Roy Suddaby and Oliver Laasch
We recognize the over-rationalized nature of contemporary management theory and practice as one of the main roots of irresponsible management. Responsible managers, therefore, first and foremost have to internalize that managerial myths of rationality are not above and beyond human agency. This insight may empower responsible managers to engage in the institutional work of re-enchanting the economic world. Crucial tasks of such institutional work include both the creation of a responsible management profession and a change of the corporation’s institutional character. Both institutionalization projects hinge on realizing managers’ and corporations’ entangled positive roles in the service of society. We discuss craft modes of production as an alternative to the rationalized bigger-is-better management paradigm. We stress the need for similar responsible management innovations that break with current paradigms of an over-rationalized economic world. Craft modes of management exemplify the potential of ‘retrovation’, novelty through the revival of managerial practices from a less-rationalized economic past.
Oliver Laasch, Roy Suddaby, R. Edward Freeman and Dima Jamali
Since responsible management originally appeared on the agenda of management researchers in the early twentieth century, the research field of responsible management has gone through an extended period of labor. It has not been, however, until the early twenty-first century, with the establishment of the United Nations Principles for Responsible Management, that responsible management had begun to form as a coherent field of academic interest. Most recently, the initial educational interest in responsible management has given birth to a swiftly developing field of research. This publication is aimed at mapping this emerging field of responsible management research. The map is composed of the disciplinary domains of ethics, responsibility, and sustainability plus cognates (ERS+); spheres of responsible management with the manager at the center, extending outwards to managerial job, group, organization, occupation, on to planetary society; and three core themes centered on managing responsibly: Learning, change, innovation; praxis, practices, process(es); and alternative management frameworks. We are suggesting three salient future research directions, mundanely responsible management; normalization of responsible management; and performative agency of management academics.
Edited by Oliver Laasch, Roy Suddaby, R. E. Freeman and Dima Jamali
Archie B. Carroll, Nancy J. Adler, Henry Mintzberg, François Cooren, Roy Suddaby, R. Edward Freeman and Oliver Laasch
What is responsible management? The responsible management field so far has been looking for a convergent one-size-fits-all answer to this question. Conversely, we choose to ask the grammatically incorrect, but generatively paradoxical question of “What are responsible management?” In response, this chapter features a rich potluck of six academic pioneers’ distinct conceptualizations of responsible management: Responsible management as responsibility management (Archie B. Carroll); as responsible leadership (Nancy J. Adler); as rebalancing society through management (Henry Mintzberg); as response-able situation management (François Cooren); as human(e) management and institutional character (Roy Suddaby); and as stakeholder harmonization (R. Edward Freeman). Each conceptualization is followed by a brief stylized interpretation of each pioneer’s perspective that links it to the extant responsible management literature. Finally, these responsible management conceptualizations are juxtaposed along the four categories of managerial agency, responsibility managed, sphere of responsibility, and management process. This juxtaposition serves to highlight each perspective’s distinctive features, and all perspectives’ joint contribution to a multifaceted understanding that can guide future study of responsible management.