Search results

Transnational migration has become a defining feature of many societies across the globe. This paper focuses on contributions to diversity theorizing and research available from “superdiversity”, an analytic framework derived from transnational migration studies. “Superdiversity” speaks to the novel social transformations taking place globally and provides new opportunities, albeit with critique, for conceptualizing and studying people, difference and inclusion. The purpose of this paper is to provide innovative ways to rethink hallmark concepts of diversity scholarship by offering new insights about the role of nation-states, the concept of difference and inclusion in the midst of mobility.

The paper relies upon transnational migration studies as an emergent field of inquiry about societal level changes brought upon by the ongoing movement of people. The social, cultural and political transformations growing out of transnational migration are used to theorize new directions for diversity research in the context of management and organization studies. By relying on “superdiversity” and its mobility-based ontology, epistemology and methodology, the paper proposes new ways to think about and carry out research on difference and inclusion.

Deploying the analytic framework of “superdiversity,” the paper offers “belonging” as the new conversation on inclusion and proposes mobile methods as a means to study mobile subjects/objects. In addition, it discusses how the ongoing transformative societal changes by way of transnational migration impact the ways in which the author theorizes and carry out diversity research. Questions and concerns around ethics, (in)equality and representation are considered vital to future research in/around diversity.

Extensive changes in societies emerging out of ongoing encounters between/among different kinds of people have taken shape by way of transnational migration. As a result, emergent and novel notions of difference have been forged in a transnational manner across social fields. By examining these transformations, the paper provides new directions and challenges for diversity scholarship in the context of rising societal tensions and rhetoric around difference and “belonging” in nation-states. It also provides alternative considerations for understanding and theorizing inclusion in diversity research.

The purpose of this paper is to examine new directions for diversity scholarship in the context of future of work or advanced technological shifts that are impacting organizations and society. It proposes that both new opportunities and challenges are likely to emerge for individuals and offers considerations around ethics, inequalities and global dimensions as relevant conversations within this domain.

The paper provides an overview of new technological advances in the domains of artificial intelligence, automation and the gig economy. It then layers considerations related to diversity within this context, focusing on issues of relevance to mainstream, critical and transnational traditions within diversity scholarship.

It is likely that technological shifts will impact several domains of diversity scholarship including how we define “diversity,” and the value and appropriateness of using advanced technologies to replace certain jobs that are predominantly held by underrepresented groups. Furthermore, the paper outlines ways in which bias, ethical considerations and emergent digital inequalities will become important conversations within diversity research in the context of future of work.

This paper brings together diversity scholarship and future of work conversations in assessing the ways such research and trends will intersect and provides insights about future directions that diversity-focused research should take to address and understand the consequences of rapid technological advances for inclusion.

This paper considers the phenomenon of “opting out” from an intersectional lens, bringing in hitherto undertheorized dimensions of gender, race and power into the conversation related to why and how some women of color may make the “choice” to leave an organization.

Through a single case study approach, our research elucidates how identity-connected experiences unconnected to work/life balance constraints and tensions caused one immigrant woman of color to leave the workplace. We expand upon the current use of intersectionality in management and organization studies by applying it as a lens to bring into consideration power relations in organizations and structural inequality as the context for understanding why and how some women of color may leave their places of employment.

Based on our in-depth case study, we demonstrate that microaggressions, power relations, and structural inequities contribute to some women of color opting out.

This paper is of value to scholars interested in intersectionality framework applications.

Academic inquiry into entrepreneurial phenomena has had a rich history over several decades and continues to evolve. This editorial draws attention to the classics: seminal articles that make profound contributions to the development of an academic field in entrepreneurship studies. We focus on the formative years of entrepreneurship research, specifically the 1970s and 1980s, to identify classics using a key informant approach that surveys members of the journal editorial board. Each nominated classic is introduced and discussed by an editorial board member, with particular focus on research opportunities that may be pursued going forward. Analyzing classics allows for the recognition of substantive advances in entrepreneurship research and provides an opportunity to delve into the academic progress achieved in understanding entrepreneurial phenomena.

Guided by feminist perspectives, we critique existing approaches to the study of womenʼs entrepreneurship on epistemological grounds and suggest that the entrepreneurship field needs to recognize gendered assumptions in theorizing. Deploying a feminist framework, we suggest that understanding the “gender gap” in entrepreneurship requires focus on institutional and structural barriers women entrepreneurs face. Existing studies of women entrepreneurs often compare women with men without considering how gender and gender relations impact the very concepts and ideas of entrepreneurship. We propose, therefore, a conceptualization of entrepreneurship that illuminates gender bias and calls attention to the interrelated individual, institutional, and structural barriers in the entrepreneurial process that arrive out of societal and cultural gender norms. Through praxis or engaged practice, we redirect scholarship in the entrepreneurship field, while proposing ways that can promote gender equality in entrepreneurial activities. In all, our gender integrative conceptualization of entrepreneurship contributes to the entrepreneurship field by recognizing and addressing a more expansive realm of influential factors within the entrepreneurial ecosystem that have previously been researched separately.

The authors bring diverse feminist perspectives to bear on social entrepreneurship research and practice to challenge existing assumptions and approaches while providing new directions for research at the intersections of gender, social and commercial entrepreneurship.

The authors apply liberal feminist, socialist feminist and transnational/post-colonial feminist perspectives to critically examine issues of gender in the field of social entrepreneurship.

By way of three distinct feminist lenses, the analyses suggest that the social entrepreneurship field does not recognize gender as an organizing principle in society. Further to this, a focus on women within this field replicates problematic gendered assumptions underlying the field of women’s entrepreneurship research.

The arguments and suggestions provide a critical gender perspective to inform the strategies and programmes adopted by practitioners and the types of research questions entrepreneurship scholars ask.

The authors redirect the conversation away from limited status quo approaches towards the explicit and implicit aim of social entrepreneurship and women’s entrepreneurship: that is, economic and social equality for women across the globe.

The authors explicitly adopt a cultural, institutional and transnational analysis to interrogate the intersection of gender and social entrepreneurship.

The Guest Editors’ intent with this special issue is to tell tales of the field and beyond, but all with the serious end of rendering visible the largely invisible. This paper aims to introduce the articles forming the special issue, as well as reviewing extant work that foregrounds the hidden stories and uncertainties of doing qualitative research.

The authors advance their arguments through a literature review approach, reflecting on the “state of the field” with regard to doing research and offering new directions on reflexivity as an ethical consideration for conducting qualitative research.

Far from consigning the mess entailed in doing qualitative research to the margins, there is much to be learned from, and considerable value in, a more thoughtful engagement with the dilemmas we face in the field and beyond, one that shows the worth of what we are highlighting to both enrich research practice itself and contribute to improving the quality of what we produce.

This paper turns the spotlight onto the messiness and storywork aspects of conducting research, which are all too often hidden from view, to promote the kinds of dialogues necessary for scholars to share their fieldwork stories as research, rather than means to a publication end.

While entrepreneurship may be driven by personal interests and lifestyle choices, entrepreneurial actions are not only economically driven opportunity-searching processes but also enactments of social transformation that may or may not lead to socioeconomic benefits. We advance that exploring these entrepreneurial processes can inform a theory of the firm that may explain how socioeconomic processes shape the socioeconomic environment of communities while serving individuals. This article discusses several understandings of the firm, as theorized in extant literature. Guided by these different conceptualizations, we present a case study of an artist and artisan cluster in Western Massachusetts to demonstrate various understandings of entrepreneurial processes. By way of conclusion, we develop the idea of the firm as a geographically embedded relational understanding aiding entrepreneurs to achieve personal goals while coconstructing their local environment.

The purpose of this paper is to examine identity formation and networking practices relevant for high-technology entrepreneuring or the enactment of entrepreneurship in Silicon Valley by Turkish business people.

Guided by postcolonial feminist frameworks, the author conducted a combination of ethnographic and auto-ethnographic fieldwork at high-technology conferences in Silicon Valley by focussing on talk and text as relevant for understanding entrepreneuring. Through a reflexive stance, the author analyzed observations, conversations, and experiences inclusive of her own positionality during the research process as they related to entrepreneurial identity formation and networking.

During business networking conferences taking place among Turkish business people in Silicon Valley, women and older males became marginalized through the emergence of a hegemonic masculinity associated with young Turkish male entrepreneurs. In addition, local context impacted whether and how actors engaged in practices that produced marginalization and resistance simultaneously.

The research is of value for scholars interested in understanding how identity formation and networking in high-technology entrepreneuring take place through gendered practices and ideas. Scholars interested in deploying postcolonial feminist perspectives will also benefit by understanding how key analytic tools and research methods from these lenses can be used for conducting fieldwork in other contexts.