36th EGOS Colloquium

Organizing for a Sustainable Future:
Responsibility, Renewal & Resistance

 

University of Hamburg

July 2–4, 2020


Hamburg, Germany

 

 

:

Sub-theme 52: Storytelling a Sustainable Future

To upload your short paper, please log in to the Member Area.
Convenors:
David M. Boje
New Mexico State University, USA
Bobby Banerjee
City, University of London, United Kingdom
Kenneth Mølbjerg Jørgensen
Aalborg University, Denmark

Call for Papers


Why is it that people tell stories about climate change and unsustainable production and consumption practices, but behaviors are not changing? Geiger and Antonacopoulou (2009: 411) theorize, “narratives have the potential to bring about organizational inertia by creating self-reinforcing mechanisms and blind spots”. Corporations claim to be sustainable, but scientists assert that by 2030 life as we know it will dramatically and tragically change for the worse. Geiger and Antonacopoulou demonstrate that the dominant narrative remains vivid despite the existence of deviating (counter-)narratives and factual evidence of impending severe crisis. For example, the dominant (success) narrative that bottled water is healthier, higher quality, and safer than municipal tap water persists despite deviating counternarratives (Frandsen et al., 2016; Boje & Wolff Lundholt, 2018) and scientific evidence that most bottled water is actually tap water, and municipal water services are healthier, safer, and more convenient.
 
Climate deniers’ grand narrative that ‘its all a hoax has a political gridlock in the US, preventing actions that could keep global temperature from changing by two or more degrees. Organization studies have long been recognized as a way of constructing, constituting and reproducing complex grand narrative plot elements that have an impact on human behavior (Banerjee, 2003; Boje, 1991, 1995; Brown, 2006; Czarniawska, 1997, 2004; Gabriel, 2000; Gabriel et al., 2011; Geiger, 2010; Jørgensen, 2002, 2007; Rhodes & Brown, 2005; Weick, 1995, 2012). While this is important narrative work for organizations, it does not, as yet, address the gap between sustainability rhetoric and concerted action to bring about a different future (Banerjee, 2012a).
 
The dark side of grand narratives (Geiger, 2008) is how they keep counternarratives at bay, such that people’s production and consumption habits are counter to their own best interest. Scientific facts, by themselves, without a compelling storytelling, do not change human behavior. The science tells us, planetary boundaries for the safe operating space of humanity are being depleted, destroyed, and diverted faster than it is being replenished or renewed (Rockström et al., 2009), yet behaviors are changing too slowly to make a difference. Anthropocene counternarrative is the prediction that climate change, will continue to intensify, and while the rich man’s lifeboats will not be a long-term survival approach, some solution will be found. Malm (2016), for example, challenges the Anthropocene counternarrative optimism, by predicting that people in global catastrophe will continue with a death grip on the capitalism they know, and will not change their production or consumption behaviors, until it’s too late. In other words, the antenarrative prospective sensemaking, the preparing in advance to bring about a future other than business-as-usual and consumerism-as-usual, will not happen without lots of suffering and loss of biodiversity.
 
This sub-theme addresses the gap between sustainability storytelling and concerted action to implement human behavioral change. There is for example a much overlooked interplay in modern societies between grander narratives of western ways of knowing (WWOK) and indigenous ways of knowing (IWOK) ‘living stories’, which are more embedded in nature’s cycles (Banerjee & Tedmanson, 2004; Banerjee & Linstead, 2010; Cajete, 2015; Hoskins & Jones, 2017; Pepion, 2016; Rosile, 2016; Twotrees & Kolan, 2016). One proposition we want to explore is that IWOK living stories are more contextualized, more about living actions, and a longer time horizon than western narratives. Further, to get at ways narrative and story are pre-constituted we want to include antenarrative processes that has begun to be studied in organization studies (Boje, 2001, 2011: Boje, Haley & Saylors, 2016; Cai Hillon & Boje, 2017; Boje, Svane & Gergerich, 2016; Henderson & Boje, 2016; Vaara & Tiernari, 2011).
 
The scholarship on western narratives, indigenous living stories, and constitutive ante narrative processes can develop into distinct approaches with regard to the degree with which performed stories are organized by a plot (narrative), or whether they are to be understood as more collective, relational, emergent and situated ‘living stories’ (L. Smith, 2017; G.H. Smith, 2017) or just more western performative stories that are somehow different than western narrative genres (Brown et al., 2009; Jørgensen & Boje, 2010). Western and indigenous living stories presume that the dynamic spaces that are enacted in between people and nature are important.
 
Furthermore, it has been generally been presumed that non-indigenous stories are the products of language, dialogues and communication (Adorisio, 2014; Beech et al., 2009). Western narratives are seen to play an important role as vehicles of ideology and normative values of adaptation (Banerjee, 2012b; White & Epston, 1990; Wines & Hamilton, 2009). They have also been posited to underpin collective action, interests, identities and memory (Arendt, 1958/1962; Freeman, 2015). More recently, scholars have understood ways stories and narratives can be constraining, underpinning inequalities, and be embedded in structures of cultural authority, thus opening avenues for understanding resistance to political interests and processes (Richardson, 1990; Munro, 1998). Furthermore, scholars have turned to more material conceptions of stories, where stories are seen as related to discourse and language but also artefacts, technologies, architectures and other material spaces as well as broader geographical, rural, urban and organizational spaces that enact stories (Benjamin, 1928/2016, 1936/1968; Barad, 2007; Jørgensen & Largarcha-Martinez, 2014; Orlikowski, 2005).
 
To summarize, this sub-theme explores the relationship between indigenous living stories and western corporate and societal narratives of sustainability. In particular the focus is on the relationship between community indigenous stories and their implications with regard to enabling answerable ethical responsibility (Bakhtin, 1990, 1993) for a sustainable future. We are interested in how stories connect to temporality, spatiality, materiality and ethics; how stories both connect as well as form the basis of resistance. This includes an interest in how people engage with other people, materiality, nature and themselves, and how people engage in building and sustaining organizations, businesses, communities and eco-systems. Furthermore, we wish to explore how organizations are either re-storied or re-narrated for sustainability or how new stories/narratives are crafted and counter narratives/counter stories materialize in new sustainable ways of organizing.
 
We are interested in how storytelling can inform how organizations and networks connect with local actors and communities in ways the organization is seen as part of a broader social-economic and community-based network of activities and resources. We are also interested in stories of resistance and how they reveal inequalities, political interests and authorities. In keeping with the EGOS 2020 Colloquium theme, we are interested in how all kinds of storytelling connect with the creation of actual realizable sustainable futures. We invite diverse perspectives and also invite diverse philosophical concepts and methods of inquiry that address how to understand the relations between stories and sustainability.
 
Papers may address, but are not limited to the following themes:

  • How organizational storytelling connects to sustainability issues

  • Material-performative notions of storytelling and their implications for sustainability

  • How space and stories are related and how they are related to sustainability

  • Temporality and the importance of the past, present and future, for example the role of antenarratives in creating sustainable futures

  • The relationship between organizational stories and the relationship to common affordances in public spaces

  • Stories that challenge and resist particular political interests, that reveal inequalities and power or political dynamics

 
 

References

  • Adorisio, A.L.M. (2014): “Organizational remembering as narrative:‘Storying’ the past in banking.” Organization, 21 (4), 463–476.
  • Arendt, H. (1958/1962): The Origins of Totalitarianism. 1st edition 1958, enlarged 2nd edition 1962. Cleveland: Meridian Books.
  • Bakhtin, M.M. (1993): Toward a Philosophy of the Act. Written as unpublished notebooks written between 1919 and 1921; first published in the USSR in 1986 with the title K filosofii postupka. Austin: University of Texas Press.
  • Banerjee, S.B. (2003): “Who Sustains Whose Development? Sustainable Development and the Reinvention of Nature.” Organization Studies, 24 (1), 143–180.
  • Banerjee, S.B. (2012a): “A Climate for Change? Critical Reflections on the Durban United Nations Climate Change Conference.” Organization Studies, 33 (12), 1761–1786.
  • Banerjee, S.B. (2012b): “Embedding Sustainability Across the Organization: A Critical Perspective.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10 (4), 719–731.
  • Banerjee, S.B., & Linstead, S. (2004): “Masking Subversion: Neocolonial Embeddedness in Anthropological Accounts of Indigenous Management.” Human Relations, 57 (2), 221–258.
  • Banerjee, S.B., & Tedmanson, D. (2010): “Grass burning under our feet: Indigenous enterprise development in a political economy of whiteness.” Management Learning, 41 (2), 147–165.
  • Barad, K. (2007): Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.
  • Beech, N., MacPhail, S.A., & Coupland, C. (2009): “Anti-dialogic Positioning in Change Stories: Bank Robbers, Saviours and Peons.” Organization, 16 (3), 335–352.
  • Benjamin, W. (1928/2016): One-way Street [Original: “Einbahnstraße”]. 2016 edition translated by E. Jephcott, edited by M.W. Jennings, preface by G. Marcus. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  • Benjamin, W. (1936/1968): The Storyteller. Reflections on the Works of Nikolai Leskov [Original: “Der Erzähler. Betrachtungen zum Werk Nikolai Lesskows”]. Reprinted in 1968 in Illuminations, translated by H. Zohn, with an introduction by H. Arendt. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 83–109.
  • Boje, D.M. (1991): “The Storytelling Organization: A Study of Story Performance in an Office-Supply Firm.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 36 (1) 106–126.
  • Boje, D.M. (1995): “Stories of the Storytelling Organization: A Postmodern Analysis of Disney as ‘Tamara-Land’.” Academy of Management Journal, 38 (4), 997–1035.
  • Boje, D.M. (2001): Narrative Methods for Organizational & Communication Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
  • Boje, D.M. (ed.) (2011): Storytelling and the Future of Organizations. An Antenarrative Handbook. New York: Routledge.
  • Boje, D.M. (2014): Storytelling Organizational Practices. Managing in the quantum age. New York: Routledge.
  • Boje, D.M. (2018): Storytelling Research Methods. Storytelling in Action. New York: Routledge.
  • Boje, D.M., Haley, U.C., & Saylors, R. (2016): “Antenarratives of organizational change: The microstoria of Burger King’s storytelling in space, time and strategic context.” Human Relations, 69 (2), 391–418.
  • Boje, D.M., Svane, M., & Gergerich, E.M. (2016): “Counternarrative and antenarrative inquiry in two cross-cultural contexts.” European Journal of Cross-Cultural Competence and Management, 4 (1), 55–84.
  • Boje, D.M., & Wolff Lundholt, M. (2018): “Understanding Organizational Narrative-Counter-narratives Dynamics. An overview of Communication Constitutes Organization (CCO) and Storytelling Organization Theory (SOT) approaches.” Communication & Language at Work, 5 (1), 18–29.
  • Brown, A.D. (2006): “A Narrative Approach to Collective Identities.” Journal of Management Studies, 43 (4), 731–753.
  • Brown, A.D., Gabriel, Y., & Gherardi, S. (2009): “Storytelling and Change: An Unfolding Story.” Organization, 16 (3), 323–333.
  • Cai Hillon, Y., & Boje, D.M. (2017): “The dialectical development of ‘storytelling’ learning organizations.” The Learning Organization, 24 (4), 226–235.
  • Cajete, G.A. (2015): Indigenous Community. Rekindling the Teachings of the Seventh Fire. St. Paul: Living Justice Press.
  • Czarniawska, B. (1997): Narrating the Organization. Dramas of Institutional Identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Czarniawska, B. (2004): Narratives in Social Science Research. London: SAGE Publications.
  • Frandsen, S., Kuhn, T., & Wolff Lundholt, M. (eds.) (2016): Counter-Narratives and Organization. New York: Routledge.
  • Freeman, M. (2015): Rewriting the Self. History, Memory, Narrative. New York: Routledge.
  • Gabriel, Y. (2000): Storytelling in Organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Gabriel, Y. (2008): “Organizational miasma, purification and cleansing.” In: A. Ahlers-Niemann, U. Beumer, Redding Mersky & B. Sievers (eds.): Organisationslandschaften. Sozioanalytische Gedanken und Interventionen zur normalen Verrücktheit in Organisationen / Socioanalytic Thoughts and Interventions on the Normal Madness in Organizations. Bergisch Gladbach: Andreas Kohlhage, 53–73.
  • Gabriel, Y., Geiger, D., & Letiche, H. (2011): “The marriage of story and metaphor.” Culture and Organization, 17 (5), 367–371.
  • Geiger, D. (2008): “The dark side of narratives: Challenging the epistemological nature of narrative knowledge.” International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy, 3 (1), 66–81.
  • Geiger, D. (2010): “The Role of Argument and Narration in Knowledge Sharing: Coping with Context, Validity, and Coherence.” Schmalenbach Business Review, 62 (3), 291–316.
  • Geiger, D., & Antonacopoulou, E. (2009): “Narratives and Organizational Dynamics: Exploring Blind Spots and Organizational Inertia.” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 45 (3), 411–436.
  • Henderson, T.L., & Boje, D.M. (2016): Managing Fractal Organizing Processes. New York: Routledge.
  • Hoskins, K., & Jones, A. (eds.) (2017): Critical Conversations in Kaupapa Māori. Wellington: Huia Publishers.
  • Jørgensen, K.M. (2002): “The Meaning of Local Knowledges: Genealogy and Organizational Analysis.” Scandinavian Journal of Management, 18 (1), 29–46.
  • Jørgensen, K.M. (2007): Power without Glory – A Genealogy of a Management Decision. Copenhagen: CBS Press.
  • Jørgensen, K.M., & Boje, D.M. (2010): “Resituating narrative and story in business ethics.” Business Ethics, 19 (3), 253–264.
  • Jørgensen, K.M., & Largarcha-Martinez, E. (eds.) (2014): Critical Narrative Inquiry. Storytelling, Sustainability and Power. New York: Nova Science Publishers.
  • Malm, A. (2016): Fossil Capital: The Rise of Steam Power and the Roots of Global Warming. London: Verso.
  • Meyer, A.D. (1982): “Adapting to Environmental Jolts.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 27 (4), 515–537.
  • Munro, P. (1998): Subject to Fiction. Women Teacher Life History Narratives and the Cultural Politics of Resistance. London: McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Orlikowski, W.J. (2005): “Material Works: Exploring the Situated Entanglement of Technological Performativity and Human Agency.” Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 17 (1), 183–186.
  • Pepion, D.D. (2016): “Indigenous Ways of Knowing and Quantum Science for Business Ethics.” In: G.A. Rosile (ed.): Tribal Wisdom for Business Ethics. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing, 17–22.
  • Richardson, L. (1990): “Narrative and Sociology.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 19 (1), 116–135.
  • Rockström, J., et al. (2009): “Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity.” Ecology and Society, 14 (2), 32 ff.
  • Rosile, G.A. (2016): Tribal Wisdom for Business Ethics. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
  • Rhodes, C., & Brown, A.D. (2005): “Narrative, organizations and research.” International Journal of Management Reviews, 7 (3), 167–188.
  • Smith, G.H. (2017): “Kaupapa Māori Theory: Indigenous transforming of education.” In: T.K. Hoskins & A. Jones (eds.): Critical Conversations in Kaupapa Māori. Wellington: Huia Publishers, 79–94.
  • Smith, L.T. (2017): “Towards Developing Indigenous Methodologies: Kaupapa Māori Research.” In: T.K. Hoskins & A. Jones (eds.): Critical Conversations in Kaupapa Māori. Wellington: Huia Publishers, 11–28.
  • TwoTrees, K., & Kolan, M. (2016): “The Trees are Breathing Us: An Indigenous View of Relationship in Nature and Business.” In: G.A. Rosile (ed.): Tribal Wisdom for Business Ethics. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing, 211–222.
  • Vaara, E., & Tienari, J. (2011): “On the Narrative Construction of Multinational Corporations: An Antenarrative Analysis of Legitimation and Resistance in a Cross-Border Merger.” Organization Science, 22 (2), 370–390.
  • Weick, K.E. (1995): Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
  • Weick, K.E. (2012): “Organized sensemaking: A commentary on processes of interpretive work.” Human Relations, 65 (1), 141–153.
  • White, M. & Epston, D. (1990): Narrative Means to Therapeutic Ends. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
  •  
David M. Boje is Professor at the Management Department, New Mexico State University, USA. He is an international scholar focused on storytelling as an organizational research method, and he created the field of “antenarrative” research. David has published widely in international scholarly journals; his work has appeared, among others, in ‘Management Science’, ‘Academy of Management Journal’, ‘Academy of Management Review’, ‘Administrative Science Quarterly’, ‘Leadership Quarterly’, ‘Organizational Research Methods’, and ‘Journal of International Business Studies’. In 2018, David gave over a dozen invited presentations on storytelling and the global climate crisis, in cities spanning three continents and eight countries.
Bobby Banerjee is Professor of Management and Director of the Executive PhD Program at Cass Business School, City, University of London, United Kingdom. His research interests include sustainability, climate change, corporate social responsibility, critical management studies and Indigenous ecology. Bobby has published widely in international scholarly journals; his work has appeared, among others, in ‘Academy of Management Learning & Education’, ‘Business Ethics Quarterly’, ‘Human Relations’, ‘Journal of Business Research’, ‘Journal of Management Studies’, ‘Journal of Marketing’, ‘Management Learning’, ‘Organization’, and ‘Organization Studies’.
Kenneth Mølbjerg Jørgensen is Professor of Organizational Learning at the Deparment of Business and Management, Aalborg University, Denmark. His research lies within critical management studies, performance-based understandings of organizational practices and philosophy of management. Kenneth has a broad publication profile: he has written monographs, articles in internationally recognized journals, chapters in international books, and has edited and co-edited several international books and journals. He has, and is, convening smaller conferences, seminars and meetings in a critical narrative inquiry network of scholars.
To upload your short paper, please log in to the Member Area.