Self-Representation of Marginalized Groups: A New Way of Thinking through W. E. B. Du Bois

Aiming to develop normative recommendations for preventing corporate irresponsibility (CiR), business and society scholars have adopted strategic approaches—exploring the causal links between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and profitability—and moral approaches—exploring the moral principles of CSR that guide managers. However, some business ethics scholars have recently argued that these studies are too simplistic as they disregard the systemic logics of broader institutional environments that generate ‘bad apples’ firms and managers. Drawing on literature that sheds light on the systemic origin of CiR (i.e. the comparative institutionalist perspective and the critical management perspective), we conduct an in-depth case study on how Russian systems of institutional absences shape insensitive corporate environmental violence of a Russian extractive multinational corporation. In doing so, we develop a novel cultural approach to the analysis of CiR that advances knowledge about the systemic origin of CiR in two ways. First, this approach allows for identifying how the sources of CiR are located within firms’ home national systems of institutional absences, which shape systemic logics of CiR that make corporate violence less traceable by firms and broader society. Second, this approach allows for identifying how governments can sustain and perpetuate insensitive corporate violence through the deliberate and systemic absenting of national institutions that could pressure firms to be more socially and environmentally responsible, thus making negative consequences of corporate violence invisible to firms and broader society. We propose future research directions and suggest policy changes in Russia and other countries with similar systems of institutional absences.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Critical Management Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How do Russian National Systems of Institutional Absences Shape Insensitive Corporate Environmental Violence of a Russian Extractive Multinational Corporation?

Villo

Turkina

2022

“…Rather, suppressive practices are implied in the agents’ penalization of efforts targeting racial equality by employing rationalized discourses that hide racism (Boykin et al, 2020 ; Chelliah & Swamy, 2018 ; Jehn & Scott, 2008 ). Primarily hegemonic articulations of racial equality do not transform the power structures that privilege white individuals (Nkomo & Al Ariss, 2014 ); nor do they truly permit racialized bodies and anyone who participates in debates on racial equality to live a dignified life (Chowdhury, 2021a , b ). Thus, noncooperative spaces misleadingly give hope to black scholars that their voices are being heard by powerful white actors and that change will materialize (Liu, 2019a ; also see de Vries et al, 2012 ).…”

Section: Theoretical Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The simultaneity of hegemonic anti-racism rhetoric and pervasive racism is particularly visible in academia (Boykin et al, 2020 ) where marginalized stakeholders (Derry, 2012 ), such as black female scholars, are persistently devalued (Dar et al, 2020 ). Marginalized stakeholders are individuals who lack self-representation, and they are ignored, neglected, mistreated, misrepresented through bias, and discriminated against “even when they make a meaningful social contribution” (Chowdhury, 2021a , p. 2).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critique of Vanishing Voice in Noncooperative Spaces: The Perspective of an Aspirant Black Female Intellectual Activist

Muzanenhamo

Chowdhury

2022

Self Cite

We adopt and extend the concept of ‘noncooperative space’ to analyze how (aspirant) black women intellectual activists attempt to sustain their efforts within settings that publicly endorse racial equality, while, in practice, the contexts remain deeply racist. Noncooperative spaces reflect institutional, organizational, and social environments portrayed by powerful white agents as conducive to anti-racism work and promoting racial equality but, indeed, constrain individuals who challenge racism. Our work, which is grounded in intersectionality, draws on an autoethnographic account of racially motivated domestic violence suffered by our lead author. Our analysis suggests that (aspirant) black women intellectual activists must develop courage to sustain their ‘voice’ within noncooperative spaces. However, the three interlinked dimensions of noncooperative spaces—namely, deceiving design, hegemonic actors’ indifference to racism, and (some assimilated gatekeepers’) false equivalence—may gradually erode a black female scholar’s courage. This forces her ‘voice’ to vanish temporarily, or even permanently. Courage is thus fragile and depletable. Yet, courage can be regenerated, resulting in regaining voice. Consequently, we propose courageous collective action by white allies and black and brown individuals who voluntarily and officially cooperate within and across various spaces to achieve racial equality.

Misrepresentation of Marginalized Groups: A Critique of Epistemic Neocolonialism

Chowdhury

2022

Self Cite

I argue that meta-ignorance and meta-insensitivity are the key sources influencing the reoccurrence of the (un)conscious misrepresentation of marginalized groups in management and organization research; such misrepresentation, in effect, perpetuates epistemic neocolonialism. Meta-ignorance describes incorrect epistemic attitudes, which render researchers ignorant about issues such as contextual history and emotional and political aspects of a social problem. Researcher meta-ignorance can be a permanent feature, given how researchers define, locate, and make use of their epistemic positionality and privilege. In contrast, meta-insensitivity is a special issue that arises when researchers miss multiple opportunities to capture valuable aspects of marginalized groups’ voices or their life experiences and expectations. The problem of meta-insensitivity during fieldwork is more serious because researchers—despite their apparent willingness to be innovative—fail to understand how to be sensitive toward marginalized groups. The perpetuation of these elements’ misrepresentation contributes to long-lasting negative consequences for marginalized groups. To counter this, I introduce and conceptualize the idea of oppositional views which researchers can mobilize to address misrepresentation of marginalized groups and challenge epistemic neocolonialism.