Call for Papers

Organizations do not exist in a vacuum. When organizations deviate from laws, rules, or norms (Aranda & Simons, 2022; Webb, Tihanyi, Ireland, & Sirmon, 2009), other individuals or organizations – typically referred to as social control agents (Pichler, Roulet, & Paolella, 2022) – will often intervene so that the rule system is not upended (Black, 1998). The process that ensues–generally labeled as organizational social control (Ermann & Lundman, 1978; Piazza, Bergemann, & Helms, forthcoming)–is enormously consequential for those organizations that are subjected to it. In some cases, social control agents are successful in suppressing deviant behavior and restoring social order; in other circumstances, such behavior can persist and, over time, even become accepted in the very system of rules it sought to challenge (Helms & Patterson, 2014). This process of social control can unfold in myriad ways: through informal means such as boycotts and protests (McDonnell & Werner, 2016), to more formal methods such as fines, lawsuits, and legislative action (Augustine & Piazza, 2022; McDonnell & Nurmohamed, 2021).
 
The issue of organizational social control is made all the more timely by the fact that deviant behavior by organizations has become more and more ubiquitous, and frequently makes headlines (Greve, Palmer, & Pozner, 2010). From high-profile misconduct cases like Theranos (Straker, Peel, Nusem, & Wrigley, 2021) to the controversial innovations pursued by Silicon Valley entrepreneurs seeking to “move fast and break things” (Garud, Kumaraswamy, Roberts, & Xu, 2020; Taplin, 2017), the prevalence of deviant behavior by organizations of all stripes invites attention to how it is addressed by society, and to the ways in which social control agents of various kinds shape the trajectory of organizational action and constrain the pursuit of innovative endeavors (Vadera, Pratt, & Mishra, 2013; Warren, 2003).
 
In line with the Colloquium’s theme of “Crossroads for Organizations: Time, Space, and People”, in this sub-theme we call upon contributions at the crossroads of social control theory and research on organizational deviance to help unpack the ways in which the behavior of organizations is policed, curbed, and restricted. The social control of organizational deviance is a negotiated process where definitions of deviance and the rules regarding deviant behavior evolve over time across different contexts and by a diverse range of social actors. Understanding this phenomenon requires going beyond the study of individual organizations by examining how social control unfolds and is orchestrated at the field level.
 
We are particularly interested in research that addresses theoretical, empirical, and methodological issues broadly pertaining to the social control of organizations. This includes research on how organizational social control can vary in intensity or effectiveness; on the strategic opportunities available to organizations that seek to thrive in the face of social control and on the role of social control agents such as governmental actors, social movement organizations, competitors, and other entities.
 
Possible topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following:

• What conditions make it such that the organization’s behavior is classified as deviant and not as illegal?

• How can organizations evade social control and get away with covertly perpetuating deviant behavior?

• How do organizations resist social control efforts, and what are the conditions under which the latter succeed?

• What is the relationship between deviant behavior and social evaluations of organizations?

• How does organizational behavior come to be labeled as deviant by social control agents?

• How do the outcomes of social control vary for organizations depending on the type of social actor that plays the social control agent role?

• How are organizations held accountable for deviant behavior? Under what conditions are they subjected to more or less severe punishment because of it?

• How do the motives of social control agents affect or influence the type of social control they exert?

• What types of social control agents can be found in different organizational contexts and what makes them distinct?

• How does the social control of organizational deviance begin and end? Are there distinct phases, or stages, to it?

• Is deviance intrinsic to disruptive innovation or the creation of new markets? And what role does social control play in market change?

• What is the process by which social control is negotiated between deviant organizations and social control agents?

References

• Aranda, A. M., & Simons, T. 2022. Clearing the Smoke: Regulations, Moral Legitimacy, and Performance in the U.S. Tobacco Industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 1: 1–17.
• Augustine, G. L., & Piazza, A. 2022. Category Evolution Under Conditions of Stigma: The Segregation of Abortion Provision into Specialist Clinics in the United States. Organization Science, 33(2): 624–649.
• Black, D. 1998. The Social Structure of Right and Wrong. Academic Press. http://www.amazon.com/dp/0121028038.
• Ermann, M. D., & Lundman, R. J. 1978. Deviant Acts by Complex Organizations: Deviance and Social Control at the Organizational Level of Analysis. Sociological Quarterly, 19(1): 55–67.
• Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A., Roberts, A., & Xu, L. 2020. Liminal movement by digital platform-based sharing economy ventures: The case of Uber Technologies. Strategic Management Journal, (February 2018): 1–29.
• Greve, H. R., Palmer, D., & Pozner, J.-E. 2010. Organizations Gone Wild: The Causes, Processes, and Consequences of Organizational Misconduct. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1): 53–107.
• Helms, W. S., & Patterson, K. D. W. 2014. Eliciting Acceptance for “Illicit” Organizations: The Positive Implications of Stigma for MMA Organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 57(5): 1453–1484.
• McDonnell, M.-H., & Nurmohamed, S. 2021. When are organizations punished for organizational misconduct? A review and research agenda. Research in Organizational Behavior, 41(xxxx): 100150.
• McDonnell, M.-H., & Werner, T. 2016. Blacklisted Businesses: Social Activists’ Challenges and the Disruption of Corporate Political Activity. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839216648953.
• Piazza, A., Bergemann, P., & Helms, W. 2022. Getting Away with It (Or Not): The Social Control of Organizational Deviance. Academy of Management Review. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2021.0066.
• Pichler, R., Roulet, T. J., & Paolella, L. 2022. A Bailout for the Outlaws: Interactions Between Social Control Agents and the Perception of Organizational Misconduct. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, (July). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.3447.
• Straker, K., Peel, S., Nusem, E., & Wrigley, C. 2021. Designing a dangerous unicorn: Lessons from the Theranos case. Business Horizons, 64(4): 525–536.
• Taplin, J. T. 2017. Move Fast and Break Things: How Facebook, Google, and Amazon Cornered Culture and Undermined Democracy. Little, Brown and Company.
• Vadera, A. K., Pratt, M. G., & Mishra, P. 2013. Constructive Deviance in Organizations: Integrating and Moving Forward. Journal of Management, 39(5): 1221–1276.
• Warren, D. E. 2003. Constructive and Destructive Deviance in Organizations. Academy of Management Review, 28(4): 622–632.
• Webb, J. W., Tihanyi, L., Ireland, R. D., & Sirmon, D. G. 2009. You Say Illegal, I Say Legitimate : Entrepreneurship in the Informal Economy. Academy of Management Review, 34(3): 492–510.
•