We Challenge You to Join the Movement: From Discourse to Critical Voice

Abstract

Despite the advances made since the civil rights era, racial and ethnic differences are still salient and politically divisive in the United States. Businesses increasingly have diversity, equity, and inclusion goals and business management faculty can play an important role in helping them achieve those goals. In this article, we argue that businesspersons, especially leaders of enterprises that have diversity, equity, and inclusion goals and the faculty who educate them, have a responsibility to help identify issues regarding, and solutions to, some of the world’s most pressing problems and can do so through consciousness-raising experiences aimed at helping their students develop a critical voice that signals they are more likely to contribute to a respectful and productive work environment. Five illustrative scenarios are set forth as consciousness-raising experiences that faculty members can draw on as tools to prepare students to use their critical voice as socially and culturally conscious future organizational leaders. Although the scenarios can be applied to multiple causes, we offer the Black Lives Matter movement, a social justice movement that has gained global attention, as a frame for this discussion.

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

“…However, the status of black female intellectual activists as marginalized stakeholders (Derry, 2012 ) limits their access to resources for transforming noncooperative spaces and achieving racial equality. Sustainable efforts and transformation thus demand the contribution of particularly ‘good [white] people’ (Rate & Sternberg, 2007 ) — white allies —due to their relatively more empowered social location as compared to that of any other social group (Bell et al, 2021 ; Contu, 2020 ; Edmondson et al, 2020 ). By ‘good people’ (Rate & Sternberg, 2007 ), we mean white individuals who aspire to establish a more equitable academia and world, and who have the resources to align themselves with such a goal (Dean, 2019 ).…”

“…More explicitly, we define and extend Chowdhury’s ( 2021c , p. 4) notion of ‘noncooperative spaces’ as “highly restrictive, disadvantageous, or even harmful [institutional, organizational and social environments] because of institutional arrangements” that inhibit racialized individuals’ voice and capacity to obtain justice and/or co-transform racist structures with white actors who seek a more equitable society. Eliminating racism involves a joint effort between white and non-white bodies, and is thus unattainable without either of these two broad categories’ input (Bell et al, 2021 ; Contu, 2020 ; Edmondson et al, 2020 ; Swan, 2017 ).…”

Формирование И Развитие Человеческого Капитала На Нефтегазовых Предприятиях

“…Ряд теорий предполагали, что такой баланс достигается за счет невидимых рыночных сил, в то время как другие теории говорили о том, что баланс должен быть установлен на основе определенной политики регулирования. Теории эндогенного роста, которые разрабатывались в конце XX века, предполагали, что каждая страна имеет свой путь развития, который зависит от технологического процесса в условиях текущего организационного развития, социальных возможностей и институциональных рамок, а также некоторых географических преимуществ [2].…”

Epistemic injustice and hegemonic ordeal in management and organization studies: Advancing Black scholarship

“…Attentiveness requires that White comrades listen carefully to Black scholars' experiences of epistemic injustice in order to identify tangible ways of showing solidarity with the individuals (Bystydzienski and Schacht, 2001), without rationalizing the hegemonic system or defending the self (Swan, 2017). The attentiveness of White comrades is underpinned by critical reflection on own agency, ignorance, acknowledged role in promoting epistemic injustice (Contu, 2018(Contu, , 2019Edmondson et al, 2020) and rejecting White privilege (Bailey, 1998). This departs from excessively scrutinizing, and retaliating against, Black scholars as well as referencing an illusionary system of meritocracy to justify the disenfranchisement of the academics (Boykin et al, 2020;Murrell, 2020).…”