cfp: Everybody Hurts, Sometimes – Emotions and Dysfunctional Leadership

CALL FOR PAPERS: European Journal of International Management

Special Issue: Everybody Hurts, Sometimes – Emotions and Dysfunctional Leadership


Guest Editors: Jeanette Lemmergaard, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark and Sara Louise Muhr, Lund University, Sweden




Organizational
dysfunction characterizes a facet of today’s workplace that is often
hidden or ignored. In general we expect, albeit naively, that business
leaders will do the right thing. They are expected to act honourably,
in accordance with organizational and institutional values, as well as
acting ethically. The ideal leader of the 21st century can integrate
all the necessary subordinates and know how to build a team while
making themselves dispensable. They know how to lead a diverse
workforce, possess strategic skills, have a learning focus, as well as
an international orientation. They offer constructive criticism when
things go wrong and resolve conflicts diplomatically, respecting
subordinate’s expectations and ambitions. Also, ideal leaders are
expected to be passionate about their jobs. They are supposed to show
emotional commitment and devotion and are expected to involve their
personal lives in the organization, thereby integrating their own
‘selves’ into the life of the organization. They are one with the
organization; a symbol of its being.



However,
such leaders are mostly mythical creatures. In reality most leaders
gain their position due to technical expertise rather than an ability
to work with human resources, and consequently tend to be strong in
operational and technical skills, but less so in
relations-building-skills. Moreover, leaders’ performance tends to be
measured on a cost-efficiency basis, and when pursuing functional
objectives, leaders can often be dysfunctional for the well-being of
those who are charged with delivering this functionality.



Leaders’
incompetence manifests itself in various ways, such as indecisiveness
and over-controlling behaviour or an overriding concern for production
and efficiency at the expense of the human resources. Opinions on
leadership and leaders are thus often constructed on the basis of
diverse rather than shared meanings. Also, many ‘successful’ leaders
may have psychopathic, narcissistic, and histrionic personality
disorders, which, although they may sometimes help them in climbing the
ladder of success, eventually will result in a dysfunctional workplace
of others.



Leaders
are people like the rest of us, human beings with emotions, fears, and
desires. Leaders make mistakes, their actions have different
consequences than intended, and sometimes they do not act at all. The
aim of this special issue is on this view to capture the ‘other side’
of leadership, to challenge the ideal image of the heroic and
charismatic leader almost displayed like a superhero. We want to invite
contributions that investigate current state of emotions and
dysfunctional leadership around the globe, applying unique
perspectives, and analyses. Qualitative and quantitative as well as
conceptual approaches are encouraged. Papers also should point to the
future of leadership with particular emphasis on how best to advance
the arguments, methods, and effectiveness of leadership.



Subject Coverage


Examples of topics appropriate to the theme of emotions and dysfunctional leadership include:


· Leaders as the disruptive force in their organizations
· The passionate leader
· The loving and caring leader
· Emotional ignorance
· Emotional workplace bullying
· Trust-breaking
· Tyrannical behaviour towards subordinates
· Leadership fantasies
· Micro leadership, with emphasis on roles and implications of roles
· Manic leadership
· Inaccessibility of leadership
· The invisible leader
· Manipulative leadership
· Management of meaninglessness
· Gossip and rumours
· Managerial cowardliness
· The ‘successful psychopath’
· Consequences of workaholic tendencies of individuals in organizational
  power positions
· Prevention and intervention strategies – who sets them, how are they
  enforced?
· Whistleblowing – usefulness and effectiveness
· Feedback phobia
· Pushing employees outside their comfort zone – promises and challenges




Notes for Authors


Submitted papers should not have been previously published nor be currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.


All
papers are refereed through a peer review process. A guide for authors,
sample copies and other relevant information for submitting papers are
available on the Author Guidelines page http://www.inderscience.com/mapper.php?id=31



Important Dates:


Extended abstract submission deadline: August 15, 2009


Full paper submission deadline: December 1, 2009


No changes can be made to the papers after: April 30, 2010


Publication release: November 2010 (Vol. 4, No. 4)




Editors and Notes:


You may send one copy in the form of an MS Word file attached to an e-mail (details in Author Guidelines) to:


Jeanette Lemmergaard, University of Southern Denmark, e-mail: jla@sam.sdu.dk and Sara Louise Muhr, Lund University, e-mail: saralouisemuhr@gmail.com


With an email copy only to:


EJIM Editorial Team, e-mail: editors@ejim-global.org and IEL Editorial Office, e-mail ejim@inderscience.com


Please include in your submission the title of the Special Issue, the title of the Journal and the name of the Guest Editors.

, ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

On the Idea of Communism – Conference 13th,14th & 15th March 2009

“It’s just the simple thing that’s hard, so hard to do.”(B.Brecht)

The year of 1990 stands for the triple defeat of the Left: the
retreat of the social-democratic Welfare State politics in the
developed First World, the disintegration of the Soviet-style Socialist
states in the industrialized Second World, and the retreat of
emancipatory movements in the Third World. A certain epoch was thereby
over, the epoch which began with the October Revolution and was
characterized by the Party-State form of organization. Does this mean
that the time of radical emancipatory politics is over?

In recent years, there are multiple signs which indicate the need
for a new beginning. The utopia of the 1990, the Fukuyamaist “end of
history” (liberal-democratic capitalist as the finally found natural
social order) died twice in the first decade of the XXIst century.
While the 9/11 attacks signaled its political death, the financial
crisis of 2008 signals its economic death.  In these new conditions,
the task is not only to reflect on new strategies, but to radically
rethink the most basic coordinates of emancipatory politics. One should
go well beyond the rejection of the Party-State Left in its “Stalinist”
form – a common place today -, and extend this rejection to the entire
field of the “democratic Left” as the strategy to reform the system
from within its representative-democratic state form. Much more than
the debacle of the Really-Existing Socialism, the defeat of 1990 was
the final defeat of this “democratic Left.”   This defeat raises the
question: is “Communism” still the name to be used to designate the
horizon of radical emancipatory projects? In spite of their theoretical
differences, the participants share the thesis that one should remain
faithful to the name “Communism”: this name is potent to serve as the
Idea which guides our activity, as well as the instrument which enables
us to expose the catastrophes of the XXth century politics, those of
the Left included.

The symposium will not deal with practico-political questions of how
to analyze the latest economic, political, and military troubles, or
how to organize a new political movement. More radical questioning is
needed today – this is a meeting of philosophers who will deal with
Communism as a philosophical concept, advocating a precise and strong
thesis: from Plato onwards, Communism is the only political Idea worthy
of a philosopher.

“The communist hypothesis remains the good one, I do not see any
other. If we have to abandon this hypothesis, then it is no longer
worth doing anything at all in the field of collective action. Without
the horizon of communism, without this Idea, there is nothing in the
historical and political becoming of any interest to a philosopher. Let
everyone bother about his own affairs, and let us stop talking about
it. In this case, the rat-man is right, as is, by the way, the case
with some ex-communists who are either avid of their rents or who lost
courage. However, to hold on to the Idea, to the existence of this
hypothesis, does not mean that we should retain its first form of
presentation which was centered on property and State. In fact, what is
imposed on us as a task, even as a philosophical obligation, is to help
a new mode of existence of the hypothesis to deploy itself.” (Alain
Badiou)

Speakers: 
Judith Balso, Alain Badiou, Bruno Bosteels,
Terry Eagleton, Peter Hallward, Michael Hardt, Jean-Luc Nancy, Jacques
Ranciere, Alessandro Russo, Alberto Toscano, Gianni Vattimo, Wang Hui,
Slavoj Zizek

Cost for all three days:  Standard = £100         Birkbeck Staff and all Students = £45

Public booking form  for Standard –  £100  and  Non-Birkbeck students – £45
Birkbeck booking form (login required) for Birkbeck Staff and Students  – £45

To pay by cheque please click here for a form.

Friday 13th March         Room B33   Birkbeck Main Building
Saturday 14th March     Room B34   Birkbeck Main Building
Sunday 15th March       Room B34   Birkbeck Main Building

There will be an overflow room on each day with a video/audio link. Bookings will be taken on a first come first served basis.

, , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

Δεύτερη Συνάντηση για τη συνδικαλιστική οργάνωση των εργαζομένων σε ΜΚΟ στη Θεσσαλονίκη

Δευτέρα 8
Δεκεμβρίου
πραγματοποιήθηκε η πρώτη
συνάντηση εργαζομένων σε ΜΚΟ στο Εργατικό
Κέντρο. Λόγω των γεγονότων των ημερών
η προσέλευση δεν ήταν η επιθυμητή. Παρόλα
αυτά έγινε μια πρώτη κουβέντα υπό τη μορφή
συνέλευσης. Οι παρευρισκόμενοι δεν ήταν
μόνο εργαζόμενοι σε ΜΚΟ αλλά και εργαζόμενοι
από δημοτικούς κοινωφελείς οργανισμούς
οι οποίοι αποδείχθηκε πως δουλεύουν σε
παρόμοιες εργασιακές συνθήκες με αυτές
των ΜΚΟ.

Από την πρώτη
αυτή συνάντηση προέκυψε πως το κάλεσμα
αφορά σε περισσότερους εργαζόμενους
οι οποίοι αντιμετωπίζουν περίπου το ίδιο
εργασιακό καθεστώς χωρίς όμως να διαθέτουν
ένα συλλογικό όργανο έκφρασης.

Τα ζητήματα που
μας απασχολούν παραμένουν τα ίδια με
τη διαφορά ότι θεωρούμε πως αυτή η συζήτηση
αφορά σε όλους όσους εργάζονται σε χώρους
που διέπονται από παρόμοιο εργασιακό
καθεστώς με αυτό των ΜΚΟ, όπως για παράδειγμα
τους Οργανισμούς Κοινής Ωφέλειας.

Επαναλαμβάνουμε
συνοπτικά τους βασικούς άξονες-προβληματισμούς
για συζήτηση.

  • Ποιος είναι
    ο ρόλος των ΜΚΟ στη συνολική παραγωγή
    και οικονομία και κατ’ επέκταση ποια
    είναι η κοινωνική ιδιότητα των εργαζομένων
    σε αυτές;
  • Ποια πρέπει
    να είναι η εργασιακή σχέση για τους εργαζόμενους
    σε μια ΜΚΟ;
  • Ποιες εργασιακές
    συνθήκες επικρατούν στις ΜΚΟ; Ποιες είναι
    οι αμοιβές μας και ποια είναι η πολιτική
    αμοιβών;
  • Ποια είναι
    η δομή και η λειτουργία αυτών των οργανώσεων;
    Ποια είναι η ειδική σχέση μας με το αντικείμενο
    εργασίας;
  • Ποια είναι
    η επίδραση του ειδικού εργασιακού μας
    αντικειμένου, ανθρωπιστικού είτε περιβαλλοντικού,
    πάνω στις εργασιακές μας συνθήκες;

(Περισσότερες
λεπτομέρειες μπορείτε να βρείτε και στο
επισυναπτόμενο κείμενο)  
 

Λόγω της μικρής
προσέλευσης αποφασίστηκε να επαναλάβουμε
τη συνάντηση στις 21
Ιανουαρίου, στο Εργατικό
Κέντρο και ώρα 19.00.
 

Για περισσότερες
πληροφορίες μπορείτε να επικοινωνείτε
με την ηλεκτρονική διεύθυνση
ergazomenoi_se_mko@yahoo.gr ή στο τηλ. 6946040466 (Έφη) 
 
Πρωτοβουλία
Εργαζομένων σε Κοινωφελείς Οργανισμούς

Powered by ScribeFire.

cfp: Are We Mad? Conference

λίγο μακριά, αλλά με πολύ ενδιαφέρον.

CALL FOR ABSTRACTS

Are We Mad? Critical Perspectives on the Canadian Mental Health 
System will be held at the University of Alberta, in Edmonton on 
March 26 & 27, 2009.

This event will be hosted in conjunction with the University of 
Alberta’s Faculty of Law and Legal Activist Collective.

SCOPE

The purpose of this Conference is to bring together researchers and 
practitioners from various disciplines for a critical discussion of 
the Canadian mental health system, and the problems this system may 
create both for individuals and for society more generally.

The treatment of the mentally ill in Canada is an ongoing source of 
concern. This conference will examine this treatment and provide 
critical perspectives that are generally not understood by the 
public.  In particular, the legal, social and ethical implications of 
the medicalisation of mental illness, disease mongering by the 
pharmaceutical industry, the inherent power disparities and grievous 
dangers attendant to the idea of involuntary hospitalization, 
revisionistic and patient-centric positions on patient rights, and 
the ramifications of widespread xenophobia with respect to the 
mentally ill will all be addressed.

  Are We Mad? Critical Perspectives on the Canadian Mental Health 
System is a forum designed to bring together those sharing these, 
and other, concerns with the current state of the mental health 
system in Canada. Authors are encouraged to submit abstracts on any 
of the conference topics listed below. Accepted papers will be 
presented at the conference by one of the authors and published in 
the proceedings. Acceptance will be based on quality, relevance and 
originality.

CONFERENCE TOPICS

– Legal issues surrounding mental illness
– Medicalisation of mental illness
– Patient rights
– Popular representations of mental illness
– Pharmaceutical ties to academic psychiatry
– Treatment efficacy and withdrawal
– Disease mongering in areas of mental health
– Involuntary hospitalization
– Stigma and the mentally ill

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS

Dr. Irving Kirsch, University of Hull (UK)
http://psy.hull.ac.uk/Staff/i.kirsch/

Dr. Gordon Warme, University of Toronto
http://www.anansi.ca/authors.cfm?author_id=437

ABSTRACT SUBMISSION

Authors should submit a presentation abstract of between 500-1000 
words in length, carefully checked for correct grammar and spelling, 
to info@arewemad.com.   Authors should prepare abstracts expecting a 
presentation time of approximately 20 minutes.

The program committee will review all abstracts and the contact 
author (the author who submits the paper) will be notified of the 
result, by e-mail.

Submission procedure:
-A «double-blind» evaluation method will be used. To facilitate this 
procedure, the authors are kindly requested to produce and provide 
the full abstract, WITHOUT any reference to any of the authors.
-The manuscript must contain the paper title and abstract but NO 
NAMES OR CONTACT DETAILS WHATSOEVER are to be included in any part of 
this file.
-The file sent must be a zip containing two files: author(s) 
information in one and the paper, without any author(s) information, 
in another. PS/PDF/DOC formats are acceptable.

IMPORTANT DATES

Abstract Submission: February 15, 2009
Authors Notification: February 28, 2009
Final Presentation Submission and Registration: March 20, 2009
Conference date: March 27 & 28, 2008

VENUE

The conference will be held in Telus Center on the campus of the 
University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

CONTACT

Questions with respect to this Call for Papers can be directed to 
info@arewemad.com

Visit the conference website at www.arewemad.com

, , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

CFP: A World Without Politics?

September 17-19, 2009

K.U. Leuven, Belgium.

Please send a two-page abstract to anya.topolski@hiw.kuleuven.be by April
1st 2009.

Conference Description:

In response to globalization, international political structures are rapidly
changing. The emerging world order is characterized by a growing and complex
network of regional and transnational institutions which shape an
increasingly interconnected global order in a way that undermines the
sovereign independence of nation-states. Because of the growing importance
of international law and the technocratic nature of these new institutions,
the emergence of the global governance structure has often been analyzed as
a process of depoliticization. Whereas politics is supposed to be about a
visible, organized and ongoing struggle for power, the very concept of
governance, as a form of «government without opposition», seems to refer to
a bureaucratic and consensual way of organizing society.

Although some have hailed the increasing reliance on law, expert knowledge
and consensus as a reinforcement of democracy, others have argued that the
process of depoliticization helps to conceal the true power relations
underlying the global structure and contributes to the disempowerment of
citizens world wide in their attempts to shape the global order in a
democratically legitimized manner. It is the purpose of this conference to
analyze the alleged depoliticization of the global order and to reflect on
the ways in which this process affects the prospects of some form of global
democracy.

The following speakers have been confirmed:

Jean Cohen, Joshua Cohen & Charles Sabel, Chantal Mouffe, Etienne Balibar,
Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Maragaret Moore, & Andreas Kalyvas.

Call For Papers:

In addition to these, we are looking for several junior scholars (recent
appointments, post-doctoral researchers and PhD candidates) interested in
delivering a paper (15-20 minutes, 20 minutes for discussion). If you would
like to be considered please send your name, academic affiliation, and a
two-page abstract to anya.topolski@hiw.kuleuven.be by April 1st 2009.

Here are some possible topics for the junior sessions.

*       Is cosmopolitan global governance a-political?
*       Is cosmopolitan global governance cloaking ideological or imperial
power structures?
*       Do human rights discourses lead to a depoliticization of world
politics?
*       Is there still a role for sovereign nation-states in the new world
order?
*       Does global democracy rule out national self-determination?
*       Is the concept of sovereignty outdated? Can or should it acquire a
different meaning?
*       Should we move from global governance to global government?
*       What forms of political opposition are possible on the world level?
*       Would an evolution towards a multi-polar world order consisting of
regional power blocs be desirable?
*       Are representative forms of government on the global level
desirable? Are they possible?

, ,

Powered by ScribeFire.