Call for Papers in Journal of Business Ethics

͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­

	Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more Business, Ethics and Collective Memory Call for Papers in Journal of Business Ethics Stephanie Decker FAcSS FBAM Jul 30   READ IN APP   Journal of Business Ethics Special Issue Call for Papers Submission deadline: 31 October 2025 Guest Editors Ziyun Fan, University of York, Ziyun Fan Jeremy Aroles, University of York, Jeremy Aroles María Fernández Moya, CUNEF University, María Fernández Moya Glen Whelan, UQAM - University of Quebec in Montreal, Glen Whelan Introduction to this Special Issue The ‘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). Upgrade to paid 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 topics We 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 workshop Pre-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 instructions All 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. Share References Aroles, 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. Upgrade to paid   Like Comment Restack   © 2025 Stephanie Decker Unsubscribe