ethnography. Management & Organizational History, 8(2), 155-173. Decker, S., Hassard, J., & Rowlinson, M. (2021). Rethinking history and memory in organization studies: The case for historiographical reflexivity. Human Relations, 74(8), 1123-1155. Durepos, G., & Mills, A. J. (2017). ANTi-History, relationalism and the historic turn in management and organization studies. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 12(1), 53-67. Fan, Z., & Christensen, L. T. (2024). The dialogic performativity of secrecy and transparency. Human Relations, 77(4), 484-504. Fan, Z., & Liu, Y. (2022). Decoding secrecy as multiple temporal processes: Co-constitution of concealment and revelation in archival stories. Human Relations, 75(6), 1028-1052. Garde-Hansen, J. (2011). Media and memory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Halbwachs, M. (1992). On collective memory (Edited, translated, and with an introduction by Lewis A. Coser). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mayer-Schönberger, V. (2009). Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Mena, S., & Rintamäki, J. (2020). Managing the past responsibly: A collective memory perspective on responsibility, sustainability and ethics. In O. Laasch, D. Jamali, R. E. Freeman, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), Research Handbook of Responsible Management (pp. 470-483). Edward Elgar Publishing. Olick, J. K. (2008). ‘Collective memory’: A memoir and prospect. Memory Studies, 1(1), 23-29. Olick, J. K. (2013). The politics of regret: On collective memory and historical responsibility. New York: Routledge. Olick, J. K., & Robbins, J. (1998). Social memory studies: From “collective memory” to the historical sociology of mnemonic practices. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 105-140. Phillips, R., Schrempf-Stirling, J., & Stutz, C. (2020). The past, history, and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 166(2), 203-213. Rowlinson, M., Hassard, J., & Decker, S. (2014). Research strategies for organizational history: A dialogue between historical theory and organization theory. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 250-274. Schmidt, E., & Cohen, J. (2013). The New Digital Age: Reshaping the Future of People, Nations and Business. London: John Murray. Schrempf-Stirling, J., Palazzo, G., & Phillips, R. A. (2016). Historic corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 41(4), 700-719. Suddaby, R. (2016). Toward a historical consciousness: Following the historic turn in management thought. M@n@gement, 1(19), 46-60. Trittin-Ulbrich, H., Scherer, A. G., Munro, I., & Whelan, G. (2021). Exploring the dark and unexpected sides of digitalization: Toward a critical agenda. Organization, 28(1), 8-25. Wadhwani, R. D., Suddaby, R., Mordhorst, M. and Popp, A. (2018). History as Organizing: Uses of the Past in Organization Studies. Organization Studies, 39(12), 1663-1683. Walsh, J. P., & Ungson, G. R. (1991). Organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 57-91. Weber, M. (1946). Politics as a vocation. In H. H. Gerth, & C. W. Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (pp.77-128). Oxford University Press. Whelan, G. (2021). Megacorporation: The infinite times of Alphabet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Yapici, N., & Dheer, R. J. (2024). Forgetting Corporate Irresponsibility: The Role of Corporate Political Activities and Stakeholder Characteristics. Journal of Business Ethics, 191(1), 29-57. Zerubavel, E. (2003). Time maps: Collective memory and the social shape of the past. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. You're currently a free subscriber to Organizational History Network. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
|
Unashamed Autistic: The Refusal To Be Ashamed
Unashamed Autistic: The Refusal To Be AshamedExploring Autistic Pride Ahead Of My Book Release On July 31st
Tomorrow, my book Unashamed Autistic will be released into the world. It’s not just a collection of essays; it’s a declaration. A refusal. A celebration. And it feels fitting, even urgent, to mark this occasion by writing about something core to the book’s heart; Autistic Pride. Autistic Pride is not a corporate slogan or a one-day event. It is a radical act of resistance. It is a lifeline thrown between Autistic people across continents and generations. And it is, above all else, a refusal to be ashamed of existing as we are. For too long, Autistic existence has been framed as a tragedy, a burden, or a puzzle to solve. The medical model has reduced us to a pathology. The media has vilified or stigmatised us. Education systems have tried to normalise us. Even supportive neurotypicals have often only extended acceptance on the condition that we suppress or mask ourselves. But we are not here to be solved, corrected, or cured. We are here to be heard. To take up space. To live full, rich, complex lives on our own terms, and to do so unashamed. What Autistic Pride Really MeansAutistic Pride is not the same as individual confidence or self-esteem. It’s something far more collective and politicised. It is the collective reclamation of a neurotype that has been systematically marginalised. Pride, in this context, is not about being more than others or in some way better, it is survival. It is an antidote to shame. To feel pride as an Autistic person is to push back against the internalised ableism we've had forced upon us since childhood. It is to unlearn the lie that there is something fundamentally wrong with us, and instead embrace the richness of our neurocognitive style: our passions, our perceptions. It’s not about pretending that life is easy, or that we don’t face profound barriers. But Autistic Pride does say “We are not the problem”. The problem is a world built to exclude us. A Personal Reckoning with ShameUnashamed Autistic is born from my own lifelong negotiation with shame. Shame that was never mine to carry, but was handed to me by schools that demanded compliance, by professionals who pathologised me, and by a society that saw my struggles as “challenging behaviour” rather than communication. I wrote this book because I needed to name that shame. To look it in the eye. And then, to burn it. In the pages of Unashamed Autistic, you’ll find essays on a number of aspects of Autistic experience, and how and why we live in a world that demands our shame. But the pervasive theme in every chapter is this; I am not ashamed. And I want you to know that you don’t have to be either. The Lie of “Independence” and the Truth of InterdependenceAutistic Pride also invites us to reject neuronormative values that are sold to us as universal truths. One of the most insidious is the hegemony of “independence”. We are told that success means standing alone, being self-sufficient, not needing help. But that’s a myth rooted in capitalist individualism, a neoliberal lie, not human reality. No one is truly independent. We are all interdependent, reliant on each other in various, shifting ways. The importance of community for our wellbeing is enshrined in research. When communities come together, individuals flourish and move towards a life of thriving. Autistic Pride means saying “I need support, and I deserve it. I offer support, and it is valuable. My way of being in the world is valid, not despite my needs, but with them”. Unashamed in a Pathologising WorldTo be openly and proudly Autistic is still a risky act in many places. It can cost us jobs, safety, healthcare, access, and even relationships. That’s why Autistic Pride is not just personal, it’s political. It’s about fighting for a world where no Autistic person has to live in the shadows in order to survive. The psychiatric system still frames autism as a “disorder”. The education system often views Autistic students as problems to be managed. Employers demand capitalist prodcutivity and small talk over actual competence. Family members still ask, “Have you tried not being Autistic?” To be unashamed in the face of all that is to defy a system that depends on our complicity by silence. Autistic Pride gives us the language and the collective strength to speak out, and to build something better. Pride Is Not Just for JuneAutistic Pride isn’t confined to one day a year. It’s not something you put on a t-shirt and then forget. It’s lived, everyday, in every act of self-acceptance. Every time an Autistic person challenges the shame forced upon us, we are resisting through pride. And that practice is contagious. When we live unashamed, we show other Autistic people (especially those still coming to terms with their identity)that it is safe to do the same. We plant seeds. We build community. We create a world where the next generation of Autistic young people can grow up free from the scrutiny of neuronormative society. The Role of CommunityAutistic Pride is sustained through community. Through the online spaces where we find each other. Through group chats, social media, blogs, and the neurodivergent creators who give language to experiences we once thought were unspeakable. This book would not exist without those communities. Unashamed Autistic was written in conversation with a broader Autistic rhizome; the decentralized, multi-dimensional network of Autistic knowledge sharing that refuses academic gatekeeping. It’s a rhizome I am proud to be a part of. A community rooted in solidarity, not superiority. When I speak of pride, I do not mean it in isolation. I mean it as a collective act, a web of Autistic people lifting each other up, making space for grief, for joy, for rage, and for rest. Moving Beyond VisibilityWhile visibility has its place, Autistic Pride goes further. Visibility without understanding becomes a side show. Representation without transformation becomes tokenism. When we are simply observed we become exhibitions in a global gallery rather than the human beings we are. Autistic Pride demands more than awareness, it demands justice. It demands accessibility, safety, autonomy, and liberation. It demands a reshaping of systems, not just superficial inclusion within them. We are not asking to be tolerated. We are declaring that we are here, and we are enough; not because we emulate neurotypical norms, but because our Autistic existence is something more than our political or economic value. A Final InvitationAs Unashamed Autistic enters the world, I want to offer an invitation to all Autistic people, and especially to those who are still learning to let go of shame. Let this be your permission slip. To stop performing for a neurotypical audience. To stim. To infodump. To rest. To exist in full embodiment of your Self. To reject shame. To write your own story. Pride is not something you earn. It is something you deserve just by existing. Unashamed. Unapologetic. Autistic. Always. You're currently a free subscriber to David Gray-Hammond. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
|
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Getting Research Funding in Business and Management History
Watch now (50 mins) | BAM Business History Webinar ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ...
-
Online & In-Person ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ...
-
Dear Reader, To read this week's post, click here: https://teachingtenets.wordpress.com/2025/07/02/aphorism-24-take-care-of-your-teach...
