Item 1:
Call for contributions: International Journal of Professional Management

During the last two decades an increasing number of business and business schools have turned to art-based techniques and aesthetics in order to respond to globalisation, increasing complexity, major competition and the need to make sense of a changing world (Adler, 2006). From the pioneer work of Antonio Strati (1999), going through the edited volume by Linstead and Höpfl (2000), the last decade has seen the development of many alternatives, bringing the arts and aesthetic enquiry into management and the understanding of organisations. For instance, managers build 3-D representations of their organisational structures; political leaders and CEOs are being exposed to theatre and myth-drama skills to develop their sustainable leadership (Olivier, 2009; Augustine and Adleman, 1999; Corrigan, 1999); students in Business and Management analyse films in their studies on strategy, intercultural management and organisational theories (Bell, 2008; Champoux, 1999); and post-graduate students in MBAs take art lessons to increase their creativity (Austin and Devin, 2003).

Although the field is growing, still business at large does not make use of the many alternatives for increasing productivity; creativity or building better teamwork. Some regard it as a distraction from 'real business.' But the artistic frame of mind, by its nature, is looking for new ideas, new connections, new solutions, and ways to make the new happen. If this approach can be applied to business in this turbulent time, it has to be good news. It does however need a framework. Work needs to be done on get more traditional approaches and art approaches working in harmony. It needs to be rigorous and relevant, as well as enjoyable.

The International Journal of Professional Management (IJPM) is inviting contributions about the role of the arts in professional management. These could be ongoing research, completed papers, case studies, or any paper that shows evidence and advances ideas for the role of the arts in management. As a practical publication the IJPM is a journal aiming to bridge the gap between theory and practice. It seeks academic papers with strong practical applications, and practitioner papers with a strong evidential base. Our audience includes managers, practitioners and professionals in different sectors, from all over the world, looking for new and innovative ideas to put into practice.

We are looking forward to learn from your ideas, for informal enquiries please contact Caroline Bagshaw, Editor, International Journal of Professional Management, carolinebagshaw@ipma.co.uk


Item 2:
Special Issue 2013 (no. X). Call for papers - Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism

Guest editors: Mikael Jonasson, Halmstad University; Anette Hallin, The Royal Institute of Technology; Phil Smith, University of Plymouth

For many, a guided tour is a ‘natural’ and often keenly sought after feature of their touristic experiences. In the last half century, training for and licensing of tour-guiding has greatly increased. Yet, there is no single model for the guided tour; and any tour can be made up from numerous, sometimes incongruous elements: signposting, interpretation, entertainment, cultural brokerage, aesthetics, even subversion. Tours take place in a wide range of contexts. They emerge from divergent traditions. The motivations and qualifications of guides and guiding organisations are diverse, and as a metaphor, the guided tour has been used to explore ideas across a wide range of disciplinary and theoretical perspectives.

Papers concerning guiding, being guided, co-guiding, touring, giving tours, producing and consuming tours, and papers addressing the relation between guided tours and theories of place and space, literature and art, and business and management, are all welcome. We particularly invite papers that take an interdisciplinary approach to tour guiding.

Possible themes are (but not limited to):
• Guiding as organising place and space
• Emotion and business in guided tours
• Alternative tours
• Image and substance in guided tours
• The politics of guided tours
• The guided tour as a collective act
• Rewriting space through guided tours
• Fact and fiction in guided tours
• The guided tour and the senses
• Mediating place through the guided tour’s uses of new technology

Proposals for papers should be between 300-500 words and sent to guest editors, see below. If possible, please describe the type of web solutions needed for the paper. Articles, book reviews and shorter discussion papers sent in will also undergo a peer review process.

Submissions: Full papers using SJHT guidelines for authors should be submitted to the guest editors no later than February 2 2012. Guidelines are found on the Journal website: www.tandf.no/sjht mikael.jonasson@hh.se

anette.hallin@indek.kth.se

philip.smith@plymouth.ac.uk


Item 3:
Call for Papers: Special Issue of Leadership – Materiality of Leadership.
Editors: Alison Pullen and Sheena Vachhani Swansea University, UK

Leadership is most often presented as a disembodied phenomenon. This is so despite the sea of literature on embodied organization (see for example, Dale, 2001; Lennie, 2000). Whether it is transformational leadership, charismatic leadership, or situational leadership the common assumption is that good leadership emanates from the mind or the soul. If the body is considered it is done so superficially, for example by associating leadership effectiveness with physical characteristics such as height, weight, and body type, and/or assuming that the leader is able bodied and ostensibly Western. In a few other cases where the body is acknowledged, it is the gut that focuses our attention, for example through the ‘gut feel’ that might guide instinctual leadership practice (Harung, 1993). But even when ‘gut feeling’ is valorised as part of good leadership it is still understood through the imperative of achieving effective decision-making, and exercising rationality in the pursuit of organizational goals – in such cases the body is subordinated to an overarching regime of instrumentality and commodified in the pursuit of organizational effectiveness. Concepts such as emotional intelligence, while bearing a loose acknowledgement of the body, are also deeply entwined and understood as being deferent to organizational effectiveness (Goleman, 2006). Again the body is enrolled in the process of organizing, often in impoverished ways that do not consider the inter-connections and inseparability of mind/body and subject/object – a relation that Merleau-Ponty (1968; see also Crossley, 1995) refers to as “chiasm”. As a result of these separations and subordinations the potential for corporeal imagination in leadership studies remains under explored. This suggests that by considering the “ontology of the flesh” (Merleau-Ponty, 1968) we can explore more substantially dimensions of materiality in relation to leadership subjectivity.

In this special issue we are concerned with the surface and exterior of the leader, that which has been called leadership aesthetics (see Hansen et al, 2007), and how this relates to, disavows or enrols the interiority of the body understood as flow and fluidity. We suggest that explorations which consider the corpus of the body contributes to a more sensory leadership theory that emerges from an ethics of the body (Diprose, 1994) that accounts for the relationship between materiality and immateriality and which attends not only to productive capabilities of the body for organizational gain but also the fragility of bodies in organizations. The direction we seek to advance with this special issue is encouraged by recent advances in the field. Ropo and Sauer (2008; see also Ropo and Parviainen, 2001), for example, acknowledge the bodily presence of the leader, especially recognising the aesthetic effect of leadership. This form of corporeal leadership realises the image and identity of the leader and its impact and effect on leadership practice. This is still limited, however, in that it is only the surface – the exterior – of the leader that is in full view and privileged. Concentrating analytically on corporeality extends this by enabling the interiority of the material leadership subject to be attended – especially as it relates to the flows and fluids of the body (such as blood and hormones). Addressing corporeality and leadership studies holds the potential for different bodies to be read as present, absent or abject in the processes, practices and theories of leadership. Concepts such as virility (see Höpfl and Matilal 2007), abjection, race and gendered bodies are vital for what may then be understood in relation to the process of leadership. One such theme which may be developed is the way in which gendered leadership stereotypes such as feminised, embodied leadership in parallel to masculinised, disembodied, rational and highly disciplined leadership are debated and contested. This special issue calls for papers that focus on the embodied relationship between leaders and followers from both theoretical and empirical perspectives.

We invite conceptual and empirical papers on the matter of leadership that may include but are not limited to:
• Difference, bodies and leaders
• Working bodies and worked on bodies
• Subjectivity and intercorporeality
• Gendered bodies and sexual difference
• Abject bodies
• Performing and performed bodies
• Ethics, responsibility and leadership
• Types of leadership, such as servant leadership
• The effects of leadership on individual bodies
• Bullying, bodily violence and leadership
• Affect, bodies and leadership
• Psychoanalytic perspectives on the leader
• Corporeality, resistance and leadership
• Leadership and the disciplining of bodies
• Dress, image and leaders’ bodies
• Embodiment and virtual leadership
• Technology, bodies and disembodiment
• Human and non-human bodies and leadership
• Post-human Leadership
• Health, leadership and the body: leadership in health and subjective bodies
• Power, corporeality and leadership
• Language, speech, discourse and materiality
• Post-colonial perspectives on leadership subjectivity

Submission details: papers should be sent to both editors - Alison Pullen a.pullen@swansea.ac.uk and Sheena Vachhani s.j.vachhani@swansea.ac.uk by 1st November 2011. The special issue is scheduled for publication in early 2013.

Item 4:
GWO: 7th international interdisciplinary conference, 27th – 29th June, 2012. Call for abstracts - Intersectionality, work and organisations

Stream Convenors: Carlos Gomez, University of Santiago de Chile; Natalia Rocha-Lawton, University of Hertfordshire; Jenny Rodriguez, Newcastle University

The stream seeks to showcase conceptual, theoretical and theoretically informed empirical discussion about intersectionality, work and organisation. The stream has a twofold aim. Firstly, to advance discussions on epistemic critiques and their implications for the way intersectionality is used as an analytical and interpretive framework to explore dynamics of power at work and organisations. Secondly, at a more practical level, the panel seeks to contribute to the understanding of how intersectionality is/could be used when researching work and organisations.

Intersectionality continues to be at the centre of debates looking at power dynamics from the perspective that argues interdependence between intersecting inequalities of gender, race, sexuality, age, disability, social class, religion, and nationality, among others, in relation to subject formations, positions and identities. Conceptually, discussions have moved from embracing Crenshaw’s (1991) propositions about the need to challenge and deconstruct single axis notions of identity, to discussing notions of pure and hybrid intersectionalities (Brah & Phoenix, 2004). More recently, the debate has advanced to more divisive thinking where some authors (McCall, 2005) address methodological complexities of intersectionality, whilst others (Ehrenreich, 2002) question the suitability of the use of ‘intersecting categories’ as the best way to approach the discussion and hint to a post-intersectionality agenda that shifts from ‘intersectionality’ to ‘multidimensionality’.

Yet the scope of intersectionality makes it useful for both its theoretical and conceptual functions, as well as its political and agentic functions to highlight and explain the inseparability of categories of difference (individual, institutional, social and cultural) and how these interact with power (McCall, 2005; Yuval-Davis, 2006). The mutually constitutive nature of inequalities and structures of discrimination argued by intersectional theories also provides a useful foundation to understand continuities, shifts and transformations of power in organisations. At the same time intersectionality is a contested framework due to the broadness of intersectional theory and practice, which leads to different, inconsistent, ambiguous, and open-ended approaches (Phoenix & Pattynama, 2006; Davis, 2008). For instance, despite the mainstreaming of intersectionality in policy-making, intersectional looks at work and organisations at an empirical level, in particular lived experiences of workers and how intersections affect structures of work and organisational dynamics, remain under-researched. The work of Joan Acker (2000, 2006) on inequality regimes set important arguments to advance the discussion on intersectionality in work organisations and a few others (Staunæs, 2006; Britton & Logan, 2008; Essers & Benschop, 2009; Holvino, 2010; Dahlkild-Öhman& Eriksson, 2011; Healy et al., 2011) have added significant theoretical and empirical insights. Yet the potential of this discussion has not been fully capitalised and it remains at the margins of the meta-narratives of work and organisation. Taylor et al. (2010:2) argue that intersections need to be “empirically substantiated demonstrated and ‘delivered’ [because] the formalistic addition and repetition of ‘intersectionality’ leaves out the intimate interconnections, mutual constitutions and messiness of everyday identifications and lived experiences”. That is an imperative challenge to advance understanding on the interplay between intersectionality, work and organisations.

More discussion is needed to map the use of intersectionality in the study of work and organisations and expand understanding of how intersecting structures sustain and perpetuate power mechanisms and systems of subordination in work settings. Moreover, these discussions need to span across geographies, temporalities, disciplines and perspectives so that they account not only for complexities in the intersections themselves but also for how these interplay with wider issues associated to contemporary work and organisational dynamics, such as debates on migration, varieties of capitalism, and more generally globalisation.

The stream invites contributions of theoretical, conceptual and empirical works that focus on intersectional analyses of workers, work and/or organisations. Papers are invited on (but not limited to) the following themes:
• Limitations, exclusions and possibilities of intersectional analysis of workers, work and organisations
• How intersectionality is used to shape research agendas about work and organisation
• Use of multiple oppression theories to explore experiences of workers
• Distinctiveness of intersectional approaches to research work and organisations
• Methodological challenges of intersectional approaches to research in organisations
• Normative assumptions challenged by the intersectional approaches used to research work and organisations
• Selection and levels of different categories used in intersectional approaches to research work and organisations
• Challenges of institutionalisation of intersectionality for research in work and organisations
• Presuppositions and implications of intersectional approaches to research in work and organisations

Abstracts of approximately 500 words (ONE page, Word document NOT PDF, single spaced, excluding references, no header, footers or track changes). All abstracts will be peer reviewed. New and young scholars with 'work in progress' papers are welcomed. In the case of co-authored papers, ONE person should be identified as the corresponding author. Note that due to restrictions of space, multiple submissions by the same author will not be timetabled. In the first instance, abstracts should be emailed to jenny.rodriguez@ncl.ac.uk.

Abstracts should include FULL contact details, including your name, institutional affiliation, mailing address, and e-mail address. State the title of the stream to which you are submitting your abstract.