Apologies for cross-postings!
Call for papers for the Critical Entrepreneurship Studies stream of the 8th International Conference in Critical Management Studies
This stream aims to explore the self-evidences of entrepreneurship scholarship, including its (neo-capitalist) ideologies, dominant assumptions, grand narratives, preferred sites, objects and practices of inquiry. Even though entrepreneurship is a very diverse phenomenon that calls for divergence and multiplicity in its understandings, the majority of entrepreneurship research is still functionalist in nature (Jennings et al, 2005). As Calas, Smircich and Bourne (2009: 552) suggest, with “few exceptions, the extensive literature on entrepreneurship positions it as a positive economic activity”. The normative assumption that entrepreneurship is a ‘good thing’ prevails along with an acceptance that ‘the more entrepreneurs the merrier’ (cf. Weiskopf and Steyaert, 2009). Entrepreneurship as a field of study has generally been dominated by research and researchers interested in it as a purely market-based phenomenon: a ‘special’ trait or set of behaviours which drive venture creation. This focus on entrepreneurship as a ‘desirable’ economic activity, perceived unquestioningly as positive, obscures important questions: for instance, questions of identity, phenomenology, ideology and relations of power.
Drawing on and intensifying previous critical work on entrepreneurship by, for instance, Nodoushani & Nodoushani, 1999, Ogbor, 2000, Steyaert and Hjorth (2007); Hjorth and Steyaert (2009) and Down (2006; 2010), we propose this stream as a means to create space for what Calas et al. (2009) refer to as Critical Entrepreneurship Studies . Continuing our earlier (2011) CMS stream on Critical Entrepreneurship Studies and Special Issue in Organization (Tedmanson, Verduyn, Essers and Gartner, 2010), we invite papers that critically reflect on entrepreneurship’s authoritative voices, forces, discourses, assemblages or desires that make us believe that there is no other option than conceiving entrepreneurship and entrepreneurs as neo-liberal icons. Critical inquiries of entrepreneurship’s exclusionary linguistic conventions are also highly appreciated for they have proven effective in disclosing, for instance, the mystification of ‘the entrepreneur’ based on essentialist conceptualisations of archetypically ‘white’ attributes (Calas et al., ibid). Moreover, we are interested in papers dealing with how the rationality of the entrepreneur is used politically – both inside and outside of the economy (e.g. in the public sector, the voluntary sector or in popular culture) – to interpellate individuals as entrepreneurial subjects, who then “further the cause of post-industrial capital through their own volition” (Jones and Spicer, 2009: 27).
On the other hand, we also embrace papers that try to save entrepreneurship from its neo-liberal over-codification by probing the constitutive voices that constantly punctuate, transgress and challenge the received wisdom. Attempts to bring to light entrepreneurship’s inherent, if often suppressed, alterity via empirical work might follow the example of Ahl (2004), Rehn and Taalas (2004), Pio (2005), Essers and Benschop (2007; 2009), Essers (2008; 2009) and Ozkazanc-Pan (2009) who have sought to ‘voice’ other entrepreneurial subjectivities than those traditionally privileged in dominant stories of entrepreneurship. On the conceptual end, papers engaging critically with the canon of entrepreneurship studies might find inspiration in Rindova et al. (2009) who have convincingly suggested to move scholarship away from a focus on wealth creation as a dominant motive for starting a venture, and to start addressing entrepreneurship’s ‘dark sides’ as well as its emancipatory possibilities. Also, papers might consider geographical, discursive and social dimensions of entrepreneurship other than those typically studied by researchers (Steyaert and Katz, 2004). Methodologically, papers might look into entrepreneurship research’s performative and interventionist possibilities and thus demonstrate how research can be used as a vehicle for bringing into existence different entrepreneurial realities (Steyaert, 2011).
While the above offers possible entry points of how entrepreneurship might be approached from a critical vantage point, we rather openly seek through this stream to further the momentum for alternate analyses of entrepreneurship within the field of critical scholarship. Aiming to unleash myriad ways of enacting entrepreneurship differently, any surprises that move forward the critical agenda of entrepreneurship are welcome.
Stream convenors:
Dr. Caroline Essers (VU University Amsterdam and Radboud University Nijmegen),
c.essers@fm.ru.nl
Dr. Pascal Dey (University of St. Gallen),
pascal.dey@unisg.ch
Dr. Karen Verduyn (VU University Amsterdam),
karen.verduijn@vu.nl
Deirdre Tedmanson (University of South Australia and Hawke Research Institute),
deirdre.tedmanson@unisa.edu.au
Please send abstracts or any questions to
c.essers@fm.ru.nl
Extended abstracts (maximum 1000 words, A4 paper, single spaced, 12 point font), including a clear research question and short but clear elaboration on the used methods (when authors have based their work on empirical research), should be submitted by 31st January 2013.
Notification of paper acceptance: 22nd February 2013
Full papers will be expected by 1st May 2013
**************************************
This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.
Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.
You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1
If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch
jbunch@benedictine.edu.
Ventures HO!