https://www.mdu.se/

To mark the 40th anniversary of the Scandinavian Journal of Management, we explore its becoming in a context where internationalism is used to evidence claims about journal quality. Through an analysis of editorial voices, we show how internationalism positions journals as ‘a view from nowhere’, making them party to a ‘God trick’. Acknowledging the situated nature of all knowledge instead provides a means of disturbing geographies of power that shape how knowledge is created, performed and transformed in journals and expanding the range of others that ‘management’ represents. We trace the beginnings of a feminist new materialist theoretical shift in the journal, which we argue is crucial in providing hope regarding what management can do and engaging with our ethical response-abilities as knowers.

This book elaborates on the concept of response-ability. Although the notion is becoming popular in organization and management studies to talk about the ethical dimension of academic practices and research work, it has been formulated outside this discipline with Joan Tronto, Donna Haraway, Vinciane Despret, and Karen Barad as key authors. This book honors the foundational contribution of these scholars and their legacy. This book adopts a feminist posthumanist definition of response-ability as an iterative and emergent process that unfolds within embodied relations and through academic practices. A response-able academic practice intertwines personal reflexivity and critical analysis of the politics underlying our ways of knowing and doing in academia. Furthermore, a response-able approach requires us, as researchers, to pay attention to the consequences of our research practices through which multiple encounters are made possible (or impossible). By offering empirical examples and theoretical elaborations, this book invites students, researchers, and practitioners to find ways of embodying response-ability when generating knowledge. With the exception of Chapter 1, no part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Chapter 1 of this book is freely available as a downloadable Open Access PDF at https://www.taylorfrancis.com under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license. Any third party material in this book is not included in the OA Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. Please direct any permissions enquiries to the original rightsholder.

In this chapter, we introduce and define the concept of response-ability through the cartographic lens of feminist posthumanism to encourage a renewal of subjectivities and practices in management and organization studies (MOS). The origins of the concept lie in fields outside MOS, with Joan Tronto, Donna Haraway, Vinciane Despret, and Karen Barad as key figures in its development. Response-ability as a concept gained traction in MOS through theoretical exploration and onto-epistemological experimentation. In this chapter, after the cartographic reading of the concept and before presenting the structure of the book, we elaborate on what response-able academic practices are and what their ethics of engagement entail. These two subjects are key to appreciating the book overall.

Available Open Access under CC-BY-NC-ND licence. Drawing on affect theory and research on academic capitalism, this book examines the contemporary crisis of universities. With 11 international and comparative case studies, it offers a unique exploration of the contemporary role of affect in academic labour and the organisation of scholarship and explores diverse features of contemporary academic life, from the coloniality of academic capitalism to performance management and the experience of being performance-managed.

In this chapter, by metaphorically extending the meaning of the word "manspreading", on one hand we describe how the term "feminist" in "new feminist materialism" has been placed "under erasure". On the other hand, we show how the feminism has been always already all set for disturbing the discursive male order of new materialism. We foreground three main feminist ethico-onto-epistemological assumptions: decentering the subject, (re)materializing all bodies; intra-acting responsibly. Correspondingly, we articulate three alternative forms of politics - a politics of location, a politics of re-materialization, and an ethical politics of response-ability - which, we deem, embody the generative and affirmative posture of new feminist materialism and pave the way for a different knowledge production practice in Management and Organization Studies.

This chapter provides an overview of the book while introducing the main concepts of a posthumanist epistemology of practice theory. In particular, the Introduction articulates the framework of the entire book which is aimed at raising a series of radical epistemological questions about what research practices entail, how such practices—in their variety—generate knowledge, and what are the ethico-onto-epistemological implications of decentering the human beings as the main actors of the research agencement.

Demographic changes associated with contemporary society are often framed as a 'care crisis' where the aging population is portrayed as threatening the financial security and the future of younger generations. To rationally intervene in these issues, welfare states - particularly in Nordic countries - increasingly rely on digital technology as a 'remedy' and 'promise' of more effective and efficient public governance operating through technopolitical care practices and logics. Technological solutions such as AI, algorithms, apps and robotics are incorporated into elderly care and aligned with care work where the digitization of processes accompanies an intensification of datafication of elderly welfare care. This analysis is aimed at identifying and discussing how the welfare state is transformed through a practice of classification and its logic of standardization, a practice of taskification grounded on time-paced service logic, and a practice of categorization relying on a logic of prioritization. These three practices and logics embody tensions emerging where caring intersects with data sourcing, that is, where the datafication of elderly welfare care lies. Feminist posthumanism allows approaching them by resisting both techno-utopian and techno-dystopian claims about the datafication of elderly welfare care.