{"id":1752,"date":"2018-10-16T11:52:21","date_gmt":"2018-10-16T09:52:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.assioa.it\/?p=1752"},"modified":"2018-10-16T11:52:21","modified_gmt":"2018-10-16T09:52:21","slug":"egos-conference-a-edinburgo-nel-2019","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.assioa.it\/en\/egos-conference-a-edinburgo-nel-2019\/","title":{"rendered":"EGOS conference a Edinburgo nel 2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sub-theme 25: Institutional Theory and Problem-driven Research: The Challenge of Normativity<\/h2>\n

Organizzatori:\u00a0<\/strong>
\nFlorian \u00dcberbacher, University of Zurich<\/p>\n

Giuseppe Delmestri,\u00a0WU \u2013 Vienna University of Economics and Business<\/p>\n

Emilio Marti,\u00a0Erasmus University Rotterdam<\/p>\n


\nTema<\/strong><\/p>\n

Organization and management scholars increasingly recognize the need to tackle grand societal challenges (e.g. Ferraro et al., 2015; George et al., 2016), such as the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). An international academic movement is on the way to advance responsible research in business and management (RRBM, 2017). This debate has been particularly intense in institutional theory, one of the dominant streams of research in organization studies (Greenwood et al., 2017). Scholars are increasingly calling for institutional research that is more problem-driven (e.g., Amis et al., 2017; Davis & Marquis, 2005; Gehman et al., 2016) and thus not only aims \u201cto understand grand social challenges but to affect them and in so doing change the world\u201d (Hampel et al., 2017, p. 581). For example, there is a need to say more about how to undertake institutional reforms, how to design and defend institutional structures that protect precarious values (Kraatz et al., 2010), and to give specific policy recommendations (Scott, 2014). To advance problem-driven research, institutional scholars have also called for new research methods, such as \u201cparticipatory action research\u201d whereby the stakeholders affected by the social problems under study are understood \u201cas active, engaged, and equal participants in the research process\u201d (Dover & Lawrence, 2010: 307).<\/p>\n

A key, yet underexplored issue within that debate is the question of normativity. When aiming to tackle grand challenges, institutional scholars venture into territories that are value-laden (see Ezzamel & Willmott, 2014; Marti & Scherer, 2016). However, institutional scholars remain remarkably silent about what makes institutions good or bad in a prescriptive, normative sense (\u00dcberbacher et al., 2018). Likewise, apart from a few notable exceptions (e.g. Lok, 2017), institutional scholars rarely reflect upon the normative foundations on which they build their research (for a critique see Willmott, 2011). Yet, researchers who want to engage in problem-driven research and address grand challenges must make the normative assumptions and implications of their research explicit and thereby actively deal with normativity. Otherwise, they risk making claims and giving recommendations that are ill-founded and ultimately irrelevant. We thus argue that a better understanding of the role of normativity is critical to strengthen problem-driven research within institutional theory.<\/p>\n

In this sub-theme, we create a platform where institutional scholars with an interest in grand challenges, such as the SDGs, can further clarify the normative dimension of their research. Thereby, the aim is to help them develop institutional scholarship that is more problem-driven and that matters more. Toward this end, we welcome two types of studies:<\/p>\n

First, we welcome papers that use institutional theory for problem-driven research on grand challenges. Researchers who submit a manuscript to the sub-theme should reflect on the normative foundations of their case and\/or draw out the normative implications of their research for policy-makers and other stakeholders. Participants could, for instance, reflect on one of the following issues and questions:<\/p>\n