Academic life under institutional pressures for AACSB accreditation: insights from faculty members in Mexican business schools

Prasad, Ajnesh; Segarra, Paulina; Villanueva, Cristian E.

doi:10.1080/03075079.2018.1458220

Cited by 41 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One distinguished example is Brewis (2005) who provides a vivid and honest account of the anxiety and depression she has encountered following the interrelations between her identity and academic work. A second remarkable example informing us from a Latin American context is Prasad et al, (2018), sharing the negative health effects, documented as stress, depression and self-doubt, on academics striving for research output and its subsequent accreditation in business schools in Mexico. Predominantly though, literature is infiltrated with critiques of the academic system (e.g.…”

Section: A Note From the Authorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who cares for academics? We need to talk about emotional well-being including what we avoid and intellectualise through macro-discourses

Smith

Ulus

2019

Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores academics’ well-being through analysing published sensitive disclosures, bringing to journal space the pain, rawness and emotional suffering of individuals’ experiences. We confront the taboos of speaking openly about mental health and emotional well-being in academic institutions, with masculine structures and encroaching neoliberal discourses that create hostile atmospheres unsupportive of vulnerability and uncertainty. We also challenge existing discourses about academics’ well-being, implicitly burdening individuals as responsible for their pain and creating walls of shame, rather than building new healthy structures. By spotlighting the voices of academics’ emotional disclosures, intensified by embodied social inequalities, we plead for openness in formal academic outlets for sharing pre-existing emotional struggles and new wounds created by cruelly competitive, winner-takes-all structures, fortified by neoliberal ideals. Led by individuals’ voices and experiences, we make recommendations for supporting academics as an attempt to extract academia from its current perverse state and commit to repair and transformation.

show abstract

Section: A Note From the Authorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who cares for academics? We need to talk about emotional well-being including what we avoid and intellectualise through macro-discourses

Smith

Ulus

2019

Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among the most pernicious aspects of journal quality lists -which, to be sure, is part of a broader audit culture routinely manifesting in business schools -appears on academic subjectivities in the form of rendering scholars acquiescent to the problematic, at times even oppressive, exercise of administrative power (Knights and Clarke, 2014). Unfortunately, the academic subjectivities of early career scholars -be it doctoral students or faculty (Bristow et al, 2017;Prasad, 2013Prasad, , 2015and those working in the Global South (Prasad et al, 2019) are especially vulnerable, due to the precarity that defines their career trajectory and outcomes. Namely, it leaves members of such groups acutely susceptible to managerialist surveillance and control.…”

Section: Existing Critique Of Journal Rankingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an aspirational future: Cultivating ontological empathy within the ethos of Management Learning

Prasad

Śliwa

2022

Management Learning

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As we write this editorial in January 2022, we look back on 2021 and we look ahead to another year of curating Management Learning together with a fantastic team of Associate Editors, a wonderful Editorial Assistant, a supportive publisher, and the community of International Editorial Board members, reviewers, and, of course, our readers. We have said 'goodbye' to 2021: another year replete with challenges and uncertainties, which, for this journal, has turned out to be very successful. Management Learning has continued to publish high quality, original, critical and reflexive scholarship on organisations and learning. Our 2-year impact factor has risen to 4.952. As a team, we have stuck together and grown closer. We were sad to see the term of Todd Bridgman as Co-Editor-in-Chief and Alexia Panayiotou as Associate Editor come to an end, and we thank them for the excellent and deeply committed work on leading and shaping this journal. At the same time, we are truly excited to welcome Ajnesh Prasad as the new Co-Editor-in-Chief of Management Learning.It is clear that 2022 has started for the journal on a high note and with a lot of enthusiasm, ambition and hope. We take this beginning of the new year -and the change in the composition of the team of Co-Editors-in-Chief -as an opportunity for reflection on our ethical commitments as Editors-in-Chief of Management Learning. What are we committed to as journal editors, especially while working under the current circumstances and given the institutional pressures of contemporary business schools? What does this mean to us? How do we put these commitments into practice? Ontological empathy and journal editorship in the era of rankingsIn framing these reflections, we find it helpful to bring in the idea of ontological empathy, introduced to the field of management and organisation studies by Christine Oliver. In her 2009 Plenary Address delivered at the Academy of Management, Oliver (2010) defined ontological empathy as

show abstract

“…Goldfarb, 2008; Gulbrandsen & Smeby, 2005), institutional objectives (e.g. Prasad et al, 2019), political and social pressures (e.g. Tian & Lu, 2017; Young et al, 2017) and ethical considerations (e.g.…”

Section: Multidisciplinary Research: Emergent Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Multidisciplinary Research as a Complex System

Dalton

Wolff

Bekker

2021

International Journal of Qualitative Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaborative research has become increasingly prominent since the mid-20th century. This article aspires to offer a fundamental ontology of a multidisciplinary research system. As a point of departure, we consider disciplinarity as a restricted language code as noted by Bernstein. The impetus for collaboration is found in a research problem’s transcendence of disciplinary bounds. This article makes several propositions that diverge from the consensus position regarding the formation and dynamics of a multidisciplinary system. Most notably that such a system adheres to the constituent elements of what could be regarded as a complex system, including an ensemble of elements, interactions between these elements, local disorder followed by the emergence of robust order and system memory. We propose that the internal communications and subsequent self-organization of such a system may be conceptualized as orientation signals, or ‘stigmergy’, analogous to those observed in swarms. System robustness, we argue, is a function of the individual researcher’s local autonomy and is, paradoxically, augmented by the weakness of communications across disciplinary bounds, along with the lack of central organization and the emphasis on research novelty. System memory, we argue, manifests itself in the ability of a researcher to change her/his route of inquiry, based on environmental feedback, whereby new information becomes incorporated into the adjusted research methodology. We propose that an emergent intelligence, at the level of the system, expresses itself in the unconcealment of the ‘form’ of the metaproblem. The theoretical model is empirically illustrated using, as an example, the contemporary field of renewable energy research, which is an area primed for collaborative research. It is anticipated that an improved understanding of multidisciplinary research systems provides insights into certain strengths particular to less integrated and self-organized forms of collaborative research along with a framework with which to improve the design and fostering of such systems.

show abstract

Academic life under institutional pressures for AACSB accreditation: insights from faculty members in Mexican business schools

Cited by 41 publications

References 41 publications

Who cares for academics? We need to talk about emotional well-being including what we avoid and intellectualise through macro-discourses

Who cares for academics? We need to talk about emotional well-being including what we avoid and intellectualise through macro-discourses

Towards an aspirational future: Cultivating ontological empathy within the ethos of Management Learning

Multidisciplinary Research as a Complex System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About