Category Archives: General

Call for Proposals to the SOEP Innovation Sample

We would like to remind you of the possibilities of the SOEP Innovation Sample (SOEP-IS) and encourage you to consider using this instrument in developing new empirical research questions. SOEP-IS is well suited to short-term experiments, but it is particularly useful for long-term surveys that are not possible in the framework of the core SOEP—whether because the instruments are not yet established or because the questions deal with very specific research issues.

Send us your proposals
We offer researchers at universities and research institutes worldwide the opportunity to use this sample for their innovative research projects, thereby helping us to shape the catalog of questions in the SOEP and obtaining the resulting data very rapidly for their own analysis.

Deadlines
Researchers interested in submitting questions should contact SOEP Survey Management by November 30, 2014, to present their proposal. If the project is determined to be viable from a survey methodology perspective, an official application procedure will follow. The official application must be received by December 31, 2014.

Applications should be submitted in English to soep-surveymanagement@diw.de.

Please find more information here and on our website www.diw.de/soep-is.

Call for Papers: The Future of Scholarly Communication in Economics

Call for Papers
The Future of Scholarly Communication in Economics

30-31 March 2015, Hamburg, Germany

In recent years scientific publishing has changed rapidly in response to the growth of the internet. Thanks to the internet, open access to research and data has become much more common. Apart from the increase in access to old forms of research, the internet has given rise to new forms of commentary, evaluation and publication, via social media channels, blogs, scientific wikis, and scientific networks. These internet-driven changes to the research process have changed the roles of publishers, libraries, and scientific communities.

The Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW) and the Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (ZBW) are active players in this changing landscape. Since 2007, both institutions have run a new type of academic journal, <http://www.economics-ejournal.org> Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal. This innovative journal, inspired by successful predecessors in natural sciences, follows an open-access prin­ciple. Moreover, it is the only economics journal without a publisher listed in the SSCI.

To further stimulate the discussions on this topic, IfW and ZBW are organizing a workshop on the topic “The Future of Scholarly Communications in Economics”. The event will be held in Hamburg on March 30-31, 2015. Approximately 8 papers will be selected for presentation. Mark Armstrong (Oxford University) will deliver a plenary talk.

In order to encourage more participation, collaboration, cooperation, and discourse within the scientific publication process, the e-journal is planning to publish a special issue related to the workshop (open to all submissions, not only to selected presentations made at the workshop, but not mandatory for workshop participants).

For the workshop, we invite researchers from economics and other disciplines to submit related empirical and theoretical contributions. Among the areas of interest are:

  • Pros/cons of the review process, and new ideas for improvements
  • Different methods to measure reputation
  • Impact of open access on the publication market
  • Inclusion of research data in the publication process
  • The changing role of publishers, libraries, and scientific communities
  • The potential of social media tools (blogs, wikis, twitter, facebook etc.) in scholarly communication

All selected presenters will receive financial assistance to help with their travel costs.

Submission deadline: November 30, 2014 (completed or draft papers preferred)

Please send your manuscripts to editorial-office@economics-ejournal.org

Scientific Committee:

  • Mark McCabe (Boston University and University of Michigan)
  • Dennis Snower (Kiel Institute for the World Economy)
  • Klaus Tochtermann (Leibniz Information Centre for Economics)
  • Justus Haucap (Heinrich Heine-University of Duesseldorf)

Management Revue – Socio-Economic Studies – Vol. 25, Issue 2

2nd Issue 2014
Management Revue – Socio-Economic Studies, Volume 25

Open Issue
Contents

Marco Guerci & Abraham B. Rami Shani
Stakeholder involvement in Human Resource Management practices: Evidence from Italy
download as PDF

Signe Pihl-Thingvad
Is self-leadership the new silver bullet of leadership? An empirical test of the relationship between self-leadership and organizational commitment
abstract as PDF

Alexander Fliaster & Tanja Golly
Innovation in small and medium-sized companies: Knowledge integration mechanisms and the role of top managers’ networks
abstract as PDF

Britta Boyd
Book review: Pramodita Sharma, Philipp Sieger, Robert S. Nason, Ana Cristina González L., Kavil Ramachandran (Editors): Exploring transgenerational entrepreneurship: The role of resources and capabilities
download as PDF

Call for Papers

Perspectives on Sustainable Consumption
edited by Ortrud Leßmann, Torsten Masson, Wenzel Matiaske & Simon Fietze

Forthcoming Issues

Managing Diversity
edited by Gerd Groezinger, and Wenzel Matiaske

Labour Time – Life Time
edited by Wenzel Matiaske, Simon Fietze, Gerd Grözinger, and Doris Holtmann

Innovation Management & Innovation Networks
edited by Susanne Gretzinger, Simon Fietze, and Wenzel Matiaske

Financial Participation
edited by Wenzel Matiaske, Andrew Pendleton, and Eric Poutsma

Call for Papers/Book Chapters: The role of TRIZ in enhancing creativity for innovation – international research and viewpoints on the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving

Call for Papers/Book Chapters
The role of TRIZ in enhancing creativity for innovation – international research and viewpoints on the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving

edited by
Alexander Brem
Professor of Technology and Innovation Management University of Southern Denmark

Leonid Chechurin
Professor of Industrial Engineering and Management
Lappeenranta University of Technology

Background

To come up with innovative ideas which fulfill the criteria to be new and breakthrough is key and at the same time difficult for companies.

One important supporting element to raise the quantity and quality of innovation is TRIZ (the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving, in English named TIPS). With its systematic approach it can be used as a logical approach to creative problem solving.

TRIZ has the following advantages in comparison with traditional innovation supporting methods:

  • Marked increase of creative productivity.
  • Rapid acceleration of the search for inventive and innovative solutions.
  • Scientifically founded approach to forecasting evolution of technological systems, products and processes.

This methodology is now being taught at several universities and has been applied by an increasing number of global organizations.

Hence, with this book, the Editors would like to give an overview of current trends and enhancements within TRIZ in an international context. The goal is to show different roles of TRIZ in enhancing creativity for innovation in research, and with selected viewpoints in practice.

All submitted paper proposals will be double-blind reviewed to ensure the highest quality.

Book Chapter Synopses with suggested topics

Topics include but are not limited to theories, methods, techniques and experiences on:

  • innovation processes and its linkages to TRIZ through all of its stages;
  • methodological support to creative and inventive design;
  • research on TRIZ-based or inspired theories, methodologies, techniques;
  • computers instruments to support TRIZ-based deployment;
  • patent mining, knowledge harvesting and representing;
  • TRIZ education initiatives, feedback or studies;
  • further advanced Innovative, Inventive & creative design processes;
  • inventiveness, creativity, innovation measurements (or assessment);
  • professional/industrial case studies where TRIZ has played a significant role.

Moreover, selected viewpoints from practice will be included.

Timeline

In advance, all potential authors must commit on our publication schedule to make sure that contributors will follow the same format.

Full paper submissions due: December 31st, 2014
Results of double-blind reviews available: March 31st, 2015
Revised paper submission deadline: June 1st, 2015
Book publication: Winter 2015/16

Publication information

All book chapters will be individually downloadable and accessible via SpringerLink.com or if someone buys the entire book in print or eBook from the Springer shop or affiliated partners such as Amazon, Barnes & Noble etc.

Each chapter is Search Engine Optimized (using the abstract and title/authors) and thus Google can find individual chapters upon a keyword search directly leading to SpringerLink.

All contributors get a discount of 33% on any Springer title purchased from the Springer online shop.

The MS Word template as well as the Author Guidelines are available online: http://bit.ly/springerguidelines

Please submit your paper only via E-Mail to Leonid Chechurin.

Call for Papers: Special Issue on Creativity in Innovation Management

International Journal of Innovation Management (IJIM)

Call for Papers:
Special Issue on Creativity in Innovation Management

Guest Editors

In order to reflect the interdisciplinary character of creativity, the Editors of this special issue cover three fundamental areas:

Why and for what can we use creativity: Business and managerial aspects
Alexander Brem, University of Southern Denmark, Sønderborg, Denmark

How can we interact in creative settings: Psychological and social aspects
Rogelio Puente-­‐Diaz, Universidad Anahuac Mexico Norte, Estado de Mexico, Mexico

How can we activate creative thinking: Cognitive and neural aspects
Marine Agogué, HEC Montréal, Montréal, Canada

Background

In  today’s  business  world  creativity  has  become  one  of  the  most  important  success  factors (Florida, 2002). The understanding of “organizational creativity as the creation of  a  valuable,  useful  new  product,  service,  idea,  procedure,  or  process  by  individuals  working together in a complex social system” (Woodman et al., 1993) is vital for the innovation  process  of  a  company  and  serves  as  a  mainspring  especially  at  the  early  beginning of an innovation (Bilgram et al., 2008). Innovation as the practical application of created ideas in turn is a critical success factor for a company’s competitive advantage and long-­‐term success.

Creativity  has  been  studied  across  several  disciplines  including  psychology,  social  sciences, economics, education and the arts. However, a homogenous definition and classification of the term creativity has often been neglected (Plucker & Beghetto, 2004; Puccio & Cabra, 2012; Simonton, 2013). Moreover, creativity has been recognized as not manageable for a long time. Therefore, studies on creativity have looked at factors that “can manage for creativity” (Amabile & Mukti, 2008) such as leadership competencies or a  working  environment  that  positively  influences  and  supports  or  hampers  creative  processes in an organization. A further shortcoming of creativity research has been that it has traditionally distinguished between two generic types of creativity. The everyday creativity inherent in the average person (e.g. Richards, 2007) and the creative genius, associated with famous talents in certain fields (e.g. Simonton, 1997). Especially in the context of business and management literature, there is still need for further research to demystify  creativity  as  being  a  natural  force  without  control,  and  to  elaborate  its  role  within the management of innovation.

Hence, the question arises how this multifaceted and interdisciplinary topic of creativity can be included in innovation management, which is the focus of this Special Issue.

Subject coverage

In  this  context,  theoretical  and  conceptual  papers  on  creativity  in  innovation  management from different disciplines are welcome. Interdisciplinary research is as well  encouraged.  Empirical  studies  that  feature  examples  and  results  of  creativity  in  innovation management are encouraged, as well as papers on success factors and risks. Comparative studies that examine similarities and differences between different sectors and countries are also welcome.

  • Suggested topics for this special issue are:
  • Definition and measurement of creativity
  • Integration in the Front End of Innovation
  • Insights into creative processes and creative cognition
  • Levers on creative thinking during ideation
  • Creativity along the innovation process
  • Linkage of creativity with prototyping and manufacturing
  • Business Model Innovation and Creativity
  • Management of networks for creativity
  • Incentivation for creativity
  • Research on creativity techniques
  • Use of collaboration tools for creativity
  • Role of innovation culture on creative processes
  • Boundaries of creativity and design
  • Individual and (interdisciplinary) team creativity
  • Similarities/differences between facilitating creativity and innovation

Moreover, studies on country comparisons influence of industry and firm size as well as gender-­‐related differences are in the scope of this Call for Papers.

Notes for prospective authors

Submitted  papers  must  not  have  been  previously  published  or  be  currently  under  consideration for publication elsewhere. All papers will be refereed by an international Special Issue Editorial Board through a double-­‐blind peer review process.

A  guide  for  authors,  sample  copies  and  other  relevant  information  is  available  at  http://www.worldscinet.com/ijim

In  addition,  selected  articles  will  be  invited  being  released  in  a  book  published  by  Imperial College Press.

Important Dates

Submission of manuscripts: April 1, 2015
Notification to authors: July 15, 2015
Revisions due: August 15, 2015
Second round decisions: October 15, 2015
Revisions due: NOvember 15, 2015
Final Editorial Decision: December 15, 2015
Journal publication: Spring 2016

References

Amabile, T. M., & Mukti, K. (2008). Creativity and the role of the leader. Harvard Business Review, 86(10), 100-­‐109.

Bilgram,  V.,  Brem,  A.,  &  Voigt,  K.-­‐I.  (2008).  User-­‐centric  innovations  in  new  product  development:  Systematic identification of lead users harnessing interactive and collaborative online-­‐tools. International Journal of Innovation Management, 12 (3), 419-­‐458.

Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. New York: Basic Books.

Plucker, J.A., & Beghetto, R.A. (2004). Why creativity is domain general, why it looks domain specific, and why the distinction doesn’t matter. In R.J. Sternberg, E.L. Grigorenko, & J.L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 153-­‐167). Washington, DC: American Psychology Association.

Puccio,  G.  J.,  &  Cabra,  J.  F.  (2012).  Idea  generation  and  idea  evaluation:  Cognitive  skills  and  deliberate  practices. In M. Mumford (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Creativity (pp. 189-­‐215). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Richards, R. (2007). Everyday creativity: Our hidden potential. In R. Richards (Ed.), Everyday creativity and new views of human nature (pp. 25–54). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Simonton, D. K. (1997). Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks. Psychological Review, 104, 66–89.

Simonton,  D.  K.  (2013).  What  is  a  creative  idea?  Little-­‐C  versus  Big-­‐C  creativity.  In  K.  Thomas  &  J.  Chan  (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Creativity (pp.69-­‐83). Cheltenham, GL: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J.E., & Griffin, R.W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293-­‐321.

 

 

 

Call for Papers: Perspectives on Sustainable Consumption (Seminar & Special Issue of Management Revue)

Call for Papers

Seminar at the IUC Dubrovnik (April 20-24th, 2015) & Special Issue of Management Revue
Perspectives on Sustainable Consumption

Ortrud Leßmann, Helmut-Schmidt-University Hamburg (Germany)
Torsten Masson, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ Leipzig (Germany)
Wenzel Matiaske, Helmut-Schmidt-University Hamburg (Germany)
Simon Fietze, University of Southern Denmark

The problem of sustainability has received serious attention since the Club of Rome pointed to the limits of growth in 1972. Addressing ecological, economic and social issues, it is still a major – perhaps the biggest – challenge humanity faces. The problem demands attention by actors from all social levels. On the micro-level, sustainable consumption is often regarded as the major way how individual consumers can contribute to sustainable development. By now a growing number of people are aware that many consumption habits have to be changed because they are in conflict with the goal of sustainable development. Yet, there is a gap between knowledge and action. Much research has been done in the last 30 years on sustainable consumption, exploring the motivations, practices, opportunities, and drivers for sustainable consumption from economic, psychological and sociological perspectives. Despite this multidisciplinary effort and the often interdisciplinary nature of research on sustainable consumption, there is room for broadening the perspectives further. In particular, the link between political participation and sustainable consumption as a political statement as well as the link between various forms and objectives of political consumption deserves more attention. Further, the impact of societal inequality on sustainable consumption has not gained much attention. Especially research on the interaction between inequality, issues of security and precariousness, political participation and consumption behavior is lacking.

In the special issue and the corresponding seminar (IUC Dubrovnik, http://www.iuc.hr/, 20.-24. April 2015), we would like to discuss our topic in an adequately broad and interdisciplinary way.  We are particularly interested in questions such as:

  • Inequality (e.g., precariousness) and sustainable consumption
  • Citizenship and consumption
  • Sustainable consumption as a political statement
  • Quantitative and qualitative empirical studies on these issues

This is not an exhaustive list.

Deadline

Potential contributors to the seminar at the IUC Dubrovnik are encouraged to submit an abstract of 1-2 pages before January 31st, 2015 electronically via Management Revue’s online submission system at http://www.management-revue.org/submission/ using ‘IUC Dubrovnik’ as article section.

All contributors to the seminar are invited to submit their paper for the special issue of management revue. Full papers must be submitted by July 31st, 2015. All contributions will be subject to a double-blind review. Papers invited to a ‘revise and resubmit’ are due October 31st, 2015. Please submit your papers electronically via the online submission system at http://www.management-revue.org/submission/ using ‘SI Sustainable Consumption’ as article section.

Hoping to hear from you!

Ortrud Leßmann (o.lessmann@hsu-hh.de),
Wenzel Matiaske,
Torsten Masson,
Simon Fietze

Call for Papers: The long and winding road of employee ownership

The 9th International Conference in Critical Management Studies, Leicester, 8-10 July 2015

Call for Papers for the Sub-Theme:

The long and winding road of employee ownership –

What can we learn from the experiences with Employee Share Ownership and Employee Owned Companies in Central and Eastern Europe before, during, and after transformation?

Team of convenors: Olaf Kranz[1], Mihaela Lambru[2], Claudia Petrescu[3], Thomas Steger[4]

The academic literature on ESOP and EOC in CEE is characterized by at least two omissions. First, it remains rather silent about the relationship between EOC and ESOPs in CEE countries, though ESOP has been widely used as an instrument of mass privatization in several CEE countries and has led to majority employee share ownership (ESO) in a large number of firms. This neglect reminds us of the fact that despite close topical, theoretical, and empirical associations, the phenomena of EOC and ESOP have scarcely been discussed together in the academic discourse at all. Ironically, while the EOC literature stresses the negative aspects of this specific employee ownership form, such as the degenerative tendencies and a limited viability of EOCs, the ESOP literature propagates the positive aspects of ESO, such as identification with the firm or productivity gains.

Second, the academic discussion on the role of ESOPs and EOCs in the transformation process in CEE countries is rather disconnected from the traditional discourse about the emancipatory role of ESOPs and EOCs in the Western world. Moreover, there are hardly any references made to the debate about ‘labor-managed-firms` in ‘labor-managed’ or ‘mixed’ economies, which had a very strong theoretical basis in terms of the “Illyrian Firm” (B. Ward) or the “pure rental firm” (M.C. Jensen & W.H. Meckling) . Ironically, in particular neoliberal scholars have suggested that ESOPs or even EOC could work well as instruments for mass privatization during the economic transformation in CEE. Thus, participatory ways of organizing are utilized by politics and management as a vehicle to transform firms towards the normal corporate form. Moreover, the implications of the rather sharp and fast decline of ESO and EOCs in the CEE countries following privatization has not been systematically reflected in the literature yet.

Thus, our current understanding of ESOPs and EOCs in CEE is limited by a lack of coherent empirical data, by a lacking connection of the experiences in CEE during transformation to the strong theoretical tradition, and by a lack of studies comparing the experiences made in CEE with the experiences made in Western countries. Against this background, the sub-theme aims (a) to advance our knowledge on the structures and processes at the individual, organizational, and societal levels that are germane to participatory types of organization; (b) to draw lessons from the CEE experiences for western countries; and (c) to learn about the behavior of participatory types of organization and of individuals in such organizations in different institutional settings.

For this purpose, we are looking for both theoretical and empirical studies that focus on micro, meso or macro levels of analysis based on qualitative and/or quantitative methods. Contributions may include, but are not limited to, the following topics:

  • The influence of public discourse about EOCs and matters pertaining to the political legitimacy of privatization on the emergence and development of EOCs
  • Traces of the ‘Illyrian Firm’ or ‘pure rental firm’ in a setting of free markets, private ownership, and political democracy
  • Comparative studies on institutional conditions for EOCs in CEE countries and their outcomes with respect to the viability of EOC
  • The influence of different (countries’) experiences with worker’s self-management on the viability of EOCs after privatization
  • Comparative case-studies about the emergence of EOC during privatization and their development depending on institutional context, participatory culture, experiences with worker’s self-management and individual ownership rights
  • Transfer of EOC & ESOP models from West to East and vice versa; adaptation of models and learning barriers between East and West
  • Comparative studies about EOC as a privatization instrument in East and West
  • History, development, distribution, and outcomes of ESOP in CEE
  • The impact of ESOP on the viability of EOCs in CEE.

Submission Guidelines

Please submit abstracts (maximum 500 words; in .doc or .pdf) by 31th January 2015 via email to: Olaf Kranz. Abstracts should contain the author(s) name(s), the institution and position as well as e-mail address. Notification of paper acceptance: 28th February 2015. Full papers (maximum 8000 words) will be expected by 10th June 2015.

For any questions, please feel free to contact Olaf Kranz at olaf.kranz@wiwi.uni-regensburg.de

[1] Olaf Kranz, Dr., University of Regensburg, Senior Lecturer at the Chair of Business Administration, especially Leadership and Organization, email: olaf.kranz@wiwi.uni-regensburg.de.

[2] Mihaela Lambru, Dr., University of Bucharest, Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Sociology and Social Work, email: mihaela.lambru@sas.unibuc.ro.

[3] Claudia Petrescu, Dr., Principal Researcher, Romanian Academy, The Research Institute for Quality of Life, email: claudia.petrescu@iccv.ro.

[4] Thomas Steger, Prof. Dr., University of Regensburg, Chair of Business Administration, especially Leadership and Organization, email: Thomas.steger@wiwi.uni-regensburg.de.

Call for Papers: Employee Share Option Programs and Employee-Owned Companies in Central and Eastern Europe

Call for Papers
Organizacija
Employee Share Option Programs and Employee-Owned Companies in Central and Eastern Europe
Deadline for Submission of Abstracts:
December 15, 2014

The academic literature on employee share option programs (ESOP) and employee-owned companies (EOC) in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) is characterized by at least two omissions. First, there is a remarkable silence about the relationship between EOC and ESOPs in CEE countries—with some exceptions that prove the rule (Mygind 2012)—though ESOP has been widely used as an instrument of mass privatization in several CEE countries and has led to majority employee share ownership (ESO) in a large number of firms (Aghion & Blanchard 1998). This neglect reminds us of the fact that despite close topical, theoretical, and empirical associations, the phenomena of EOC and ESOP have scarcely been discussed together in the academic discourse at all (Dow 2003). Ironically, while the EOC literature stresses some rather negative aspects of the specific employee ownership form, such as the degenerative tendencies and a principally limited viability of EOCs, the ESOP literature mainly propagates the positive aspects of ESO, such as the positive effects on identification with the firm or productivity gains.
Second, the academic discussion on the role of ESOPs and EOCs in the transformation process in CEE countries is rather disconnected from the long standing discourse about the potentially emancipatory role of ESOPs and EOCs in the Western world (Backhaus 1979). Moreover, there are hardly any references to the previously prominent debate about ‘labor-managed-firms` in either ‘labor-managed’ or ‘mixed’ economies, which had had a very strong theoretical basis in terms of the “Illyrian Firm” (Ward 1958; Vanek 1970; Meade 1972) or the “pure rental firm” (Jensen & Meckling 1979) despite reflecting “some degree of ideological commitment” (Hansmann 1996: 7) during the Cold War. Moreover, the implications of the rather sharp and fast decline of ESO and EOCs in the CEE countries following privatization have not yet been systematically reflected in the Western literature (Kalmi 2003).

Thus, our current understanding of ESOPs and EOCs in CEE is not only limited by the lack of coherent empirical data, but also by the lack of a connection to the strong theoretical tradition, and by the lack of studies that compare the experiences made in CEE with the experiences made in Western countries. However, if one is interested in developing and experimenting with some alternative forms of organizing, with different forms of material and immaterial employee participation, and with democratic governance structures, the experiences with ESOPs and EOCs in the CEE countries can be analyzed more rigorously, thereby connecting them more strongly with the Western discourse and tradition.

Against this background, Organizacija aims to publish a Special Issue on ESOP and EOC in CEE. The aims of this Special Issue are (a) to advance our knowledge on the structures and processes at the individual, organizational, and societal levels that are germane to participatory types of organization; (b) to draw lessons from the CEE experiences for the western regions; and (c) to learn about the behavior of participatory types of organization and of individuals in such organizations in different institutional settings. For this purpose, we are looking for theoretical and empirical contributions from economics, history, industrial relations, management studies, political science, and sociology, amongst others.

We welcome both theory-based empirical studies grounded in any methodological tradition (qualitative as well as quantitative), and conceptual contributions that focus on micro, meso or macro levels of analysis. Moreover, we encourage both studies that extend current theories and those questioning or even disconfirming taken-for-granted beliefs about participatory types of organization on theoretical or empirical grounds. Papers may include, but are not limited to, the following topics:

  • The influence of public discourse about EOCs and matters pertaining to the political legitimacy of privatization on the emergence and development of EOCs
  • Traces of the Illyrian Firm or pure rental firm in a setting of free markets, private ownership, and political democracy
  • Specific country studies and comparative studies on institutional conditions for EOCs in CEE countries and their outcomes with respect to the viability of EOC
  • The influence of specific contexts of corporate governance in CEE countries on the ownership and control of EOCs
  • The influence of industrial relations in the CEE context on the viability of EOCs in CEE and the influence of EOCs on industrial relations practices
  • Efficiency and effectiveness of EOCs in CEE
  • The influence of different (countries’) experiences with worker’s self-management on the viability of EOCs after privatization
  • Comparative case-studies about the emergence of EOC during privatization and their development depending on institutional context, participatory culture, experiences with worker’s self-management and individual ownership rights
  • Transfer of EOC & ESOP models from West to East and vice versa; adaptation of models and learning barriers between East and West
  • Comparative studies about EOC as a privatization instrument in East and West
  • History, development, distribution, and outcomes of ESOP in CEE
  • The impact of ESOP on the viability of EOCs in CEE

Procedures

The following deadlines have to be observed:

  • 15th December 2014: Submission of abstracts (maximum 1000 words) to the guest editors (thomas.steger@ur.de or olaf.kranz@wiwi.uni-regensburg.de)
  • 31st January 2015: Invitations to submit full papers sent out
  • 31st May 2015: Submission of full papers (according to the journal’s guidelines http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/orga, maximum 8000 words)
  • 30th September 2015: Feedback to authors
  • 31st December 2015: Submission of full papers with revisions
  • 2016: Journal volume to be published

Any further questions may be addressed to the guest editors:
Thomas Steger / Olaf Kranz
Department of Leadership and Organization
University of Regensburg

References
Aghion, P. & Blanchard, O.J. (1998) On privatization methods in Eastern Europe and their implications. Economics of Transition, 6, 87-99.
Backhaus, J. (1979) Ökonomik der partizipativen Unternehmung. Vol. I. Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck.
Dow, G.K. (2003) Governing the firm. Worker’s control in theory and practice. Cambridge: CUP.
Hansmann, H. (1996) The ownership of enterprise. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Jensen, M.C. & Meckling, W.H. (1979) Rights and production functions: An application to labor-managed firms and codetermination. Journal of Business, 52, 469-506.
Kalmi, P. (2003) The rise and fall of employee ownership in Estonia, 1987-2001. Europe-Asia Studies, 55, 1213-1239.
Meade, J. (1972) The theory of labour-managed firms and of profit sharing. Economic Journal, 82, 402-428.
Mygind, N. (2012) Trends in employee ownership in Eastern Europe. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23, 1611-1642.
Vanek, J. (1970) The general theory of labor-managed market economies. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Ward, B. (1958) The firm in Illyria: Market syndicalism. American Economic Review, 48, 566-589.

Call for Papers: Work and Organization in the Age of Global Economic Crisis: Industrial Relations in the Post-Socialist Societies of Europe

Call for Papers

European Journal of Industrial Relations

Work and Organization in the Age of Global Economic Crisis:
Industrial Relations in the Post-Socialist Societies of Europe

Guest Co-editors: Anna Soulsby, Graham Hollinshead, Thomas Steger

In this special issue, we invite comparative studies that examine growing insecurities in the fields of work, organization and employment in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), including the effects of migration, in the context of the international ‘crisis of capitalism’. We are interested in research that investigates local responses (at the levels of the workplace, establishment or industry) to the spread of uncontrolled market forces in the region and makes connections to debates in the wider social sciences. We are particularly interested in studies which analyse the latest phases of transition in CEE as subject to contestation and negotiation by a plurality of groupings within economy and society, and which bring to the fore the significance of class, gender and ethnicity. We welcome submissions which capture the unevenness of developments since the financial crisis through comparative analysis of changes in the institutional arrangements impinging on work and employment. We also wish to explore whether, and how, the particularly hostile environment for trade unionism in CEE is creating new avenues for renewal and reinvention, and whether the resourcefulness and imagination exhibited by trade unionists in the region offer real learning opportunities for the international labour movement.

Key Dates and Contact Details:
Submission of extended abstracts (maximum 1000 words not including references):
29 December 2014.
Submission of full papers: 31 July 2015.

Please contact one of the guest co-editors, or the Editor, for any queries. The abstract submission should be sent by e-mail attachment to the following:
anna.soulsby@nottingham.ac.uk
G.hollinshead@herts.ac.uk
thomas.steger@wiwi.uni-regensberg.de
r.hyman@lse.ac.uk

Universität Bayreuth – Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeit bzw. Post Docs

Die Professur für Allgemeine Betriebswirtschaftslehre sucht ab sofort

Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiter(innen) bzw. Post Docs.

Das Aufgabengebiet umfasst die Mitwirkung in der betriebswirtschaftlichen Lehre, insbesondere im Bereich der Allgemeinen BWL. Weiterhin erwarten wir eine Mitwirkung bei
Forschungsprojekten an der Schnittstelle zu den Gebieten Marketing/ Management/ Medien.

Wir bieten Ihnen eine interessante und verantwortungsvolle Tätigkeit mit sehr guten
Weiterbildungs- und Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten. Im Rahmen der Tätigkeit wird die
Gelegenheit zu eigener wissenschaftlicher Arbeit und zum Erwerb weiterer wissenschaftlicher
Qualifikationen (Promotion bzw. Habilitation) inklusive Lehrerfahrung gegeben.

  • Sie verfügen über ein mit Prädikatsexamen abgeschlossenes wirtschaftswissenschaftliches
    Hochschulstudium mit betriebswirtschaftlichem Schwerpunkt.
  • Sehr gute Kenntnisse auf dem Gebiet der Allgemeinen BWL, insbesondere in einem der folgenden Forschungsbereiche sind erforderlich: Marketing, Management und Medien.
  • Gute Kenntnisse der englischen Sprache und quantitativer Methoden (Statistik,
    Ökonometrie) sowie Interesse an empirischer Forschung sind unerlässlich.

Die Universitat Bayreuth strebt eine Erhöhung des Anteils von Frauen in
Wissenschaftsbereichen an, deshalb fordern wir Frauen nachdrücklich zur Bewerbung auf.
Schwerbehinderte Bewerber/innen werden bei gleicher Eignung bevorzugt.

Schicken Sie bitte Ihre üblichen Bewerberunterlagen ausschlieslich in elektronischer Form
(pdf, 1 Datei) bis zum 01.11.2014 an Prof. Dr. Bettina Lis, e-mail bettina.lis@uni-bayreuth.de.