Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

    Posted 02-02-2017 23:26

    Dear Entrepreneurship Scholars and Practitioners,

     

    IMHO Benson has hit the nail on the head by invoking AOM's own Code of Ethics.

     

    What  other countries or organisations do, or don't do,  is not relevant.

     

    If we do not comply with our own Code of Ethics we lack integrity. AoM should either comply or change the Code of Ethics.

     

    I call on AoM Leadership to explain how their statement complies with AoM's  Code of Ethics.

     

    If AoM leadership does not choose to comply with our Code of Ethics or change it,   should they  resign?

     

    Cheers,

    Roxanne

     

    Dr. Roxanne Zolin

    Professor and Head of Discipline - Entrepreneurship

    Australian Institute of Business

    A 27 Currie Street, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000 W www.aib.edu.au

    T 61-8-7325-1315 M 0433 400 113 E roxanne.zolin@aib.edu.au

    This email and any attachments  transmitted with it are confidential and intended  solely for

    the use of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error please

    notify us immediately. Any loss or damage incurred in using this email or its attachments is

    not  our responsibility and  ( save as expressly provided by  law to the contrary )  our entire 

    liability will be limited to re-supplying the material. 

     

     

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> on behalf of "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Reply-To: "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Date: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 at 5:41 PM
    To: "ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG" <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Per and Benson, I understand where you're coming from, but I think you're oversimplifying a complex issue.

     

    As many of you know, long before last week it was extremely difficult, in some cases virtually impossible, to get US visas for scholars from the seven "countries of concern" to which the EO applies. Just last year I spent considerable effort preparing to host a visiting doctoral student who happened to be an Iranian national, only to be told at the last minute that my university would not support the visa application, because all previous attempts had been denied by the State Department. Should AOM have issued a statement condemning this policy for the 2016, 2015, and 2014 annual meetings?

     

    The US, like other countries, has long submitted foreign nationals from various countries to different levels of scrutiny in the visa process, at the airport, and elsewhere. This is obviously discriminatory. Is it appropriate for AOM to take a public position on travel restrictions per se? What about restrictions outside the US? Six of the seven countries in question currently forbid Israeli passport holders from entry, so that an Israeli scholar cannot attend a conference in Iran or Sudan or Libya. This certainly violates the text below bolded by Benson. Should AOM condemn this?

     

    As Anita notes, the AOM has a strict policy preventing officers from expressing their personal views as the views of the organization. Moreover, the AOM has no process in place by which the organization can develop a view on a public policy question. Anita says that there is a proposal under consideration by the Executive Committee to relax these restrictions in "extreme circumstances," but it is still being discussed. Of course, determining what constitutes an extreme circumstance is far from obvious.

     

    In short, I think you're misinterpreting "politics" to mean partisan politics, in which case it seems like the travel ban is not a political issue, but one relating to human rights and freedom of inquiry. As I understand it, the Board interprets politics to mean, "pertaining to government or public affairs," in which case country-specific travel and immigration restrictions do count as political.

     

    Cheers,

    Peter

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Per Davidsson
    Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 4:03 PM
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Fully agree.



    Sent from my iPad


    On 1 Feb 2017, at 21:53, Honig, Benson <bhonig@MCMASTER.CA> wrote:

    I fully agree.

    I have no idea why politics were invoked. It's pretty clear in our code of ethics, as follows:

     

     The Academy of Management is devoted to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of management

    practices. It promotes the use of such knowledge to improve the work lives of individuals, the efficiency and

    effectiveness of organizations, and the well-being of society as a whole. The AOM ensures that attention is paid to the

    rights and well-being of all organizational stakeholders.

     

    AOM members respect and protect civil and human rights and the central importance of freedom of inquiry and

    expression in research, teaching, and publication.

     

    Further:

     

     · Worldview. Academy members have a duty to consider their responsibilities to the world community.

    In their role as educators, members of the Academy can play a vital role in encouraging a broader

    horizon for decision making by viewing issues from a multiplicity of perspectives, including the

    perspectives of those who are the least advantaged.

     

    Thus, protecting human rights and ensuring freedom of inquiry and expression is not a matter of politics – it is a fundamental component of what we do, as stated in our code. Many solid corporations came out more clearly regarding this fiasco. See what the statement from the American Sociological Association looks like:

     

    http://www.asanet.org/news-events/asa-news/statement-american-sociological-association-concerning-new-administrations-recent-and-future

     

    Our leadership should be responsive and accountable in these matters.

     

    Benson Honig Ph.D.

    Teresa Cascioli Chair in Entrepreneurial Leadership

    DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University

    Hamilton Ontario Canada L8S4M4

    Tel: 905-525-9140 ext. 23943

    Cell: 905-518-1716

     

     

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!


  • 2.  [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

    Posted 02-03-2017 09:00
    I am upset that an international organization of the standing of the AoM does not boycott the USA in response to this travel ban. There are already many thousands of academics who have signed such a petition, and a move by the AoM would be a real signal that we are not just an academic institution but one that seeks to impact the society in which we all work. 

    In the US, even the NBA moved their "All Star Game" - when they wanted to signal their disapproval of intolerant legislation in North Carolina. The AoM should be a leader in this regard - not a follower.  As noted this is not a political issue but one of human rights and academic freedom.

    While I know moving the conference is a challenge, given that the President of AoM is based in Toronto, and given recent comments by both the Prime Minister of Canada and the Province and City, why don't we just move the conference there. I know that it would be logistically challenging, but doing the right thing is often difficult.  That does not mean we should not do it.

    Surely a big vision and an implementation challenge are the challenges of entrepreneurship.

    As an alternative, we could establish Toronto as a second site - and connect every session electronically - giving participants the choice of location. 

    There are  politicians in Toronto and Canada who would just love this opportunity to show the importance of tolerance and diversity.

    Andrew Maxwell
    Director Bergeron Entrepreneurs in Science and Technology, Lassonde School of Engineering, York University, Toronto.



    On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Roxanne Zolin <Roxanne.Zolin@aib.edu.au> wrote:

    Dear Entrepreneurship Scholars and Practitioners,

     

    IMHO Benson has hit the nail on the head by invoking AOM's own Code of Ethics.

     

    What  other countries or organisations do, or don't do,  is not relevant.

     

    If we do not comply with our own Code of Ethics we lack integrity. AoM should either comply or change the Code of Ethics.

     

    I call on AoM Leadership to explain how their statement complies with AoM's  Code of Ethics.

     

    If AoM leadership does not choose to comply with our Code of Ethics or change it,   should they  resign?

     

    Cheers,

    Roxanne

     

    Dr. Roxanne Zolin

    Professor and Head of Discipline - Entrepreneurship

    Australian Institute of Business

    A 27 Currie Street, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000 W www.aib.edu.au

    T 61-8-7325-1315 M 0433 400 113 E roxanne.zolin@aib.edu.au

    This email and any attachments  transmitted with it are confidential and intended  solely for

    the use of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error please

    notify us immediately. Any loss or damage incurred in using this email or its attachments is

    not  our responsibility and  ( save as expressly provided by  law to the contrary )  our entire 

    liability will be limited to re-supplying the material. 

     

     

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> on behalf of "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Reply-To: "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Date: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 at 5:41 PM
    To: "ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG" <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Per and Benson, I understand where you're coming from, but I think you're oversimplifying a complex issue.

     

    As many of you know, long before last week it was extremely difficult, in some cases virtually impossible, to get US visas for scholars from the seven "countries of concern" to which the EO applies. Just last year I spent considerable effort preparing to host a visiting doctoral student who happened to be an Iranian national, only to be told at the last minute that my university would not support the visa application, because all previous attempts had been denied by the State Department. Should AOM have issued a statement condemning this policy for the 2016, 2015, and 2014 annual meetings?

     

    The US, like other countries, has long submitted foreign nationals from various countries to different levels of scrutiny in the visa process, at the airport, and elsewhere. This is obviously discriminatory. Is it appropriate for AOM to take a public position on travel restrictions per se? What about restrictions outside the US? Six of the seven countries in question currently forbid Israeli passport holders from entry, so that an Israeli scholar cannot attend a conference in Iran or Sudan or Libya. This certainly violates the text below bolded by Benson. Should AOM condemn this?

     

    As Anita notes, the AOM has a strict policy preventing officers from expressing their personal views as the views of the organization. Moreover, the AOM has no process in place by which the organization can develop a view on a public policy question. Anita says that there is a proposal under consideration by the Executive Committee to relax these restrictions in "extreme circumstances," but it is still being discussed. Of course, determining what constitutes an extreme circumstance is far from obvious.

     

    In short, I think you're misinterpreting "politics" to mean partisan politics, in which case it seems like the travel ban is not a political issue, but one relating to human rights and freedom of inquiry. As I understand it, the Board interprets politics to mean, "pertaining to government or public affairs," in which case country-specific travel and immigration restrictions do count as political.

     

    Cheers,

    Peter

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Per Davidsson
    Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 4:03 PM
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Fully agree.



    Sent from my iPad


    On 1 Feb 2017, at 21:53, Honig, Benson <bhonig@MCMASTER.CA> wrote:

    I fully agree.

    I have no idea why politics were invoked. It's pretty clear in our code of ethics, as follows:

     

     The Academy of Management is devoted to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of management

    practices. It promotes the use of such knowledge to improve the work lives of individuals, the efficiency and

    effectiveness of organizations, and the well-being of society as a whole. The AOM ensures that attention is paid to the

    rights and well-being of all organizational stakeholders.

     

    AOM members respect and protect civil and human rights and the central importance of freedom of inquiry and

    expression in research, teaching, and publication.

     

    Further:

     

     · Worldview. Academy members have a duty to consider their responsibilities to the world community.

    In their role as educators, members of the Academy can play a vital role in encouraging a broader

    horizon for decision making by viewing issues from a multiplicity of perspectives, including the

    perspectives of those who are the least advantaged.

     

    Thus, protecting human rights and ensuring freedom of inquiry and expression is not a matter of politics – it is a fundamental component of what we do, as stated in our code. Many solid corporations came out more clearly regarding this fiasco. See what the statement from the American Sociological Association looks like:

     

    http://www.asanet.org/news-events/asa-news/statement-american-sociological-association-concerning-new-administrations-recent-and-future

     

    Our leadership should be responsive and accountable in these matters.

     

    Benson Honig Ph.D.

    Teresa Cascioli Chair in Entrepreneurial Leadership

    DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University

    Hamilton Ontario Canada L8S4M4

    Cell: 905-518-1716

     

     

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!


  • 3.  [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

    Posted 02-03-2017 11:57

    Dear Andrew,

     

    You make some interesting points about Toronto and Canada.

     

    I see from social media that some people think that the AoM should relocate either its conference and/or its headquarters to Canada to hide the fact it is American.  Speaking as a historian of international business, I don't know if that strategy would work. During and between the two world wars, some German firms incorporated in Switzerland and other neutral countries in an attempt to present themselves as non-German firms. This strategy worked for some but not all of these organizations.  In some cases, Western government officials saw through the ruse of incorporating in Zurich or Macau, as did some customers in those nations. (Consumers in that era were typically low information people).   I suspect that the many Middle Eastern and Chinese academics who currently pay to attend the AoM won't be fooled if the mailing address is suddenly changed from Briarcliff Manor to Toronto.  They will realise that the AoM remains an essentially US organization, even if they membership fees are now billed in Canadian dollars and the website has a Canadian IP address. Whether that knowledge would change their willingness to pay to attend the AoM is something I don't know. I suppose it depends on the extent to which they feel that the attitudes of the current US administration towards Muslims, Mexicans, China, etc reflect those of the US population.

     

    The following pieces of business-historical scholarship may or may not provide useful lessons for the AoM leadership at this time.

     

    Casson, M., & da Silva Lopes, T. (2013). Foreign direct investment in high-risk environments: an historical perspective. Business History, 55(3), 375-404.

     

    Jones, G., & Lubinski, C. (2012). Managing Political Risk in Global Business: Beiersdorf 1914–1990. Enterprise and Society, 13(01), 85-119.

     

    Smith, A. (2016). A LBV perspective on political risk management in a multinational bank during the First World War. Multinational Business Review, 24(1), 25-46.

    Andrew   

     

     

    Regards,

     

    Andrew Smith

     

    Andrew Smith

    Director of Studies, International Business

    Senior Lecturer in International Business, University of Liverpool Management School.

    University of Liverpool Management School,  University of Liverpool

    Chatham Street,  Liverpool L69 7ZH,  United Kingdom.

    Office: GE45

    http://pastspeaks.com/about/ 

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Andrew Maxwell
    Sent: 03 February 2017 14:00
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] FW: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    I am upset that an international organization of the standing of the AoM does not boycott the USA in response to this travel ban. There are already many thousands of academics who have signed such a petition, and a move by the AoM would be a real signal that we are not just an academic institution but one that seeks to impact the society in which we all work. 

     

    In the US, even the NBA moved their "All Star Game" - when they wanted to signal their disapproval of intolerant legislation in North Carolina. The AoM should be a leader in this regard - not a follower.  As noted this is not a political issue but one of human rights and academic freedom.

     

    While I know moving the conference is a challenge, given that the President of AoM is based in Toronto, and given recent comments by both the Prime Minister of Canada and the Province and City, why don't we just move the conference there. I know that it would be logistically challenging, but doing the right thing is often difficult.  That does not mean we should not do it.

     

    Surely a big vision and an implementation challenge are the challenges of entrepreneurship.

     

    As an alternative, we could establish Toronto as a second site - and connect every session electronically - giving participants the choice of location. 

     

    There are  politicians in Toronto and Canada who would just love this opportunity to show the importance of tolerance and diversity.

     

    Andrew Maxwell

    Director Bergeron Entrepreneurs in Science and Technology, Lassonde School of Engineering, York University, Toronto.

     

     

     

    On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Roxanne Zolin <Roxanne.Zolin@aib.edu.au> wrote:

    Dear Entrepreneurship Scholars and Practitioners,

     

    IMHO Benson has hit the nail on the head by invoking AOM's own Code of Ethics.

     

    What  other countries or organisations do, or don't do,  is not relevant.

     

    If we do not comply with our own Code of Ethics we lack integrity. AoM should either comply or change the Code of Ethics.

     

    I call on AoM Leadership to explain how their statement complies with AoM's  Code of Ethics.

     

    If AoM leadership does not choose to comply with our Code of Ethics or change it,   should they  resign?

     

    Cheers,

    Roxanne

     

    Dr. Roxanne Zolin

    Professor and Head of Discipline - Entrepreneurship

    Australian Institute of Business

    A 27 Currie Street, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000 W www.aib.edu.au

    T 61-8-7325-1315 M 0433 400 113 E roxanne.zolin@aib.edu.au

    This email and any attachments  transmitted with it are confidential and intended  solely for

    the use of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error please

    notify us immediately. Any loss or damage incurred in using this email or its attachments is

    not  our responsibility and  ( save as expressly provided by  law to the contrary )  our entire 

    liability will be limited to re-supplying the material. 

     

     

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> on behalf of "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Reply-To: "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Date: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 at 5:41 PM
    To: "ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG" <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Per and Benson, I understand where you're coming from, but I think you're oversimplifying a complex issue.

     

    As many of you know, long before last week it was extremely difficult, in some cases virtually impossible, to get US visas for scholars from the seven "countries of concern" to which the EO applies. Just last year I spent considerable effort preparing to host a visiting doctoral student who happened to be an Iranian national, only to be told at the last minute that my university would not support the visa application, because all previous attempts had been denied by the State Department. Should AOM have issued a statement condemning this policy for the 2016, 2015, and 2014 annual meetings?

     

    The US, like other countries, has long submitted foreign nationals from various countries to different levels of scrutiny in the visa process, at the airport, and elsewhere. This is obviously discriminatory. Is it appropriate for AOM to take a public position on travel restrictions per se? What about restrictions outside the US? Six of the seven countries in question currently forbid Israeli passport holders from entry, so that an Israeli scholar cannot attend a conference in Iran or Sudan or Libya. This certainly violates the text below bolded by Benson. Should AOM condemn this?

     

    As Anita notes, the AOM has a strict policy preventing officers from expressing their personal views as the views of the organization. Moreover, the AOM has no process in place by which the organization can develop a view on a public policy question. Anita says that there is a proposal under consideration by the Executive Committee to relax these restrictions in "extreme circumstances," but it is still being discussed. Of course, determining what constitutes an extreme circumstance is far from obvious.

     

    In short, I think you're misinterpreting "politics" to mean partisan politics, in which case it seems like the travel ban is not a political issue, but one relating to human rights and freedom of inquiry. As I understand it, the Board interprets politics to mean, "pertaining to government or public affairs," in which case country-specific travel and immigration restrictions do count as political.

     

    Cheers,

    Peter

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Per Davidsson
    Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 4:03 PM
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Fully agree.



    Sent from my iPad


    On 1 Feb 2017, at 21:53, Honig, Benson <bhonig@MCMASTER.CA> wrote:

    I fully agree.

    I have no idea why politics were invoked. It's pretty clear in our code of ethics, as follows:

     

     The Academy of Management is devoted to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of management

    practices. It promotes the use of such knowledge to improve the work lives of individuals, the efficiency and

    effectiveness of organizations, and the well-being of society as a whole. The AOM ensures that attention is paid to the

    rights and well-being of all organizational stakeholders.

     

    AOM members respect and protect civil and human rights and the central importance of freedom of inquiry and

    expression in research, teaching, and publication.

     

    Further:

     

     · Worldview. Academy members have a duty to consider their responsibilities to the world community.

    In their role as educators, members of the Academy can play a vital role in encouraging a broader

    horizon for decision making by viewing issues from a multiplicity of perspectives, including the

    perspectives of those who are the least advantaged.

     

    Thus, protecting human rights and ensuring freedom of inquiry and expression is not a matter of politics – it is a fundamental component of what we do, as stated in our code. Many solid corporations came out more clearly regarding this fiasco. See what the statement from the American Sociological Association looks like:

     

    http://www.asanet.org/news-events/asa-news/statement-american-sociological-association-concerning-new-administrations-recent-and-future

     

    Our leadership should be responsive and accountable in these matters.

     

    Benson Honig Ph.D.

    Teresa Cascioli Chair in Entrepreneurial Leadership

    DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University

    Hamilton Ontario Canada L8S4M4

    Cell: 905-518-1716

     

     

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!

     

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!


  • 4.  [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

    Posted 02-03-2017 12:53
    Dear Andrew,
    Great points.
    But please have into account that Canada is located in America. America is the name of the continent. 
    United States of America is part of America. Same as the over 30 other countries.

    Enviado desde mi iPhone

    El 3/02/2017, a las 12:49 p.m., Smith, Andrew [adasmith] <A.D.Smith@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK> escribió:

    Dear Andrew,

     

    You make some interesting points about Toronto and Canada.

     

    I see from social media that some people think that the AoM should relocate either its conference and/or its headquarters to Canada to hide the fact it is American.  Speaking as a historian of international business, I don't know if that strategy would work. During and between the two world wars, some German firms incorporated in Switzerland and other neutral countries in an attempt to present themselves as non-German firms. This strategy worked for some but not all of these organizations.  In some cases, Western government officials saw through the ruse of incorporating in Zurich or Macau, as did some customers in those nations. (Consumers in that era were typically low information people).   I suspect that the many Middle Eastern and Chinese academics who currently pay to attend the AoM won't be fooled if the mailing address is suddenly changed from Briarcliff Manor to Toronto.  They will realise that the AoM remains an essentially US organization, even if they membership fees are now billed in Canadian dollars and the website has a Canadian IP address. Whether that knowledge would change their willingness to pay to attend the AoM is something I don't know. I suppose it depends on the extent to which they feel that the attitudes of the current US administration towards Muslims, Mexicans, China, etc reflect those of the US population.

     

    The following pieces of business-historical scholarship may or may not provide useful lessons for the AoM leadership at this time.

     

    Casson, M., & da Silva Lopes, T. (2013). Foreign direct investment in high-risk environments: an historical perspective. Business History, 55(3), 375-404.

     

    Jones, G., & Lubinski, C. (2012). Managing Political Risk in Global Business: Beiersdorf 1914–1990. Enterprise and Society, 13(01), 85-119.

     

    Smith, A. (2016). A LBV perspective on political risk management in a multinational bank during the First World War. Multinational Business Review, 24(1), 25-46.

    Andrew   

     

     

    Regards,

     

    Andrew Smith

     

    Andrew Smith

    Director of Studies, International Business

    Senior Lecturer in International Business, University of Liverpool Management School.

    University of Liverpool Management School,  University of Liverpool

    Chatham Street,  Liverpool L69 7ZH,  United Kingdom.

    Office: GE45

    http://pastspeaks.com/about/ 

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Andrew Maxwell
    Sent: 03 February 2017 14:00
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] FW: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    I am upset that an international organization of the standing of the AoM does not boycott the USA in response to this travel ban. There are already many thousands of academics who have signed such a petition, and a move by the AoM would be a real signal that we are not just an academic institution but one that seeks to impact the society in which we all work. 

     

    In the US, even the NBA moved their "All Star Game" - when they wanted to signal their disapproval of intolerant legislation in North Carolina. The AoM should be a leader in this regard - not a follower.  As noted this is not a political issue but one of human rights and academic freedom.

     

    While I know moving the conference is a challenge, given that the President of AoM is based in Toronto, and given recent comments by both the Prime Minister of Canada and the Province and City, why don't we just move the conference there. I know that it would be logistically challenging, but doing the right thing is often difficult.  That does not mean we should not do it.

     

    Surely a big vision and an implementation challenge are the challenges of entrepreneurship.

     

    As an alternative, we could establish Toronto as a second site - and connect every session electronically - giving participants the choice of location. 

     

    There are  politicians in Toronto and Canada who would just love this opportunity to show the importance of tolerance and diversity.

     

    Andrew Maxwell

    Director Bergeron Entrepreneurs in Science and Technology, Lassonde School of Engineering, York University, Toronto.

     

     

     

    On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Roxanne Zolin <Roxanne.Zolin@aib.edu.au> wrote:

    Dear Entrepreneurship Scholars and Practitioners,

     

    IMHO Benson has hit the nail on the head by invoking AOM's own Code of Ethics.

     

    What  other countries or organisations do, or don't do,  is not relevant.

     

    If we do not comply with our own Code of Ethics we lack integrity. AoM should either comply or change the Code of Ethics.

     

    I call on AoM Leadership to explain how their statement complies with AoM's  Code of Ethics.

     

    If AoM leadership does not choose to comply with our Code of Ethics or change it,   should they  resign?

     

    Cheers,

    Roxanne

     

    Dr. Roxanne Zolin

    Professor and Head of Discipline - Entrepreneurship

    Australian Institute of Business

    A 27 Currie Street, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000 W www.aib.edu.au

    T 61-8-7325-1315 M 0433 400 113 E roxanne.zolin@aib.edu.au

    This email and any attachments  transmitted with it are confidential and intended  solely for

    the use of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error please

    notify us immediately. Any loss or damage incurred in using this email or its attachments is

    not  our responsibility and  ( save as expressly provided by  law to the contrary )  our entire 

    liability will be limited to re-supplying the material. 

     

     

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> on behalf of "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Reply-To: "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Date: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 at 5:41 PM
    To: "ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG" <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Per and Benson, I understand where you're coming from, but I think you're oversimplifying a complex issue.

     

    As many of you know, long before last week it was extremely difficult, in some cases virtually impossible, to get US visas for scholars from the seven "countries of concern" to which the EO applies. Just last year I spent considerable effort preparing to host a visiting doctoral student who happened to be an Iranian national, only to be told at the last minute that my university would not support the visa application, because all previous attempts had been denied by the State Department. Should AOM have issued a statement condemning this policy for the 2016, 2015, and 2014 annual meetings?

     

    The US, like other countries, has long submitted foreign nationals from various countries to different levels of scrutiny in the visa process, at the airport, and elsewhere. This is obviously discriminatory. Is it appropriate for AOM to take a public position on travel restrictions per se? What about restrictions outside the US? Six of the seven countries in question currently forbid Israeli passport holders from entry, so that an Israeli scholar cannot attend a conference in Iran or Sudan or Libya. This certainly violates the text below bolded by Benson. Should AOM condemn this?

     

    As Anita notes, the AOM has a strict policy preventing officers from expressing their personal views as the views of the organization. Moreover, the AOM has no process in place by which the organization can develop a view on a public policy question. Anita says that there is a proposal under consideration by the Executive Committee to relax these restrictions in "extreme circumstances," but it is still being discussed. Of course, determining what constitutes an extreme circumstance is far from obvious.

     

    In short, I think you're misinterpreting "politics" to mean partisan politics, in which case it seems like the travel ban is not a political issue, but one relating to human rights and freedom of inquiry. As I understand it, the Board interprets politics to mean, "pertaining to government or public affairs," in which case country-specific travel and immigration restrictions do count as political.

     

    Cheers,

    Peter

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Per Davidsson
    Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 4:03 PM
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Fully agree.



    Sent from my iPad


    On 1 Feb 2017, at 21:53, Honig, Benson <bhonig@MCMASTER.CA> wrote:

    I fully agree.

    I have no idea why politics were invoked. It's pretty clear in our code of ethics, as follows:

     

     The Academy of Management is devoted to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of management

    practices. It promotes the use of such knowledge to improve the work lives of individuals, the efficiency and

    effectiveness of organizations, and the well-being of society as a whole. The AOM ensures that attention is paid to the

    rights and well-being of all organizational stakeholders.

     

    AOM members respect and protect civil and human rights and the central importance of freedom of inquiry and

    expression in research, teaching, and publication.

     

    Further:

     

     · Worldview. Academy members have a duty to consider their responsibilities to the world community.

    In their role as educators, members of the Academy can play a vital role in encouraging a broader

    horizon for decision making by viewing issues from a multiplicity of perspectives, including the

    perspectives of those who are the least advantaged.

     

    Thus, protecting human rights and ensuring freedom of inquiry and expression is not a matter of politics – it is a fundamental component of what we do, as stated in our code. Many solid corporations came out more clearly regarding this fiasco. See what the statement from the American Sociological Association looks like:

     

    http://www.asanet.org/news-events/asa-news/statement-american-sociological-association-concerning-new-administrations-recent-and-future

     

    Our leadership should be responsive and accountable in these matters.

     

    Benson Honig Ph.D.

    Teresa Cascioli Chair in Entrepreneurial Leadership

    DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University

    Hamilton Ontario Canada L8S4M4

    Cell: 905-518-1716

     

     

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!

     

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO! La información contenida en este correo electrónico está dirigida únicamente a su destinatario y puede contener información confidencial, material privilegiado o información protegida por derecho de autor. Está prohibida cualquier copia, utilización, indebida retención, modificación, difusión, distribución o reproducción total o parcial. Si usted recibe este mensaje por error, por favor contacte al remitente y elimínelo. La información aquí contenida es responsabilidad exclusiva de su remitente por lo tanto la Universidad EAFIT no se hace responsable de lo que el mensaje contenga. The information contained in this email is addressed to its recipient only and may contain confidential information, privileged material or information protected by copyright. Its prohibited any copy, use, improper retention, modification, dissemination, distribution or total or partial reproduction. If you receive this message by error, please contact the sender and delete it. The information contained herein is the sole responsibility of the sender therefore Universidad EAFIT is not responsible for what the message contains.
    La información contenida en este correo electrónico está dirigida únicamente a su destinatario y puede contener información confidencial, material privilegiado o información protegida por derecho de autor. Está prohibida cualquier copia, utilización, indebida retención, modificación, difusión, distribución o reproducción total o parcial. Si usted recibe este mensaje por error, por favor contacte al remitente y elimínelo. La información aquí contenida es responsabilidad exclusiva de su remitente por lo tanto la Universidad EAFIT no se hace responsable de lo que el mensaje contenga. The information contained in this email is addressed to its recipient only and may contain confidential information, privileged material or information protected by copyright. Its prohibited any copy, use, improper retention, modification, dissemination, distribution or total or partial reproduction. If you receive this message by error, please contact the sender and delete it. The information contained herein is the sole responsibility of the sender therefore Universidad EAFIT is not responsible for what the message contains. ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!


  • 5.  [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

    Posted 02-03-2017 13:28
    Andrew, to follow up my response to Benson: The AOM has about 20,000 members, roughly half of whom are in the US. Presumably that includes no small number of Trump voters, some of whom may support the temporary travel ban. 

    I suspect that in general, there is far more viewpoint diversity in the AOM than in most other academic organizations. I would imagine there are many members who share your and others' view that the EO violates AOM's code of ethics and that the organization should make a strong statement against it (and consider moving or canceling the conference). Others may approve the EO, approve some parts and not others, or disapprove but think the AOM should not make a public statement. Without taking a poll, how do we know? 

    My point has been about process, not outcome. On what issues should the AOM take a public position, and what should that position be? Should the officers have the discretion to do this on a case-by-case basis? Should we poll the membership to find out and, if so, how often? As I suggested before, the line between "political" and "non-political" is not always clear. What you are suggesting establishes a very strong precedent. 

    Peter

    Sent: February 3, 2017 8:19 AM
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] FW: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

    I am upset that an international organization of the standing of the AoM does not boycott the USA in response to this travel ban. There are already many thousands of academics who have signed such a petition, and a move by the AoM would be a real signal that we are not just an academic institution but one that seeks to impact the society in which we all work. 

    In the US, even the NBA moved their "All Star Game" - when they wanted to signal their disapproval of intolerant legislation in North Carolina. The AoM should be a leader in this regard - not a follower.  As noted this is not a political issue but one of human rights and academic freedom.

    While I know moving the conference is a challenge, given that the President of AoM is based in Toronto, and given recent comments by both the Prime Minister of Canada and the Province and City, why don't we just move the conference there. I know that it would be logistically challenging, but doing the right thing is often difficult.  That does not mean we should not do it.

    Surely a big vision and an implementation challenge are the challenges of entrepreneurship.

    As an alternative, we could establish Toronto as a second site - and connect every session electronically - giving participants the choice of location. 

    There are  politicians in Toronto and Canada who would just love this opportunity to show the importance of tolerance and diversity.

    Andrew Maxwell
    Director Bergeron Entrepreneurs in Science and Technology, Lassonde School of Engineering, York University, Toronto.



    On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Roxanne Zolin <Roxanne.Zolin@aib.edu.au> wrote:

    Dear Entrepreneurship Scholars and Practitioners,

     

    IMHO Benson has hit the nail on the head by invoking AOM's own Code of Ethics.

     

    What  other countries or organisations do, or don't do,  is not relevant.

     

    If we do not comply with our own Code of Ethics we lack integrity. AoM should either comply or change the Code of Ethics.

     

    I call on AoM Leadership to explain how their statement complies with AoM's  Code of Ethics.

     

    If AoM leadership does not choose to comply with our Code of Ethics or change it,   should they  resign?

     

    Cheers,

    Roxanne

     

    Dr. Roxanne Zolin

    Professor and Head of Discipline - Entrepreneurship

    Australian Institute of Business

    A 27 Currie Street, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000 W www.aib.edu.au

    T 61-8-7325-1315 M 0433 400 113 E roxanne.zolin@aib.edu.au

    This email and any attachments  transmitted with it are confidential and intended  solely for

    the use of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error please

    notify us immediately. Any loss or damage incurred in using this email or its attachments is

    not  our responsibility and  ( save as expressly provided by  law to the contrary )  our entire 

    liability will be limited to re-supplying the material. 

     

     

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> on behalf of "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Reply-To: "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Date: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 at 5:41 PM
    To: "ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG" <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Per and Benson, I understand where you're coming from, but I think you're oversimplifying a complex issue.

     

    As many of you know, long before last week it was extremely difficult, in some cases virtually impossible, to get US visas for scholars from the seven "countries of concern" to which the EO applies. Just last year I spent considerable effort preparing to host a visiting doctoral student who happened to be an Iranian national, only to be told at the last minute that my university would not support the visa application, because all previous attempts had been denied by the State Department. Should AOM have issued a statement condemning this policy for the 2016, 2015, and 2014 annual meetings?

     

    The US, like other countries, has long submitted foreign nationals from various countries to different levels of scrutiny in the visa process, at the airport, and elsewhere. This is obviously discriminatory. Is it appropriate for AOM to take a public position on travel restrictions per se? What about restrictions outside the US? Six of the seven countries in question currently forbid Israeli passport holders from entry, so that an Israeli scholar cannot attend a conference in Iran or Sudan or Libya. This certainly violates the text below bolded by Benson. Should AOM condemn this?

     

    As Anita notes, the AOM has a strict policy preventing officers from expressing their personal views as the views of the organization. Moreover, the AOM has no process in place by which the organization can develop a view on a public policy question. Anita says that there is a proposal under consideration by the Executive Committee to relax these restrictions in "extreme circumstances," but it is still being discussed. Of course, determining what constitutes an extreme circumstance is far from obvious.

     

    In short, I think you're misinterpreting "politics" to mean partisan politics, in which case it seems like the travel ban is not a political issue, but one relating to human rights and freedom of inquiry. As I understand it, the Board interprets politics to mean, "pertaining to government or public affairs," in which case country-specific travel and immigration restrictions do count as political.

     

    Cheers,

    Peter

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Per Davidsson
    Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 4:03 PM
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Fully agree.



    Sent from my iPad


    On 1 Feb 2017, at 21:53, Honig, Benson <bhonig@MCMASTER.CA> wrote:

    I fully agree.

    I have no idea why politics were invoked. It's pretty clear in our code of ethics, as follows:

     

     The Academy of Management is devoted to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of management

    practices. It promotes the use of such knowledge to improve the work lives of individuals, the efficiency and

    effectiveness of organizations, and the well-being of society as a whole. The AOM ensures that attention is paid to the

    rights and well-being of all organizational stakeholders.

     

    AOM members respect and protect civil and human rights and the central importance of freedom of inquiry and

    expression in research, teaching, and publication.

     

    Further:

     

     · Worldview. Academy members have a duty to consider their responsibilities to the world community.

    In their role as educators, members of the Academy can play a vital role in encouraging a broader

    horizon for decision making by viewing issues from a multiplicity of perspectives, including the

    perspectives of those who are the least advantaged.

     

    Thus, protecting human rights and ensuring freedom of inquiry and expression is not a matter of politics – it is a fundamental component of what we do, as stated in our code. Many solid corporations came out more clearly regarding this fiasco. See what the statement from the American Sociological Association looks like:

     

    http://www.asanet.org/news-events/asa-news/statement-american-sociological-association-concerning-new-administrations-recent-and-future

     

    Our leadership should be responsive and accountable in these matters.

     

    Benson Honig Ph.D.

    Teresa Cascioli Chair in Entrepreneurial Leadership

    DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University

    Hamilton Ontario Canada L8S4M4

    Cell: 905-518-1716

     

     

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!
    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!


  • 6.  [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

    Posted 02-03-2017 17:03
    Human rights and non-discrimination are not political issues but fundamental human rights which are also supernationally guaranteed and obviously part of the US Constitution.

    It seems to me that as always when management scholars need to stand up after having written tons of articles about Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Citizenship or how Management can resolve great challenges in the world, they simply do not.

    Christian




    ------------------------------------------------------
    Christian Lechner
    Free University of Bolzano
    School of Economics and Management
    Universitätsplatz 1 - piazza Università, 1
    Bozen-Bolzano
    Room: 
    SER E301
    Phone: 
    +39 0471 013200

    On 3 Feb 2017, at 19:28, Klein, Peter G. <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU> wrote:

    Andrew, to follow up my response to Benson: The AOM has about 20,000 members, roughly half of whom are in the US. Presumably that includes no small number of Trump voters, some of whom may support the temporary travel ban. 

    I suspect that in general, there is far more viewpoint diversity in the AOM than in most other academic organizations. I would imagine there are many members who share your and others' view that the EO violates AOM's code of ethics and that the organization should make a strong statement against it (and consider moving or canceling the conference). Others may approve the EO, approve some parts and not others, or disapprove but think the AOM should not make a public statement. Without taking a poll, how do we know? 

    My point has been about process, not outcome. On what issues should the AOM take a public position, and what should that position be? Should the officers have the discretion to do this on a case-by-case basis? Should we poll the membership to find out and, if so, how often? As I suggested before, the line between "political" and "non-political" is not always clear. What you are suggesting establishes a very strong precedent. 

    Peter

    Sent: February 3, 2017 8:19 AM
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] FW: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

    I am upset that an international organization of the standing of the AoM does not boycott the USA in response to this travel ban. There are already many thousands of academics who have signed such a petition, and a move by the AoM would be a real signal that we are not just an academic institution but one that seeks to impact the society in which we all work. 

    In the US, even the NBA moved their "All Star Game" - when they wanted to signal their disapproval of intolerant legislation in North Carolina. The AoM should be a leader in this regard - not a follower.  As noted this is not a political issue but one of human rights and academic freedom.

    While I know moving the conference is a challenge, given that the President of AoM is based in Toronto, and given recent comments by both the Prime Minister of Canada and the Province and City, why don't we just move the conference there. I know that it would be logistically challenging, but doing the right thing is often difficult.  That does not mean we should not do it.

    Surely a big vision and an implementation challenge are the challenges of entrepreneurship.

    As an alternative, we could establish Toronto as a second site - and connect every session electronically - giving participants the choice of location. 

    There are  politicians in Toronto and Canada who would just love this opportunity to show the importance of tolerance and diversity.

    Andrew Maxwell
    Director Bergeron Entrepreneurs in Science and Technology, Lassonde School of Engineering, York University, Toronto.



    On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Roxanne Zolin <Roxanne.Zolin@aib.edu.au> wrote:

    Dear Entrepreneurship Scholars and Practitioners,

     

    IMHO Benson has hit the nail on the head by invoking AOM's own Code of Ethics.

     

    What  other countries or organisations do, or don't do,  is not relevant.

     

    If we do not comply with our own Code of Ethics we lack integrity. AoM should either comply or change the Code of Ethics.

     

    I call on AoM Leadership to explain how their statement complies with AoM's  Code of Ethics.

     

    If AoM leadership does not choose to comply with our Code of Ethics or change it,   should they  resign?

     

    Cheers,

    Roxanne

     

    Dr. Roxanne Zolin

    Professor and Head of Discipline - Entrepreneurship

    Australian Institute of Business

    A 27 Currie Street, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000 W www.aib.edu.au

    T 61-8-7325-1315 M 0433 400 113 E roxanne.zolin@aib.edu.au

    This email and any attachments  transmitted with it are confidential and intended  solely for

    the use of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error please

    notify us immediately. Any loss or damage incurred in using this email or its attachments is

    not  our responsibility and  ( save as expressly provided by  law to the contrary )  our entire 

    liability will be limited to re-supplying the material. 

     

     

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> on behalf of "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Reply-To: "Klein, Peter G." <Peter_Klein@BAYLOR.EDU>
    Date: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 at 5:41 PM
    To: "ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG" <ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Per and Benson, I understand where you're coming from, but I think you're oversimplifying a complex issue.

     

    As many of you know, long before last week it was extremely difficult, in some cases virtually impossible, to get US visas for scholars from the seven "countries of concern" to which the EO applies. Just last year I spent considerable effort preparing to host a visiting doctoral student who happened to be an Iranian national, only to be told at the last minute that my university would not support the visa application, because all previous attempts had been denied by the State Department. Should AOM have issued a statement condemning this policy for the 2016, 2015, and 2014 annual meetings?

     

    The US, like other countries, has long submitted foreign nationals from various countries to different levels of scrutiny in the visa process, at the airport, and elsewhere. This is obviously discriminatory. Is it appropriate for AOM to take a public position on travel restrictions per se? What about restrictions outside the US? Six of the seven countries in question currently forbid Israeli passport holders from entry, so that an Israeli scholar cannot attend a conference in Iran or Sudan or Libya. This certainly violates the text below bolded by Benson. Should AOM condemn this?

     

    As Anita notes, the AOM has a strict policy preventing officers from expressing their personal views as the views of the organization. Moreover, the AOM has no process in place by which the organization can develop a view on a public policy question. Anita says that there is a proposal under consideration by the Executive Committee to relax these restrictions in "extreme circumstances," but it is still being discussed. Of course, determining what constitutes an extreme circumstance is far from obvious.

     

    In short, I think you're misinterpreting "politics" to mean partisan politics, in which case it seems like the travel ban is not a political issue, but one relating to human rights and freedom of inquiry. As I understand it, the Board interprets politics to mean, "pertaining to government or public affairs," in which case country-specific travel and immigration restrictions do count as political.

     

    Cheers,

    Peter

     

     

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Per Davidsson
    Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 4:03 PM
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Critical Management Studies seems to be alone in responding...

     

    Fully agree.



    Sent from my iPad


    On 1 Feb 2017, at 21:53, Honig, Benson <bhonig@MCMASTER.CA> wrote:

    I fully agree.

    I have no idea why politics were invoked. It's pretty clear in our code of ethics, as follows:

     

     The Academy of Management is devoted to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of management

    practices. It promotes the use of such knowledge to improve the work lives of individuals, the efficiency and

    effectiveness of organizations, and the well-being of society as a whole. The AOM ensures that attention is paid to the

    rights and well-being of all organizational stakeholders.

     

    AOM members respect and protect civil and human rights and the central importance of freedom of inquiry and

    expression in research, teaching, and publication.

     

    Further:

     

     · Worldview. Academy members have a duty to consider their responsibilities to the world community.

    In their role as educators, members of the Academy can play a vital role in encouraging a broader

    horizon for decision making by viewing issues from a multiplicity of perspectives, including the

    perspectives of those who are the least advantaged.

     

    Thus, protecting human rights and ensuring freedom of inquiry and expression is not a matter of politics – it is a fundamental component of what we do, as stated in our code. Many solid corporations came out more clearly regarding this fiasco. See what the statement from the American Sociological Association looks like:

     

    http://www.asanet.org/news-events/asa-news/statement-american-sociological-association-concerning-new-administrations-recent-and-future

     

    Our leadership should be responsive and accountable in these matters.

     

    Benson Honig Ph.D.

    Teresa Cascioli Chair in Entrepreneurial Leadership

    DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University

    Hamilton Ontario Canada L8S4M4

    Cell: 905-518-1716

     

     

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!
    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!

    ************************************** 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 Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!