XI ANPAD Organizational Studies Conference - EnEO 2022
EnEO 2022

Technological innovations have generated a new economic and social order based on covert practices of data extraction, prediction, and sales. This exploitation of data allows organizations to maximize profits and enhances the expropriation of rights and the capture of human experiences, resulting in a discourse of technological solutionism as indispensable for organizational growth and productivity. This technological rationality has enabled the reconfiguration of organizations, as well as the control of actions and power struggles through service applications, social media, and algorithmic management.
This phenomenon accentuates the (re)production of inequality, exclusion and social discrimination, in addition to legitimizing inappropriate groups, organizations and practices (such as cybercrime, the dissemination of fake news and corporate crimes). Problematizing the ethics of digital technologies, exposing their predispositions to (re)produce privileges and maintain hegemonic logics, is a necessary agenda that contributes to the discussion of gender and racial discrimination, among other important social issues.
The call aims to bring together diverse approaches and methods and seeks to stimulate the development of research on the digitalized world and organizational studies, focusing on the power asymmetries between users, workers, and digital platforms, as well as the role of the state in mediating and controlling these relations.
To this end, seven main themes are proposed:
1) Surveillance capitalism, data colonialism, and algorithmic mediation;
2) Digitalized labor, surveillance culture, and algorithmic management;
3) Digitalization as a tool for inequality, exclusion, and discrimination (social, racial, gender positions, among others);
4) Power and techno-resistance;
5) Social Media and identity;
6) Artificial Intelligence and its repercussions in organizations as means of oppression, influence on meaningful work production, and forms of resistance;
7) Digital platforms as spaces of organizational disputes, including disputes between political groups, production and dissemination of fake news, and other practices aimed at damaging reputations and legitimizing inappropriate practices.

Studying the subject constitution based on power-knowledge relations engendered in organizations and in social and labor relations has been a concern for several Organization Studies (OS) researchers over the years. Including renowned thinkers such as Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari, Jacques Derrida, Bruno Latour, Giorgio Agamben, Suely Rolnik, and Peter Pal Pelbart, theorizations about power relations, discursive practices, and subjectivation processes have already made some important contributions, but they still deserve to be further discussed and problematized by OS researchers.

Foucault, Deleuze, and Guattari deal with subjectivity through problematization, questioning what is given or evident, which enabled the formation of an epistemological line, post-structuralism, which has its philosophical inspiration in Friedrich Nietzsche. Thus, this theme aims to bring together researchers interested in post-structuralism in OS, promoting dialogue on the contributions developed over time regarding the production of subjectivities in labor, organizational, and social relations. Scholars who seek to explore other forms of knowledge production, as well as other thought’s movements that bring new ways of doing criticism in OS, are especially welcome.

Furthermore, other approaches and authors that establish interfaces with post-structuralism are welcome, enriching the discussions and broadening the perspectives on the topic. Considering these issues, we encourage papers that address the following themes, but not limited to:

- Subject constitution in organization: production of subjectivity at work;

- Analysis of the body and power: biopolitics and biopower;

- Politics of affects, ethics of the self and friendship in organizations;

- The notion of practice in post-structuralist studies;

- Queer theory, gender and sexuality in post-structuralism;

- Performativity and Actor-Network Theory;

- The political dimension of non-humans;

- Epistemological and methodological aspects of post-structuralism;

- Archaeologies and genealogies on discursive formations;

- Discourse and the subject relation with the truths of management.

Socio-environmental disruptions that erupt nowadays reveal a planet undergoing profound transformation, a reflection of yet another crisis of global fossil capitalism — inseparable from the logic of accumulation that has, for centuries, organized relationships between modes of existence in terms of domination, exploitation, and extraction for the benefit of a few. These events and processes are entangled in systems of exploitation that perpetuate the fiction of human exceptionalism while deepening socio-environmental inequalities, consequences of the histories of geopower that define the Anthropocene and its offshoots (Capitalocene, Plantationocene, Chthulucene, Necrocene, etc.).

We aim to bring together researchers interested in discussing the role of organizations and organized human action as agents of nature’s destruction, while also reclaiming the responsibility of Management and Organizational Studies in this debate. We seek to gather individuals whose research tells new stories, proposing alternative analytics of existence, ways of cohabiting this planet with each other and with the many beings with whom we share a common fate.

We hope to collect articles that critically reflect on the role of actors and agents in the climate, socio-environmental, and socio-economic crises; food, water, and energy (in)security; the interrelations between planetary health and dynamics that cause psycho-emotional suffering; eco-anxiety and eco-hope; alternative forms of organization and (self)management, resilience, resistance with nature and territories (agroecology, permaculture, Indigenous cosmologies, traditional communities, commons, post-extractivism); socio-environmental conflicts and justice; large-scale projects and their socio-environmental effects; socio-territorial dynamics and political ecology; critical perspectives on social responsibility, sustainability, energy transition, and ESG; environmental disasters, catastrophes, and crimes; socio-environmental activism, risks, and environmental alerts; rights of nature; and theoretical, ontological, and epistemological debates related to these issues, among other plural perspectives. Lastly, the theme aims to encourage unconventional methodologies, epistemologies, and practices that amplify voices and knowledge marginalized in society, especially from the Global South.

The pervasiveness of organizational practices and work processes in the life of the contemporary citizen is such that family life and work life have increasingly come to share physical, and often, affective spaces. Reflecting on organizing and working in these times calls for perspectives that address such intersections, and psychoanalysis is one such perspective.

The convergence between organizational studies and psychoanalysis has a prolific history spanning over 60 years of research. By incorporating the dimension of the unconscious, these approaches inform different frameworks that challenge managerial aims based on psychoanalytic ethics and the recognition of the subject. This Special Issue aims to examine these topics by suggesting the psychoanalytic approach as a paradigm for the study of organizations and management. Various topics, such as but not limited to those listed below, are of interest:

• Psychoanalytic approaches to organizational analysis.
• Psychoanalytic ontologies and epistemologies and their role in critical knowledge.
• Relationships between subject, work, leadership, and organizations.
• Psychic reality and organizational dynamics.
• Subjectivity in political theory, organizations, the workplace, and everyday life.
• Psychoanalysis and identity: gender diversity, race, intersectionalities, feminist theories, queer studies, bullying, social exclusion and inclusion.
• Psychoanalysis and mental illness in organizing and working, social change, neoliberalism, unemployment, aging, and rural and urban environments.
• Life and death instincts in organizations, work, and consumption.
• Psychoanalysis and the polis: politics, tactics and strategy, and social bonds.
• Psychoanalytic, philosophical, and sociological issues in organizational and work studies.
• Methodological approaches based on discourse analysis and psychoanalysis.

The national academic environment has already assimilated the need for reflection on the production of scientific knowledge about organizations and administrative practice. Epistemology is inserted as a specific discipline, or as a particular topic of discussion in most curricula of the Graduate Programs in Administration. Epistemology is also a central theme of scientific events, as in the case of the International Colloquium on Epistemology and Sociology of Science in Administration, and several times it has already received editions entirely dedicated to its discussion from periodicals in the area. Within the scope of ANPAD, the Theme was created in 2009, in the Division of Teaching and Research in Administration and Accounting (EPQ), and, in 2010, in the Division of Organizational Studies (EOR). As a methodical and reflective study of knowledge, of its organization, of its formation, of its development, of its functioning and of its products, epistemology occupies an extremely important place for the critical examination of our own production of sciences and knowledge, helping us, thus, in making critical awareness of our daily practice.

For the EOR Division, the proposal is that the theme is dedicated to epistemology in organizational studies and seeks to focus the reflection on the production of knowledge and scientific knowledge of organizational and administrative phenomena, as well as to discuss the social conditions of production of this knowledge, always with in order to promote dialogues between epistemologies and disciplines. With these objectives, the theme contemplates the diverse epistemic approaches (positivism, functionalism, institutionalism, interpretativism, critical theory, marxism, pragmatism, post-structuralism, critical realism, among others), from contributions of disciplines such as administration, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, history, semiotics and psychoanalysis. Ontology and methodology can be approached, but from the articulation of these with the epistemologies, building principles, arguments, hypotheses, interpretations and practices to critically analyze the different epistemological approaches.

The theme seeks to bring together researchers associated with both classical and contemporary currents of orthodox and heterodox Marxism, committed to radical science. The tradition of Marxist studies and its branches have been instrumental in addressing social struggles over the past centuries. The challenges of contemporary capitalism—such as the climate crisis, growing socio-economic inequality, military conflicts, and the increasing precarization of labour—demand such a critical arsenal, given its emancipatory potential, which justifies its relevance and underscores its importance in the field. It is worth noting that Marxist critique has a tradition within Brazilian management and organisational studies, with scholars like Tragtenberg, Prestes-Motta, Faria, Misoczky, Goulart, and Paço-Cunha contributing to the understanding of phenomena such as bureaucracy, changes in the labour process, organisational resistance of the working class, and even organisational and management theories themselves.

This theme invites submissions that critically investigate: i) the development of productive forces and/or their objective and subjective consequences for the working class, in terms of labour relations and conditions, the reproduction of human and non-human life, the production of health, manifestations of multiple forms of oppression, and the resistance of the working class in motion; ii) the expansion of capital in its various forms (productive, commercial, financial, speculative) and the intra-capitalist class conflicts expressed in economic (whether legal or illegal), cultural, political, and conflictual/war terms; iii) the formation of states as products of class struggles, materialised in forms of government, public policies, and legal frameworks; iv) the work of Marx and debates on historical materialism.

In sum, this theme aims to bring together those interested in understanding the concrete contradictions of capitalist sociability in its various forms of existence.

This theme seeks to discuss social inequalities in the world of work and organizations, as well as the privileges of hegemonic groups, considering axes of oppression and exploitation such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and social class. We prioritize studies with an intersectional perspective that examine how these differences translate into inequalities and are articulated in the workplace and organizations, resulting in mechanisms of exclusion, discrimination, and privilege. This debate has gained academic and political relevance due to the growing interest in building more democratic and inclusive work environments, management, and organizations.

We value research that explores power dynamics, emphasizing the political dimension of differences in ideological, socio-historical, and cultural terms. The vision of work addressed includes discussions about productive and reproductive labor, as well as public and private organizations, associations, social movements, and other forms of social organization.

We invite studies that address the construction and reproduction of inequalities in the workplace, focusing on both historically marginalized groups (women, Black people, Indigenous peoples, LGBTQIAPN+, people with disabilities, etc.) and privileged groups (masculinities, whiteness, cisgender identities, etc.). The debate encompasses analyses of inequalities in the labor market at national, regional, and international levels, across macro, meso, and micro spheres. It also includes the role of social movements and organizational experiences in addressing inequalities.

We highlight our interest in research that employs diverse onto-epistemological, theoretical, and methodological perspectives, such as decolonial, anti-colonial, and Afrocentric debates, as well as new research agendas. We also encourage the adoption of alternative forms of expression and writing, such as “escrevivência” (writing as living), embodied writing, and artistic writing, promoting differentiated modes of writing, especially in alignment with feminist writing.

From a historical-temporal approach, the theme explores the political/social/cultural/economic/psychosocial relations between subjects, organizations, and societies. We invite papers that explore the past/present/future meaning for organizations from a historical or temporal perspective based on any epistemological or ontological paradigms. We understand organizations in a broader way, encompassing companies but also social movements, daily work, family, or educational organizations; in short, they denote processes, practices, and structures that define how different groups understand and practice organizing in time and space.

We welcome studies that:

- Understand organizations and organizing in time and how the past, present, and future manifest themselves and are used by different social actors to construct historical, daily, and future reality.

- Analyze how the presence and liveliness of the past in the form of traditions, rituals, and artifacts such as sources and historical archives, as well as the future that is present in the form of utopias, fiction, and forecasts that mobilize attention and resources, contribute to broadening the understanding of organizational phenomena and their articulation with the social, political, economic, cultural and ethical-moral spheres.

- Stimulate debates on historical research in administration and organizational studies based on historical methods, such as archival research, historical case studies, oral history, ANTi-history and rhetorical history.

- Use critical approaches to the study of the past for discussions on historical versions already established and legitimized in the history and official memory of organizations and societies. This involves the search for a more reflective understanding of privileged places of knowledge production - historical archives - and their logic of exclusion and silencing in contrast to ways of archiving dissent.

- Highlight the experience of people and organizations in time and space and the representations of subjects about the past, present, and future. We also expect texts using biographical methods or life stories.

Common goods are shared resources that, by their nature, cannot be the exclusive property of an individual or group: forests, rivers, parks, markets and often public health, education and security services. In contexts such as the current ones, in which the state bureaucracy is slow to face the challenges brought about by changes, community brigades, residents' associations and other forms of collective action acquire increased importance.
The economist Elinor Ostrom, winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2009, challenged the idea that only privatization or state regulation are alternatives for managing common goods. She showed that local communities can manage resources effectively. They can contribute to the sustainability of the rural or urban regions in which they are located.
Geographical Indications can be understood as the recognition of the right, granted by the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI), to the exclusive use of the name of a region to designate products or services produced there. This recognition promotes protection against imitation, increased social capital, product appreciation, and preservation of local culture.

In recent years, there has been rapid growth in the number of GIs in Brazil. While the country took 14 years to register the first 50, the number has more than doubled since 2016, reaching 120 today. Despite this growth, many GIs still do not achieve their objectives, which makes them a fertile subject for organizational studies. In this sense, we propose five main themes:
1) Case studies of national and international GIs;
2) Theories and methodologies of collective action;
3) Challenges arising from obtaining GI status;
4) GIs from the perspective of territorial development; and
5) Symbolic constructions based on mobilization related to GIs.

The field of Organizational Studies has always been open to different theoretical, epistemic, and methodological approaches. Its plural character is strongly influenced by its interface with various areas of knowledge, historically enriched by fields such as history, geography, psychology, philosophy, anthropology, sociology, political science, economics, architecture, and others. Among the phenomena studied, cities have been considered loci for diverse studies that explore their complexities and multiplicities of social processes and territorialities. Cities, as spaces where different urban groups intersect, are territorialized through disputes, appropriations, everyday practices, power relations, and occupations that occur within them. The lens of organizational studies allows us a new understanding of these urban social dynamics intertwined with the materiality of urban space. To continue this fruitful intersection between Organizational Studies and Cities, our proposal seeks to encompass theoretical and theoretical-empirical works that focus on cities and their contradictions, commonly present in themes such as cultural formations in and of cities, the historical use of organizing cities, the relationship between state and society and their urban developments, gentrification processes, informality, symbolic dynamics, monumental spaces, sites of resistance and the ordinary, urban edges, margins, and peripheries, social and racial segregation, diasporas, migratory movements, urban mobility, festivals, territorial and identity processes related to space, and the implications these issues have for the processes of meaning, time, and history, among others. The approaches encouraged in this proposal are also rich, welcoming quantitative and qualitative works, as well as hermeneutic, positivist, and critical frameworks that seek to examine the past, present, and future of cities.

The uniqueness of the 21st century can be highlighted from widely different perspectives. Among them, the way social groups organize themselves and how they name their historical course is relevant due to its connection with some of the issues considered major challenges of contemporary society. The deepening of inequality, social conflicts, intolerance towards human differences and the persistence of ethnic cleansing as a model of civilizing organization are ideas that coexist in the same historical period in which the peak of technological development is claimed.

By drawing a parallel between Traditional and Renewed Administration, Aktouf (1996) exposes issues that destabilize the idea of development, such as the universal conciliation of interests and needs. This reading appears as a result of the analysis of the World Summit on Social Development held in Copenhagen. In this unprecedented event, the theme of social development and human well-being was considered a high priority for the 21st century. However, the agenda was consolidated amid a series of contradictions.

The ambiguity surrounding the concept of social development derives from the need for its socio-cultural-political-historical contextualization. Adjacent questions include, for example, what social development is possible considering human differences (generational, ethnic, gender, sex, religious, regional, linguistic, to name a few)? How can the concept of sustainability be redefined to promote social and economic inclusion? What are the interfaces between the concept of social development and the private sector, government and the third sector? What are the organizational possibilities for constructing the concept of social development, capable of encompassing well-being, economic growth, reduction of inequalities, prejudices, violence and sustainability?

The studies are expected to reveal the obstacles and potential for constructing possible social development, through the exploration of organizational practices, collective actions, social technologies and social entrepreneurship.

The objective of this thematic group is to gather, articulate, foster, and bring visibility to research outcomes that explore organizational practices aimed at countering, destabilizing, disrupting, and/or creating fissures in neoliberal modes of work. We encourage papers that investigate alternative modes of being and organizing, which evade, invert, and challenge established frameworks (Lazzarato, 2014; Foucault, 2017). These studies should address popular knowledge and practices, including their flavors, arts, festivals, markets, informal economies, and underground or solidarity activities, as well as the practices of trading, negotiating, experiencing, remembering, narrating, and recalling the everyday lives of diverse societal groups.
We propose discussions of studies that articulate resistance to neoliberal subjection and the homogenization of knowledge, by examining cultures and practices that subvert the pragmatics of capitalist utilitarianism. We suggest that the texts directed toward this theme reflect on what is popular and minor from a historical perspective, and on movements associated with minor literature (Deleuze & Guattari, 1978). The use of popular practices asserts a distinct functioning of knowledge and power hierarchies (Certeau, 2012), presenting possibilities for production and organization in spaces other than those already established, such as city squares, streets, alleys, and lanes.
We also invite studies that address the various margins of success, the affects that shape popular culture, the "less reliable" sources and their "uninteresting" and "unimportant" stories to the mainstream, as well as the marginalized subjects, knowledge, and flavors that offer multiple possibilities for destabilizing institutionalized managerial knowledge and the status quo. In this context, as indicated by Pelbart (2000, 2003, 2016), mapping alternative modes of existence becomes a relevant project, highlighting multiplicities that cannot be encompassed by the totalizing machinery of power.

Different markets and their processes, such as competition, cooperation, risk, evaluation and valuation, impact organizations, their strategies, structures and governance. Power, politics, morality, laws and interests are also relevant aspects for understanding the construction of markets and how organizations relate to them. In addition, institutional diversity is strongly influenced by economic agents. Taking these phenomena into account, Economic Sociology is one of the areas that has contributed the most and still has great potential to stimulate new theorizing in the field of Organizational Studies. This branch of sociology has broadened the understanding of economic action, mainly by transposing the rationalist assumptions of Traditional Economic Theory and privileging cultural, social, cognitive and political aspects in the dynamics of markets and organizations. We understand that the distinctive character of Economic Sociology, among many other theories in Organizational Studies, is the conception of socially embedded economic action and its relationship with markets, organizations and institutions. Therefore, with the aim of deepening knowledge in the field of Organizational Studies about the relationship between Markets, Organizations and Institutions, we would like to point out that we welcome theoretical-empirical papers and essays from various theoretical perspectives, such as: Economic Sociology, Sociology of Markets, Political Economy, Socio-Economics, New Institutional Economics, Institutional Theory, Comparative Institutional Analysis, Field Theory, Social Network Analysis and Political Science. The topic is open to both qualitative and quantitative work.