Publications Database

Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!

The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:

  • Faculty Member’s Name;
  • Area of Expertise;
  • Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
  • Journal Name; and
  • Date Range.

At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.

If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

 

Search Results

Liu, Y., Chen, S., Bell, C. and Tan, J. (Forthcoming). "How Do Power and Status Differ in Predicting Unethical Decisions? A Cross-national Comparison of China and Canada", Journal of Business Ethics, 167(4), 745-760.

View Paper

Abstract This study examines the varying roles of power, status, and national culture in unethical decision-making. Most research on unethical behavior in organizations is grounded in Western societies; empirical comparative studies of the antecedents of unethical behavior across nations are rare. The authors conduct this comparative study using scenario studies with four conditions (high power vs. low power × high status vs. low status) in both China and Canada. The results demonstrate that power is positively related to unethical decision-making in both countries. Status has a positive effect on unethical decision-making and facilitates the unethical decisions of Canadian participants who have high power but not Chinese participants who have high power. To explicate participants’ unethical decision-making rationales, the authors ask participants to justify their unethical decisions; the results reveal that Chinese participants are more likely to cite position differences, whereas Canadian participants are more likely to cite work effort and personal abilities. These findings expand theoretical research on the relationship between social hierarchy and unethical decision-making and provide practical insights on unethical behavior in organizations.

Gölgeci, I., Johnston, D. and Murphy, W. (2019). "Power-Based Behaviours Between Supply Chain Partners of Diverse National and Organizational Cultures: The Crucial Role of Boundary Spanners’ Cultural Intelligence", Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 65(3), 262-281.

Open Access Download

Belk, R. and Bhattacharyya, A. (2019). "Consumer Resilience and Subservience in Technology Consumption by the Poor", Consumption, Markets and Culture, 42 (5/6), 489-507.

Open Access Download

Abstract Consumer technology theorists have explored technology consumption primarily through a de-linked, individualistic lens. We augment existing theories on technology consumption by widening the scope of the theorizing lens to include the role of class-based societal domination on consumption by the oppressed. We show that the poor respond to oppression by practices that go beyond non-compliance and subterfuge. We highlight the overlooked phenomenon of Consumer Resilience, and unveil the practices of Subservience in technology consumption by the poor in India. These are consumption practices that help the dominated classes appease those dominating them, at the expense of their own dignity and well-being.

Goldsby, T.J., Knemeyer, A.M., Schwieterman, M.A. and Rungtusanatham, M. (2018). "Supply Chain Portfolio Characteristics: Do They Relate to Post-IPO Financial Performance?", Transportation Journal, 57(4), 429-463.

View Paper

Abstract In the years following an initial public offering (IPO), firms have to manage portfolios of customers and suppliers in order to achieve growth goals during this particularly uncertain time in a firm's lifecycle. The current research sheds light on three key questions: (1) Do firms benefit from conducting a large portion of business with a large customer or supplier? (2) Is it beneficial if the focal firm represents a large portion of business for customers and suppliers? And, (3) is balanced portfolio dependence helpful to a focal firm? The extant literature, drawing insights from the logics of power and embeddedness, is divided on these questions. We utilize a secondary data set of focal firms (post-IPO) and their portfolios of relationships with customers and suppliers to explain where each theoretical perspective applies to the management of supply chain portfolios.

Johnston, D., Gölgeci, I. and Murphy, W. (2018). "Power-Based Behaviors in Supply Chains and their Effects on Relational Satisfaction: A Fresh Perspective and Directions for Research", European Management Journal, 36(2), 278-287.

Open Access Download

Abstract Although the sources of a firm's power vis-à-vis upstream and downstream relationships in supply chains have been studied extensively, how a firm may act or react to power-based behaviors of its partners has not been sufficiently defined and discussed. To this end, we present three power-based behaviors: dominance, egalitarian, and submissive. From a cross-disciplinary reading of the relevant literature, we conceptualize and discuss the characteristics of these behaviors as manifested by dyads within supply chains. Three power-based behaviors are proposed to describe both initiating and responding behaviors used by partners, with these behaviors affecting relational satisfaction. This results in nine potential descriptors of the state of any supply chain relationship. We then discuss the opportunities to use our approach to better research the dynamics of power in supply chain relationships.

Auster, E.R. and Prasad, A. (2016). "Why Do Women Still Not Make It to the Top? Dominant Organizational Ideologies and Biases by Promotion Committees Limit Opportunities to Destination Positions", Sex Roles, 75(5), 177-196.

Open Access Download

Abstract Prior studies have made important strides in understanding the drivers of gender bias facing women at the top. Yet, relatively little is known about the intra-organizational power dynamics of how and why these patterns still persist despite a plethora of initiatives to redress the phenomenon over the last several decades. This paper develops an intra-organizational power perspective on the dynamics of promotion bias to destination positions. We propose that social dominance emerges as social categorization based on a candidate’s visible and invisible markers leads to distorted perceptions and stereotyping which, when combined with group favoritism and conformity pressures within committee practices, engender the perceived degree of ideological asymmetry between the candidate and the organization. It is the magnitude of the perceived degree of ideological asymmetry that drives promotion bias. This bias has potent effects on the institutionalization of power over time. Our perspective ultimately offers new insights into the role of dominant organizational ideology and dynamics of biases that continue to limit promotion opportunities of women to destination positions.

Voronov, M. and Vince, R. (2012). "Integrating Emotions into the Analysis of Institutional Work", Academy of Management Review, 37(1), 58-81.

View Paper

Abstract We argue for the importance of including analyses of emotional and unconscious processes in the study of institutional work. We develop a framework that integrates emotions and their connection to domination, and we offer a typology of interactions between the emotional and cognitive antecedents of institutional maintenance, disruption, and creation. We conclude by discussing the implications of paying closer attention to emotions for future institutional research, including questions regarding reproduction versus change, intentionality, and rationality.
  • Finalist for the Best Published Paper in Organization and Management Theory Award, OMT Division of the Academy of Management, August 2013
  • Emerald Citations of Excellence for 2015 Award

Voronov, M. (2005). "Should Critical Management Studies and Organization Development Collaborate? Invitation to a Contemplation", Organization Management Journal, 2, 4-26.

View Paper

Abstract In this article, the author argues that despite important differences between Critical Management Studies (CMS) and Organization Development (OD), there is enough common ground to make a dialogue worth-while for both fields and for management practice. The author outlines some major “objectives” of each field, noting some important but frequently overlooked similarities and complementarities between them. Power and empowerment are offered as examples of focal topics around which the two disciplines could have a productive discussion, suggesting that such an exchange would help CMS' important insights about power to have more of an impact on organizational practice while enhancing OD's ability to tackle issues of power, domination, and politics. Such a conversation can eventually result in improved management practice – more mindful of issues of power and domination-with benefits for both organizational performance and employees' well-being.

Voronov, M. and Coleman, P. T. (2003). "Beyond the Ivory Towers: Organizational Power Practices and A “Practical” Critical Postmodernism", Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39, 169-185.

View Paper

Abstract The aim of this article is to consider how the important insights offered by critical management studies (CMS) can be made more accessible to wider audiences and used to inform organizational practice. The authors start by briefly discussing the main ideals and aims of CMS, touching on the heterogeneity of the field and focusing on the issues that CMS scholars have had to address to find receptive ears among non-CMS scholars and practitioners. They then proceed to suggest how CMS may become better able to reach those audiences by offering more accessible concepts and methodologies. The notion of organizational power practices is introduced as a way to facilitate that task by making CMS-inspired investigation of power more accessible and relevant to everyday organizational concerns.