Fiddling while the ice melts? How organizational scholars can take a more active role in the climate change debate

The debate over anthropogenic climate change or the idea that human activities are altering the physical climate of the planet continues to rage amid seemingly irreconcilable differences, both within the developed world and between developed and less developed countries. With high uncertainty, rival worldviews, and wide diversity of meaning attached to the expression, climate change has become a key narrative within which local and transnational issues – economic, social, and political – are framed and contested. The field is fraught with controversies regarding causes and consequences, as well as different attitudes toward risks, technologies, and economic and social well-being for different groups. Parties also dispute how to share responsibility for reducing emissions – whether the issue primarily needs market, regulatory, technological, or behavioral solutions. Climate change is many things to many people. Competing interests negotiate over its interpretation and utilize various strategies to promote practices that advance their own understandings regarding climate change and its governance

Constructing a climate change logic: An institutional perspective on the "tragedy of the commons"

Despite increasing interest in transnational fields, transnational commons have received little attention. In contrast to economic models of commons, which argue that commons occur naturally and are prone to collective inaction and tragedy, we introduce a social constructionist account of commons. Specifically, we show that actor-level frame changes can eventually lead to the emergence of an overarching, hybrid "commons logic" at the field level. These frame shifts enable actors with different logics to reach a working consensus and avoid "tragedies of the commons." Using a longitudinal analysis of key actors' logics and frames, we tracked the evolution of the global climate change field over 40 years. We bracketed time periods demarcated by key field-configuring events, documented the different frame shifts in each time period, and identified five mechanisms (collective theorizing, issue linkage, active learning, legitimacy seeking, and catalytic amplification) that underpin how and why actors changed their frames at various points in time-enabling them to move toward greater consensus around a transnational commons logic. In conclusion, the emergence of a commons logic in a transnational field is a nonlinear process and involves satisfying three conditions: (1) key actors view their fates as being interconnected with respect to a problem issue, (2) these actors perceive their own behavior as contributing to the problem, and (3) they take collective action to address the problem. Our findings provide insights for multinational companies, nation-states, nongovernmental organizations, and other stakeholders in both conventional and unconventional commons

Diaries as a Methodological Innovation for Studying Grand Challenges

We illustrate the potential of diaries for advancing scholarship on organization studies and grand challenges. Writing personal diaries is a time-honored and culturally sanctioned way of animating innermost thoughts and feelings, and embodying experiences through self-talk with famous examples, such as the diaries written by Anne Frank, Andy Warhol, or Thomas Mann. However, the use of diaries has long been neglected in organization studies, despite their historical and societal importance. We illustrate how different forms of analyzing diaries enable a “deep analysis of individuals’ internal processes and practices” (Radcliffe, 2016) which cannot be gleaned from other sources of data such as interviews and observations. Diaries exist in different forms, such as “unsolicited diaries” and “solicited diaries” and have different purposes. We evaluate how analyzing diaries can be a valuable source to illuminate the innermost thoughts and feelings of people at the forefront of grand challenges. To exemplify our arguments, we draw on diaries written by medical professionals working for Doctors Without Borders as part of our empirical research project conducted in extreme contexts. We show the value of unsolicited diaries in revealing people’s thought world, that is not apprehensible from other modes of communication, and offer a set of practical guidelines on working with data from diaries. Diaries serve to enrich our methodological toolkit by capturing what people think and feel behind the scenes but may not express nor display in public

Reframing Silence as Purposeful: Emotions in Extreme Contexts

Publication status: PublishedAbstractIndividuals bear the weight of emotional distress when exposed to brutality and suffering in warzones. Yet, immersed in scenes of intense human tragedy, they must publicly mask their emotional turmoil. How then may such individuals cope with the emotional distress they suffer but mute? Through the analysis of 53 unsolicited, personal diaries, non‐participant observations in conflict zones, and interviews with Médecins Sans Frontières personnel, we study medical professionals who work in extreme contexts. Employing Goffman's notions of frontstage and backstage behaviour, we reveal silence as an emotional defence mechanism. We argue that this silence is a result of individuals’ deliberate choice rather than being muted by external forces. This choice enables individuals to maintain focus and perform critical, often life‐saving duties under extreme pressure. We find that silence does not imply an absence of emotion nor diminish emotional distress. Instead, silence functions as a protective measure against potential emotional breakdowns. We illustrate how journaling serves as a private refuge for self‐expression, enabling individuals to navigate their emotions and experiences away from scrutiny by others. We contribute to understanding emotional regulation in extreme contexts, and redefine silence as an essential aspect of coping and resilience.</jats:p

sj-docx-1-jom-10.1177_01492063231224353 – Supplemental material for Reputation-Damaging Events Over a Long Time Horizon: An Event-System Model of Substantive Reputation Repair

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-jom-10.1177_01492063231224353 for Reputation-Damaging Events Over a Long Time Horizon: An Event-System Model of Substantive Reputation Repair by Jarrod P. Vassallo, Yeonji Seo and Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari in Journal of Management</p

The Art of Reconstructing a Shared Responsibility: Institutional Work of a Transnational Commons

The author examines how the production of art may constitute an important form of institutional work and legitimating rhetoric for institutional change. With a case study on the design process of a work of art calling to mind the common responsibility to protect the Baltic Sea, she identifies three mechanisms through which an artistic form of institutional work is performed. They are (a) creating emotional response by generating a sense of nostalgia over a lost common experience,(b) educating by constructing a mnemonic device that educates the audience and constructs the commons as a shared category, and (c) empowering that gives marginalized actors power to participate in protecting the commons. The study shows how artists, through their art, contribute to the creation of a shared material and symbolic space that helps construct mutual responsibility for collective resources such as the world’s seas and oceans.Peer reviewe