Ellen R. Auster

The recent financial crisis has prompted questioning of our basic ideas about capitalism and the role of business in society. As scholars are calling for “responsible leadership” to become more of the norm, organizations are being pushed to enact new values, such as “responsibility” and “sustainability,” and pay more attention to the effects of their actions on their stakeholders. The purpose of this study is to open up a line of research in business ethics on the concept of “authenticity” as it can be applied in modern organizational life and more specifically to think through some of the foundational questions about the logic of values. We shall argue that the idea of simply “acting on one’s values” or “being true to oneself” is at best a starting point for thinking about authenticity. We develop the idea of the poetic self as a project of seeking to live authentically. We see being authentic as an ongoing process of conversation that not only starts with perceived values but also involves one’s history, relationships with others, and aspirations. Authenticity entails acting on these values for individuals and organizations and thus also becomes a necessary starting point for ethics. After all, if there is no motivation to justify one’s actions either to oneself or to others, then as Sartre has suggested, morality simply does not come into play. We argue that the idea of responsible leadership can be enriched with this more nuanced idea of the self and authenticity.

Collective identity is important for the cohesion of social movements, yet there is an inherent tension between group unity and heterogeneity when multiple groups are motivated to come together to work for change. Through a three-year investigation of the early stages of a women’s rights movement following the Libyan revolution, we explore the dynamics of collective identity development. Our findings capture how two heterogeneous groups, Libyan locals and Libyan diaspora, interact to negotiate and re-negotiate the boundaries of collective identity. We find that this process unfolds through an ongoing struggle where the point of difference between the groups—their uncommon past—is the mechanism first used to ensure inclusion of insiders, and then to exclude outsiders from the collective identity. Our paper contributes to our understanding of the relational process through which collective identity co-evolves, and the challenges faced by heterogeneous groups engaging in collective action.

It’s easy to feel overwhelmed by out to-do lists, leaving us unsure where to begin. When this happens, it can be helpful to focus on two criteria in our decision making: importance and urgency. Consider these two criteria as part of a two-by-two matrix. On one axis is importance, and on the other is urgency. When you need to prioritize your assignments, this matrix can help you decide when you can delegate, eliminate or postpone the less essential in order to focus on what is mission critical.

Reflexivity is required for institutional work, yet we know very little about the mechanisms for generating such understandings of the social world. We explore this gap through a case study of an interstitial event that aims to create a community of ‘change-makers’. The findings suggest that such events can generate reflexive dis/embedding through two complementary mechanisms. Specifically, personal narratives of injustice and action and individual-collective empowering generate emotional dynamics that disembed actors from their given attachments and embed them within new social bonds. Through these mechanisms, the event in the case study was able to challenge audience members’ conceptions of self and others and change their worldview. This research advances our understanding of how reflexivity can be developed by uncovering the emotional dynamics crucial to the dis/embedding of actors.

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.

Auster and Hillenbrand introduce Stragility, described as the “art of strategic, agile, people‐powered change.” They discuss four interrelated skills: “sensing and shifting, embracing our inner politician, inspiring and engaging, and cultivating change fitness.” They draw on such corporate examples as Apple, Macy’s, and Whole Foods Market. There is also the counter‐example of Research in Motion—later renamed BlackBerry, Ltd.—and the loss of their business to Apple and its iPhones. Stragility requires hyper‐awareness and the ability and willingness to listen to skeptics and critics. “We need to anticipate disruptive game changers,” the authors write, “and monitor our competitive landscape while also keeping an eye on what’s happening on the periphery.

Values are the wellspring – the foundation – of building a great company. They are one of the most important components of how any business creates value in the inarguably global approach to twenty-first-century capitalism.

Middle managers provide a powerful conduit for strategy execution particularly in fast paced environments. Their knowledge of strategy is critical for strategic change to be successful. Yet, little research directly examines how aware middle managers are of corporate strategy and how accurate they are in their understanding of how that strategy translates into divisional goals. Framed in cognition theory, this exploratory study uses qualitative and quantitative analysis to investigate the antecedents, accuracy and self-awareness of middle managers’ knowledge of strategy within a large North American financial firm (N = 294). Implications for research and practice are highlighted.

In the midst of greed, corruption, the economic crash and the general disillusionment of business, current conceptions of leadership, organizational values, and authenticity are being questioned. In this article, we fill a prior research gap by directly exploring the intersection of these three concepts. We begin by delving into the relationship between individual values and organizational values. This analysis reveals that the “value fit” approach to creating authenticity is limited, and also indicates that a deeper exploration of the nature of values and the role of leadership is necessary. More specifically, we propose that organizational values should be viewed as an opportunity for ongoing conversations about who we are and how we connect. Through this type of dialogue which we define as “value through conversation”, we can create what we call poetic organizations. A typology of four interconnected values each of which forms a foundation for the critical questioning and inquiry that might be found in poetic organizations is developed. We suggest that this conceptualization offers a new and dynamic approach for thinking about the relationships between leadership, values, and authenticity and has important implications for both research and practice.