1

Submission #XXXXXPDW proposal

Working on the Dark Side: A Paper Development Workshop for New Research in Organizational Misconduct

OrganizersCelia Moore, London Business SchoolRegents Park, London NW1 4SA, United KingdomTel.: 44 20 7000 8931; email: cmoore@london.edu

Jo-Ellen Pozner, Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley545 Student Services Building, #1900, Berkeley, CA, 94705Tel.: (510) 643 1413; email: pozner@haas.berkeley.edu

Andrew von Nordenflycht, Beedie School of Business, Simon Fraser University500 Granville Street, Vancouver, BC V6C 1W6, CanadaTel.: 778-782-2236; email: vonetc@sfu.ca

Senior ScholarsBlake Ashforth, Arizona State UniversityArt Brief, University of UtahPhil Bromiley, University of California IrvineDon Palmer, University of California Davis

Abstract This PDW brings together scholars to discuss and develop working papers broadly related to organizational misconduct, corruption, and deviance. This session will be a practical one, geared toward hands-on development of participants’ working papers. We have invited a team of senior scholars who have successfully published papers on misconduct and related topics in top management journals. We will pair these scholars with PDW participants interested in developing their working papers towards publication. PDW applicants will submit their working papers or detailed outlines to the organizers, including a one-page abstract, by June 1.

Primary SponsorOrganizational Management and Theory Division (OMT)

2

Other divisions to which the session would be of interestBusiness Policy and Strategy (BPS)Organizational Behavior (OB)Social Issues in Management (SIM)

ProposalWe would like to propose a Professional Development Workshop that brings together scholars to discuss and develop working papers broadly related to organizational misconduct, corruption, and deviance.

Although our general assumption as organizational scholars is that the objects of our study operate above board and honestly, repeated experience shows that this is not the case. A recent study, in fact, indicates that the business press reported on misconduct at 40% of the Fortune 100 between 2000 and 2005 (Clement 2006). Misconduct must therefore be considered a normative aspect of organizational life, which generates real consequences.

Whereas misconduct has received increased attention of late (see the July 2008 special issue of AMR), this area of inquiry has not yet emerged as a cohesive field. This is due in part to the number of diverse labels given to organizational misconduct (such as fraud, corruption, misbehavior, deviance, illegality, etc.), and is exacerbated by the fact that, to date, empirical research on these related phenomena has been sporadic. However, the current economic environment and the persistence of corporate scandals are both working to increase momentum for academics to take up misconduct as a critical and coherent area of inquiry.

Since so many phenomena are applicable to organizational misconduct, such work necessarily entails the application of a broad range of methodologies. Creative approaches to data collection (in no small part due to the difficulty of accessing data on issues that organizations would prefer remain hidden) are also often required. One of the goals of this PDW, therefore, is to bring together scholars from a variety of backgrounds and theoretical traditions to share ideas and help each other develop their work toward publication.

Additionally, since empirical attention on organizational misconduct is relatively new, scholars have not had many opportunities to meet and share their work and research stories. A second goal of this PDW, then, would be to help build a community of scholars currently working on issues relating to organizational misconduct and set a foundation from which new collaborations might develop.

3

Participant application procedure

Participants will be required to submit drafts of papers to the organizers by June 1. In certain circumstances, very detailed outlines will be acceptable. The goal will be to pair about three papers/sets of collaborators to each senior mentor. The organizers will use their discretion to determine the applicability of papers for the symposium, with a view to selecting papers that focus most directly on misconduct at the organizational level (for example, experimental work at the individual level of analysis is likely not appropriate).

The organizers will assign selected papers to senior scholars, as appropriate, who will act as mentors on the project. Each mentor will receive an outline or working paper from no more than three participants and will prepare comments in advance of the AoM meetings. Participants will also receive the full papers of the other projects that have been paired with the same mentor, to encourage a fuller discussion of each project. To facilitate discussion, abstracts of all accepted papers will also be circulated among the full group of participants in advance of the session to encourage peer mentoring and in-depth discussion.

The PDW will be organized around roundtable discussions. After a brief introduction, the mentors will provide targeted feedback to small groups of PDW participants whose papers they have reviewed. Feedback will be given in small groups, so that all participants at each table can both provide feedback and learn from the other works in progress. To close the session, participants will have the opportunity to present a short synopsis of their papers and ideas to the full group, with the goal of sharing new ideas and encouraging potential collaboration.

We anticipate a session of no more than 10-15 working papers. We have already recruited a strong roster of senior scholars working in this area, including Blake Ashforth, Art Brief, Phil Bromiley, and Don Palmer, to facilitate the group.

Two of the three organizers successfully proposed and organized a similar PDW session in 2009. Fifteen papers were accepted and workshopped at the session, and some of these papers have since been published in top tier journals (for example, Marcel & Cowen, 2011). In addition, the authors organized a well-reviewed, well-attended symposium on a similar topic at the 2011 AoM meetings in San Antonio. We believe that this PDW will help junior scholars more effectively publish on this critical topic in the top journals.

4

LogisticsRoom setup: Because this is a working paper session, the ideal room setup would entail approximately 4 small round tables (depending on participation) to seat 6 to 8 people each, , to facilitate small group discussion. A whiteboard for each table, if available, would be extremely helpful. In addition, we would like to request that a small podium be set up at the front of the room.

Timeframe We propose a three-hour session to be organized as follows:

Introduction (20 minutes) Working paper session (120 minutes) Concluding remarks and wrap-up (40 minutes)

Marcel, J., & Cowen, A. (2011). Damaged goods: The board’s decision to dismiss reputationally-compromised directors. Academy of Management Journal.

I have received signed statements from all intended participants agreeing to participate for the entire workshop, AND that these participants are not in violation of the Rule of Three + Three.