Mikkelsen E¹, Oikarinen E², Frandsen S³, Rehman M²

¹Copenhagen Business School, Department of Organization, ²Oulu Business School, University of Oulu, ³Lund University

This track aims to explore how emotions influence individual and collective behavior, decision-making, and relationships across organizational, management and marketing contexts. We seek to bring together scholars who exchange knowledge and share methodological innovations to advance the scholarly discourses on emotions in organizations and in marketing.

Emotions have gained growing recognition in organization, management and marketing research. The track embraces diverse ontological and epistemological perspectives to better understand the complexity and subjective nature of emotions in organizational, managerial and marketing dynamics. The track is keenly interested in expanding theoretical and empirical insights into how emotions intersect with pressing contemporary issues, with potential contributions including, but not restricted to, the following themes:

• Emotional engagement with sustainability/CSR and the role of hope, fear and/or apathy in collective responses to grand challenges.
• Emotions as drivers of inclusion/exclusion, diversity, justice, and ethical conduct, internal and external to the organization.
• How AI, algorithms shape emotional experiences in work and service encounters. How does AI feel from micro to macro levels?
• The emotional complexities of AI-human interactions and companionships
• Emotional experiences of new ways of working, hybrid work models, and alternative organizations.
• Emotional undercurrents of organizational scandals, crises, and legitimacy struggles
• Emotions in wellbeing, burnout, and the pursuit of happiness in and around organizations
• Emotional dimensions and dynamics of established concepts such as identity work, collaboration, time, or power.
• Unconscious emotional dynamics and the dark side of organizing.
• Methodological explorations in multidisciplinary research to understand emotions (e.g., multimodal, neurophysiological).

In this track, we invite scholars to engage with different theoretical approaches to emotions and share their methodological concerns and challenges of studying emotions.

Bévort F¹

¹Copenhagen Business School, ²University of Gothenburg, ³Liisa Makkela

Digitalization is reshaping human resource management (HRM) across the Nordic countries, introducing advanced technologies that enable data-driven decision-making, personalized employee engagement, and agile competence development. From AI-powered recruitment tools to digital learning platforms and predictive analytics, HR professionals are increasingly leveraging digital solutions to enhance organizational performance and strategic alignment.

Yet, this transformation also brings complex challenges. As HR processes become more automated, questions arise about the role of human judgment, ethical governance, and the risk of algorithmic bias. Moreover, digitalization can affect work–life balance, inclusion, and employee autonomy—issues that are particularly relevant in the Nordic context, where strong labor market institutions, high levels of trust, and collaborative traditions shape organizational culture and expectations.

This track invites theoretical, empirical, and practice-oriented contributions that explore the multifaceted impact of digital transformation on HRM within Nordic organizations. We are especially interested in papers that examine how digitalization influences HR roles, employee experiences, and organizational outcomes, while also addressing the tensions between technological efficiency and human-centric values. Last, but not least, critical approaches are welcomed, digitalization maybe a hype based on hyper-rationality without the ability to deliver and can lead to unanticipated problems and even failures. Many HRM-practices are driven by consultancy firms’ need of income, and not real organizational needs.

Key questions include:

How do digital tools reshape HR decision-making and employee relations?

What ethical frameworks are needed to guide responsible digital HR practices?

How do Nordic organizations maintain trust and inclusion in increasingly digital workplaces?

In what ways can digitalization support collaborative and participatory work cultures?

We welcome interdisciplinary perspectives and diverse methodological approaches that contribute to a deeper understanding of digital HRM in the Nordic region. The goal is to foster dialogue on how organizations can navigate digital change in ways that are both innovative and ethically grounded.

Keywords:

1. Digital HRM
2. Nordic model
3. Employee engagement
4. Competence development
5. Work–life balance
6. Ethical AI
7. Inclusion

Lindberg F¹, Tillotson J²

¹Nord University Business School, ²University of Vaasa, School of Marketing and Communication

Nordic Consumer Culture Research has its theoretical basis in Consumer Culture Theory (CCT), which is concerned with the meanings, sociohistoric influences, and social dynamics that shape consumer experiences, identities and markets in the myriad messy contexts of everyday life (Arnould & Thompson, 2005). In a broad sense, Nordic consumer culture has been referred to as the idiosyncratic mix of the state, the market and the consumers (Askegaard & Östberg, 2019). This means that Nordic researchers try to include Nordic context-of-context (Askegaard & Linnet, 2011) when investigating consumption and marketing phenomena. A Nordic perspective on consumer and market culture is however underdeveloped and we encourage discussions and explorations further.

In previous publications, for example, efforts are made to discuss "statist-individualist" and glocalized consumer culture (Kjeldgaard & Askegaard, 2006; Ulver, 2019), and the role of myth markets, institutionalizations, and the Nordic imaginary (Andersen et al., 2021; Askegaard & Östberg, 2019). Others have focused on a wide array of phenomena, such as the role of “hygge” (Linnet, 2011), Nordic taste and value regimes (Andersen et al., 2021, Weijo, 2019), consumption conformity vs freedom (Salminen, 2019), welfare export (Bjerregaard & Kjeldgaard, 2019), culture impact on nature experiences, role of state vs. market, immigrants and welfare consumption, neoliberal vs. welfare state regimes, state role in market formation, and so on. 

The track welcomes varied topics on consumption and marketing, both conceptual, empirical and critical, as related to Nordic contexts, but research should not be constrained by rationalizing, logical empiricist precepts. 

We urge presentations to be contextually oriented, focus on research question(s), explicate theoretical foundation and (if relevant) empirical findings, and the suggested contributions of the work. 

SUBMISSIONS TO THE TRACK CAN BE CONSIDERED FOR PUBLICATION IN A SPECIAL ISSUE ON NORDIC CONSUMER CULTURE RESEARCH IN QUALITATIVE MARKET RESEARCH: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL (EMERALD).

Karlsson T¹, Brorström S, Nyland K, Kallio K

¹University Of Gothenburg

The Public Sector Management Standing Track (PSM)

The Public Sector Management Track (PSM) aims to provide a platform for discussing historical, current, and emerging themes of governance and management in the public sector. It seeks to support the development of a vibrant scholarly community interested in public sector research and to facilitate creative and constructive discussions within and beyond academia.

Public sectors worldwide face a shifting landscape of challenges – from climate change and pandemics to migration, economic strain, geopolitical tensions, and fragile supply chains. Such pressures generate turbulence and uncertainty that shape how public management is practiced. The Nordic setting provides distinctive experiences of handling these conditions, while also offering lessons that enrich international debates on how authorities translate global pressures into strategies.

For the 2026 conference we invite papers that empirically and theoretically explore the possibilities, limitations, and innovations of public management in uncertain contexts. We welcome contributions that examine public sector governance and management, considering key concepts such as resilience, adaptability, legitimacy, and innovation, using a variety of methods and theoretical approaches.

Submissions that engage with how local and/or regional actors respond to global pressures through governance, management, and innovation in the public sector are welcome. Possible themes include, but are not restricted to:

• Shocks and Security: how countries, municipalities, regions, and local agencies adapt to crises such as pandemics, climate, geopolitical tensions, migration, and how security considerations shape preparedness and response
• Digitalization: balancing efficiency, privacy, equity, and legitimacy.
• Resilience: exploring institutional flexibility, redundancy, security capacity, and learning under uncertainty across national
• Trust and Legitimacy: how public trust is maintained, eroded or reconstructed amid fiscal austerity, polarization, and crises
• Sustainability and Inclusion: addressing social inequality and participatory governance in local and/or national settings facing global environmental and socioeconomic pressures

Wedlin L¹, Boch Waldorff S², Tyllström A¹

¹Uppsala University, Department of Business studies, ²Copenhagen Business School, CBS 

This standing track on Scandinavian translation broadly focuses on the role and travel of ideas in contemporary society, and this year we are particularly interested to see papers that explore the interplay between institutional theory, and digitalization and AI – phenomena that will make inroads in almost all major societal institutions as we know them. 

Current developments call for a rethinking of institutional investigations and explanations (see Rudko et al. 2025; Schildt, 2022), including those of translations. For example, the onset of digital social media, with its tendency to drive media content towards personalization, emotionalization and individual charisma, has been documented to hamper or even undermine hitherto taken-for-granted institutional processes of organizational legitimation. Also, generative AI, making possible a diffusion of ideas and formats at an exponential rate, can potentially drive institutional isomorphism across institutional contexts at an extreme pace. At the same time, local organizational translations of new phenomena (Rovik 2002, Sahlin and Wedlin 2008) can be expected to be affected, as context-specific feedback loops to institutional processes fall away, changing both needs and modes of decoupling. 

We hence invite scholars of all ranks to submit theoretical, empirical, or methodological paper manuscripts to serve as input for a scholarly discussion to rethink institutional theory, translations, and practice. What is the impact and explanatory power of institutional theory in studies of digitalization? Are the conceptual tools provided by institutionalism – e.g. isomorphism, decoupling, translation and institutional fields, scripts and logics - sufficient and relevant to understand new phenomena, or do they need updating? Or maybe even rendered obsolete? 

The convenors of this track will also consider the possibility of creating a special issue on these topical issues.

Convenors:

• Anna Tyllström, Uppsala University and Institute for Futures Studies, associate professor
• Linda Wedlin, Uppsala University, professor
• Susanne Boch-Waldorff, CBS, associate professor

References:

Rovik, KA. 2002. "The Secrets of the Winners: Management Ideas That Flows." The Expansion of Management Knowledge: Carriers, Flows and Sources.

Rudko, Ihor, Aysan Bashirpour Bonab, Maria Fedele and Anna Vittoria Formisano. 2025. "New Institutional Theory and Ai: Toward Rethinking of Artificial Intelligence in Organizations." Journal of Management History 31(2):261-84.

Sahlin, Kerstin and Linda Wedlin. 2008. "Circulating Ideas: Imitation, Translation and Editing." The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism 218:242.

Schildt, Henri. "The institutional logic of digitalization." Digital transformation and institutional theory. Emerald Publishing Limited, 2022. 235-251.

Tryggestad K¹

¹Dept. of Business Administration, University of Inland Norway

Our standing track on accounting and organizing was launched at NFF 2024 Reykjavik. Judged by the energy among the participants and the quality of the papers presented, we have decided to give the track another try at NFF 2026 Aarhus. We call for contributions covering a wide array of accounting and auditing topics, such as:

• Accounting and organizational change (in public and/or private sector)
• Accounting for a circular economy
• Accounting, auditing and sustainability reporting
• Accountants, Auditors and careers
• Accounting digitalization and automation in and between firms and client organizations
• New and emerging roles and identities within accounting and auditing
• Performance measurement systems
• Management accounting and control
• Project accounting (e.g., budgeting, risk management, evaluation)
• Accounting and valuation
• Accounting and business ethics
• Accounting, security and resilience 

We welcome papers and contributions that are conceptual and/or empirically grounded. Novel and critical contributions are of course more than welcomed.

Our ambition is that the accounting track becomes a standing track that includes but also extends beyond the next upcoming NFF conference. This implies that we aim to organize at least one track per NFF conference for at least two consecutive NFF conferences. We also consider additional supplementary activities, e.g.:

• Standing Track meetings/activities in between NFF conferences, focusing on young researchers (e.g. offering a NFF PhD course, early-careers workshops, and scholarships for postdocs...)
• Collect and distribute information about conferences and Nordic research funding opportunities relevant to the members of the track.
• Stimulate research collaboration among the members of the track.
• Create and maintain a map of major Nordic research projects within the research theme covered by the track.
   

Track organizers/coordinators:

Professor Emerita Inger Johanne Pettersen (inger.j.pettersen@ntnu.no), Trondheim Business School at NTNU, Norway, and the country’s first woman with a chair in Business Administration. Currently also a student of archives.

Associate Professor Per Christian Ahlgren (per.c.ahlgren@ntnu.no), Trondheim Business School at NTNU, Norway.

Professor Peter Skærbæk (ps.acc@cbs.dk), Copenhagen Business School, Denmark.

Professor Kjell Tryggestad (kjell.tryggestad@inn.no), Department of Business Administration, the Business School faculty at University of Inland Norway, Norway.

Løkke A¹

¹Aarhus University

Unfitting workplace attendance behavior poses a global challenge, with consequences ranging from productivity loss and job dissatisfaction to long-term absenteeism (Karanika-Murray & Cooper, 2018; Lohaus & Habermann, 2019). Such attendance behaviors include absenteeism, not showing up for scheduled work (Johns, 2008), and sickness presenteeism, which describes working despite ill health (Ruhle et al., 2020). Both can be seen as part of the same decision-making process (Johns, 2010; Karanika-Murray & Biron, 2020; Lohaus & Habermann, 2021; Whysall et al., 2023) and considering this process is key to understanding them as adaptive behaviors that might balance individual health and job needs (Miraglia & Johns, 2016; Whysall et al., 2023), potentially even with positive consequences (Karanika-Murray & Biron, 2020). 

Yet, many aspects of workplace attendance behavior remain unclear. For example, while first evidence suggests that leaders are an important social actor for followers’ attendance behavior (Krøtel & Løkke, 2023; Løkke, 2022), the impact of social and relational dynamics at work (Miraglia & Johns, 2021) is still insufficiently explored. Likewise, increases in remote work have blurred established definitions of presence, underscoring the need for understanding attendance behaviors in this context (Breitsohl et al., 2023). Questions about how the workplace environment, individual dispositions, and contextual factors influence attendance decisions and their outcomes continue to be highly relevant. In addition, to understand attendance decisions as they unfold, there is a need for more longitudinal and diary studies (Patel et al., 2023; Vinod Nair et al., 2020), more field experiments (for an example: Alfitian et al., 2024) and the systematic inclusion of the social and organizational context (Patel et al., 2023).

Consequently, this track invites contributions that advance the theory and practice of workplace attendance behavior, with the aim of understanding and fostering sustainable attendance patterns.

List of track-related topics covered
Based on the importance of workplace attendance behaviors, we seek contributions that are aimed at advancing our understanding of all types of attendance behavior. Below is a list of potential categories within research on absenteeism and presenteeism, but others are also welcome:

• Understanding the individual decision process and the perceptions of illness and attend-ance behaviors from various actors
• Understanding the functional potential of sickness presenteeism
• Research on presenteeism in unusual or under-researched contexts
• Insights on attendance behaviors in new work arrangements (e.g., remote work)
• Exploring the role of leadership in the formation and consequences of attendance behav-iors
• Examining the role of Human Resource Management in fostering sustainable attendance
• Exploring methodological advancement (e.g., experiments, diary studies & interventions, conceptual, and qualitative studies

Organizers’ names and affiliations

• Ann-Kristina Løkke, Department of Management, Aarhus University 

• Claus D. Hansen, Department of Sociology and Social Work, Aalborg University

• Heiko Breitsohl, Department of Organization, Human Resources and Service Management, University of Klagenfurt.

• Maria Karanika-Murray, School of Business, Leicester University

• Sascha Ruhle, Department of Human Resource Studies, Tilburg University

Slok C¹

¹Copenhagen Business School

Voluntary Leadership, Democracy, and the Quality of Management

Democratic institutions sometimes rely on voluntary leadership to ensure local legitimacy, participation, and trust. From parish councils and school boards to local associations and NGOs, volunteers are central to democratic governance. Yet, as the complexity of organizational tasks increases, voluntary leadership models face mounting challenges. The expectation that unpaid, part-time, or non-professional leaders can ensure both democratic participation and managerial quality exposes a structural tension at the heart of democratic organization.

This track explores the paradox of voluntarism as both a democratic strength and a managerial vulnerability. On the one hand, voluntary leadership sustains democratic ideals of inclusivity, local anchoring, and civic responsibility. On the other, it can undermine the consistency, accountability, and professional standards required for high quality management. When leadership is a civic duty rather than a professional role, organizations risk ambiguity in authority, uneven competence, and fragile work environments.

We invite contributions that examine this tension between democratic legitimacy and managerial effectiveness across different contexts, religious, civic, cultural, educational, or public sector. How do voluntary leaders navigate increasing administrative and managerial demands? What happens to notions of democracy and participation when calls for professionalization arise? And how do organizations negotiate the boundary between civic engagement and managerial competence?

The track welcomes theoretical, empirical, and comparative perspectives on:

• Governance and accountability in volunteer-led organizations
• Professionalization and the erosion or renewal of democratic participation
• The politics of legitimacy, expertise, and trust in local leadership
• Work environment and quality of management under voluntary governance
• Hybrid models that combine voluntarism and professionalism

By exploring these intersections, the track aims to deepen our understanding of how democracy is practiced and strained through the everyday realities of voluntary leadership.

Iveroth E¹, Sörhammar D, Löwstedt J

¹Uppsala University

Digital technologies such as algorithms, machine learning, business intelligence, and “robots” increasingly shape organizational life, influencing how work is organized, decisions are made, and value is created. While these technologies transform everyday practices, they also raise new challenges related to coordination, accountability, and sustainability. Yet, we still lack academic understanding of how these “intelligent” technologies, with all their applications and consequences, impact organizations.

This track provides a meeting point for researchers exploring how digital transformation reshapes management, control, and sustainability practices across organizational and societal levels. The focus is on how digitalization can inspire and support new organizational solutions (e.g., strategies, offerings, roles, routines, and norms) as well as integration between actors in their ecosystems (e.g., suppliers, customers, and stakeholders). In connection with the conference theme Global challenges and local strategies, we welcome contributions examining how organizations translate global digital and sustainability developments into locally grounded strategies and innovations.

A special focus will be on how digitalization can drive and enable sustainability, contributing to the ongoing “twin transition” toward greener and more resilient forms of organizing. We invite papers within the broad theme of “digital transformation, sustainability, and control,” particularly those addressing the interplay between digital and green transitions.

After more than a decade, this standing NFF track continues to explore how organizations manage the interplay between global digital trends and locally embedded strategies for sustainable transformation. Organized in collaboration with the National Research School Management and IT (MIT), it has previously been part of NFF conferences in Stockholm (2011), Reykjavík (2013), Copenhagen (2015), Bodö (2017), Vaasa (2019), Örebro (2022), and Reykjavík (2024). We encourage Ph.D. students and senior faculty from MIT, together with other researchers interested in digital transformation, sustainability, and control, to submit papers and join the discussion in Denmark.

Omanovic V¹, Risberg A², Diedrich A³, Kangas-Müller L⁴

¹School of Business, Economics, and Law, University of Gothenburg, Sweden., ²The University of Inland , ³School of Business, Economics and Law, ⁴The Department of Management Studies at Aalto University School of Business

We invite contributions focusing on diversity work in organizations in general. The contributions may address practices to increase diversity in the workplace, gender (in)equality, and the integration of migrants into the labor market and workplaces. 

Regarding the latter, we look forward to receiving contributions that explore integration and inclusion practices which may not always be designed or implemented exclusively for migrant employees (e.g. Holck, 2018; Kangas-Müller m.fl., 2023; Omanović & Langley, 2023; Risberg & Romani, 2022). Additionally, we invite contributions that more closely examine the agency of different actors or embedded in relations in the context of integration (see e.g., Diedrich & Czarniawska, 2023; Omanović, Bucken-Knapp & Spehar, 2025). We also welcome contributions that highlight the implications of these organizational practices for both organizations and minoritized groups.

Topics of interest for this track could include, but are not limited to:

• Practices of organizing workplace integration of migrants and/or gender (in)equality.
• Neurodiversity in organizations.
• Drivers (e.g., ideas, ideologies, interests), manifestations (e.g., artefacts, plans), and practices (e.g., recruitment, training, and mentoring) involved in integrating minoritized groups in organizations.
• The interrelationships between practices of organizing integration, a “diverse workforce”, and/or gender (in)equality within and across organizations.
• How changing socio-political contexts shape the nature of, and commitment to, employer practices related to the inclusion of minoritized groups.
• The role of digital technology, such as AI, in the employment integration and inclusion processes.
• How migrant workers mobilize and develop strategies to cope with exclusion within organizations and the labor market.
• Differences in how the socialization of employees from refugee migrant backgrounds is organized compared to other migrant groups.
• Methodological papers elaborating on or exemplifying methods for studying workplace diversity.
• Or any other theme related to diversity work and diversity management in organizations.

Diedrich, A., & Czarniawska, B. (2023). Organising Immigrants' Integration. Cham: Springer International Publishing AG.

Holck, L. (2018). Unequal by structure: Exploring the structural embeddedness of organizational diversity. Organization, 25(2), 242–259. doi.org/10.1177/1350508417721337

Kangas-Müller, L., Eräranta, K., & Moisander, J. (2023). Doing inclusion as counter-conduct: Navigating the paradoxes of organizing for refugee and migrant inclusion. Human Relations, 00187267221145399. doi.org/10.1177/00187267221145399

Omanović V., Bucken-Knapp G. and Spehar A. (2025). A Shift in Perspective: Refugee Voices and Agency in the Labor Market Entering and Workplace Integration Process. Journal of Organisational Sociology. DOI.org/10.1515/joso-2024-0027

Omanović, V., & Langley, A. (2023). Assimilation, Integration or Inclusion? A Dialectical Perspective on the Organizational Socialization of Migrants. Journal of Management Inquiry, 32(1), 76–97. doi.org/10.1177/10564926211063777

Risberg, A., & Romani, L. (2022). Underemploying highly skilled migrants: An organizational logic protecting corporate ‘normality’. Human Relations, 75(4), 655–680. doi.org/10.1177/0018726721992854.

Engwall L¹

¹Uppsala University

Universities, the home of our academic work, are indeed a successful organizational form. The oldest ones date back to the medieval times and since then − particularly after the Second World War − a large number of followers have been established. In this way, the number of institutions, the number of faculty and the number of students has increased considerably. Universities have become significant institutions in societies all over the globe. In a time when corporate governance has received an increasing attention, the governance of universities is likewise a significant topic on the agenda.

For the discussion of university governance, a framework presented by Burton Clark in 1983 has been very useful. He classified countries according to the power exercised over universities by the state, the market and the profession. In this way, he could label universities in the USSR as state dominated, while the market mainly ruled in the United States and the profession governed in Italy. In other countries, universities were subject to varying mixes of governing forces. Four decades later, changes in these governance patterns have occurred. In many countries, like the Nordic ones, there has been a movement towards more market solutions. New public management has spread in a society labelled by Michael Power as an audit society. This has implied increasing ambitions to evaluate and compare different institutions by means of rankings, bibliometric data and other performance indicators. At the same time, there are also tendencies that politicians (the state in Clark’s framework) want to have more control of universities by appointing Presidents and Boards and steering them more closely in terms of research and education. Professions are in this way pushed back and the traditional academic freedom is challenged.

Against the above backdrop, the track invites contributions that deal with the changing character of university governance in general and in the Nordic countries in particular. In this way, the track continues a conversation among NFF scholar that has been going on since 2003 at the conference in Reykjavik. The track welcomes papers that are dealing with various aspects of the governance of present-day universities, such as

(1) The effects of marketization of higher education and research (2) The political challenges of academic freedom, (3) The increasing application of management principles, (4) The growing administrative structures, (5) The effects of rankings and evaluations, (6) The mergers between academic institutions and (7) The selection of academic leaders.

Asmuß B¹, Rosfeldt Lorentzen A¹, Thomsen C¹

¹Aarhus University

Following discussions at AoM 2025 in Copenhagen on polarization as a communication-born grand societal challenge (GSC) (Leybold et al., 2025) this track seeks to investigate how societal inequalities are grounded and re-inforced in and through communication.

Societal inequalities as defined in SDG 10 relate to unfair disparities in opportunities and treatments within and among countries. Striving for more equality is fundamental for ensuring social cohesion and sustainable economic growth. However, complex, global problems like social inequalities require coordinated efforts across various sectors, international boundaries and disciplinary fields to find and implement innovative solutions.

From a constitutive perspective on communication (Basque, Bencherki, & Kuhn 2022), the way how these inequalities are talked into being, sustained and transformed by common discourses, is central for understanding the basic drivers that foster societal inequalities. Such understanding will help guide research and practice.

The track invites submissions that investigate the communicative underpinnings of social inequalities from a variety of disciplinary fields within management and communication, including but not limited to strategic management, HRM, marketing/PR, information management/digitalization, public governance, project management, and media studies, and addressing a variety of levels such as individual, group, organizational and societal ones.

Lehtimäki H¹, Yakovleva N², Leppälä K¹, Scheurenbrand K³

¹University Of Eastern Finland Business School, ²KEDGE Business School, ³ESSCA Business School 

Sustainable transitions move away from unsustainable practices towards efficient and sustainable solutions; this requires innovation, collaboration, and management approaches. Theory needs to examine how small- and medium-sized enterprises and larger multinational enterprises can reduce environmental pollution through improving operations and responding to sustainability regulation (such as the European Union Green Deal and Corporate Social Responsibility Directive) as well as voluntary initiatives that promote circular economy and sustainability. Despite increased innovation in industries such as product tracing, digitalisation, sustainability reporting, sustainable product innovation, and efforts to engage consumers and suppliers in sustainable practices, gaps in understanding how to promote uptake of sustainable business models and practices persist. 

This track session aims to deliberate how theory and research can encourage sustainability transitions and transformations in businesses, organisations, and communities both locally and for global scaling up. For instance, with this session, we encourage participants to:  1) explore theoretical foundations, innovations and social dimensions of scaling-up sustainable management; 2) shed light on knowledge gaps on sustainability transitions and transformation from a local or global perspective; 3) investigate sustainable or circular consumer behaviours and preferences; 4) inquire on the planning and management of sustainable materialities and/or waste transitions; 5) examine sustainability leadership research; 6) explore circular economic transitions and transformation, or nascent to functioning circular economic ecosystems; 7) examine how scholars engage with policy makers, practitioners and communities, and establish the interface between public policy and voluntary action for ecological and socially equitable transitions.

Belmonte-Ureña, L. J., Plaza-Úbeda, J. A., Vazquez-Brust, D., & Yakovleva, N. (2021). Circular economy, degrowth and green growth as pathways for research on sustainable development goals: A global analysis and future agenda. Ecological Economics, 185, 107050.

Bocken, N., Pinkse, J.,  Ritala, P. & Darnall, N. (2025). Moving Beyond Circular Utopia and Paralysis: Accelerating Business Transformations Towards the Circular Economy. Organization & Environment. doi.org/10.1177/10860266251346251

Glińska-Neweś, A., Glinka, B., Lewicka, D., Keranen, A. & Fu, Y. (2025), Fostering green initiatives among employees: the influence of corporate entrepreneurship climate. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 31(7), 1756–1774. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uef.fi:2443/10.1108/IJEBR-06-2024-0624

Lehtimäki, H., Aarikka-Stenroos, L., Jokinen, A., & Jokinen, P. (2023). The Routledge Handbook of Catalysts for a Sustainable Circular Economy. In Routledge eBooks. Informa. doi.org/10.4324/9781003267492

Lehtimäki, H., Leppälä, K., Mielonen, N., Piispanen, V-V, Henttonen, K., Sengupta, S., Parkkinen, I., & Liakh, O. (2025). Sustainable Innovation Framework: A Review of Organization, Strategic Management, and Entrepreneurship Literature. Sustainable Development. doi.org/10.1002/sd.70092

Leppälä, K., Vornanen, L., &  Savinen, O. (2023). Lifecycle extension of single-use medical device sensors: Case study of an engineering sustainability transition program. Journal of Cleaner Production, 423, 138518–138518. doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138518

Scheurenbrand, K., Parsons, E., Cappellini, B., & Patterson, A. (2018). Cycling into Headwinds: Analyzing Practices That Inhibit Sustainability. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 37(2), 227–244. doi.org/10.1177/0743915618810440

Souza Piao, R., Vincenzi, T. B. D., Vazquez‐Brust, D. A., Yakovleva, N., Bonsu, S., & Carvalho, M. M. D. (2024). Barriers toward circular economy transition: Exploring different stakeholders' perspectives. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(1), 153-168.

Atkova I¹, Ahokangas P¹, Iivari M¹, Koivumäki T¹

¹University of Oulu, Oulu Business School, Martti Ahtisaari Institute

Track organizers: Irina Atkova, Marika Iivari, Petri Ahokangas, Timo Koivumäki

The intersection of business model innovation (BMI) and internationalization has attracted growing scholarly attention in recent years (Evers et al., 2023). Within this research stream, BMI is often conceptualized as a key enabler of international expansion, particularly in digital and service-intensive industries (Marinov, 2022). It implies that firms making changes, especially radical, in their business models are more likely to enter new markets. Thus, BMI functions as a core mechanism driving internationalization (Krenn and Chiarvesio, 2024). 

However, the contemporary global environment—marked by pandemics, geopolitical tensions, supply chain disruptions, economic uncertainty, rapid technological innovation, and intensifying global competition —has introduced new complexities that challenge the assumed openness, scalability, and global reach of innovative business models (Verbeke, 2020; Juergensen et al., 2024). Such crises often compel organizations to reconfigure their business models toward localization and resilience, emphasizing context-specific adaptations, regional partnerships, and shorter value chains (Strange, 2020; Gereffi, 2020). Consequently, the traditional logic of BMI as a globally scalable process is increasingly counterbalanced by the need for contextualized, adaptive, and resilient models that can withstand shocks and institutional discontinuities.

These developments raise paradoxical tensions between global integration and local responsiveness—between maintaining open, adaptable business models and developing locally grounded, context-sensitive practices. Understanding how firms navigate these tensions—particularly through the mechanisms of BMI—remains a critical but underexplored research frontier.

Accordingly, this track seeks to advance theoretical and empirical discussions on the dynamic, paradoxical relationship between global and local strategies in business model innovation. We invite contributions that explore how firms across different sectors and regions balance scalability with resilience, openness with control, and global aspirations with local legitimacy. 

We encourage submissions that address, but are not limited to, the following themes and research questions:

• How do firms balance global scalability and local responsiveness through business model innovation during periods of crisis or uncertainty?
• What organizational mechanisms, capabilities, or partnership configurations enable firms to reconcile the paradox between openness and control in global business models?
• How do digitalization and platformization reshape the boundaries of global business models and enable new forms of hybrid global–local configurations?
• In what ways do institutional, cultural, and regulatory contexts influence the adaptation or reconfiguration of business models in international markets?
• What are the implications of global crises for theorizing business model innovation, particularly concerning resilience, sustainability, and paradox management?
• How can process-oriented, longitudinal, or comparative research designs contribute to understanding the dynamics of BMI and internationalization under conditions of global turbulence?
• How can business ecosystems and interorganizational networks facilitate or hinder the adaptation of business models during crises?

We welcome both conceptual and empirical contributions and encourage a variety of methodological approaches.

Muhos M¹, Kelliher F³, Saarela M¹, Lång S²

¹University Of Oulu, ²Åbo Akademi University, ³South East Technological Unversity

Microenterprises—defined as businesses with fewer than ten employees—constitute a heterogeneous and under-researched segment of the entrepreneurial landscape. Despite their numerical dominance and socio-economic relevance, microenterprises remain marginal in mainstream management and entrepreneurship studies.

This track responds to a growing academic and policy-oriented interest in microenterprises by inviting contributions that explore their unique characteristics, challenges, and opportunities. The gap is addressed by inviting contributions that explore the distinct characteristics, managerial practices, and contextual embeddedness of microenterprises. The track aims to foster a nuanced understanding of micro-entrepreneurship across individual, organizational, and regional levels, emphasizing diversity in business models, motivations, and strategic orientations.

Recent scholarships have begun to challenge prevailing assumptions about microenterprise capabilities and constraints. Gherhes et al. (2016) argue for a clear distinction between micro-businesses and SMEs, emphasizing that microenterprises face unique growth constraints related to resource scarcity, managerial capacity, and institutional support. Their systematic review highlights the need for tailored theoretical and policy frameworks that reflect the realities of micro-scale operations. Kelliher and Reinl (2009) adopt a resource-based view to explore how micro-firm managers leverage relational and contextual resources to compensate for structural limitations. Their work underscores the importance of embeddedness and informal networks in shaping managerial practice and strategic decision-making in microenterprises. Moreover, Rastrollo-Horrillo (2021) dismantles the myth of managerial incapacity in micro-firms by applying. Her findings reveal that microenterprise managers can develop sophisticated practices when supported by participatory and context-sensitive methodologies. Lehtinen, Saarela, and Virkkala (2021) provide a comprehensive review of microenterprise internationalisation, identifying pathways and barriers differing significantly from those of larger firms. Their work calls for more nuanced models that account for the incremental, network-driven, and often non-linear nature of internationalisation in microenterprises.

Building on these perspectives, this track invites empirical and conceptual papers that extend the boundaries of current knowledge. The track sheds light on the rich diversity of topics related to micro-entrepreneurship and micro-enterprise management, covering themes such as 

• sidepreneurs/Moonlighters, part-time, and full-time entrepreneurship
• innovation, development and growth aspects of microenterprises
• start-ups
• contextual and regional aspects
• internationalization of microenterprises
• diversity aspects such as gender, refugee, and immigrant perspectives to micro-entrepreneurship
• policy frameworks supporting microenterprise development
• methodological advancements in studying microenterprises 

In addition to traditional management and entrepreneurship perspectives, the track encourages multi-disciplinary contributions from diverse fields such as sociology, regional studies, information systems, and policy. We particularly invite contextual studies.

References:

Gherhes, C., Williams, N., Vorley, T., & Vasconcelos, A. C. (2016). Distinguishing micro-businesses from SMEs: A systematic review of growth constraints. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 23(4), 939–963. doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-05-2016-0075

Kelliher, F., & Reinl, L. (2009). A resource‐based view of micro‐firm management practice. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 16(3), 521–532. doi.org/10.1108/14626000910977206 

Rastrollo-Horrillo, M. A. (2021). Dismantling the myths about managerial (in) capabilities in micro-firms: SEAM intervention-research to develop management practices. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 37(3), Article 101158. doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2021.101158 

Lehtinen, U., Saarela, M., & Virkkala, P. (2021). Internationalisation of microenterprises: Systematic literature review. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, 20(3), 234–252. doi.org/10.1504/IJMED.2021.118408

Rytinki M¹, Linde P², Chu H³

¹University Of Oulu, ²Malmö University, ³Universiteit Leiden

This track invites scholars to explore the evolving landscape of creative industries, focusing on how innovation, sustainability, and digital transformation are reshaping cultural and entrepreneurial practices. Creative industries—spanning art, design, music, media, and cultural tourism—are increasingly recognized as drivers of economic growth, social cohesion, and regional development. Yet, these sectors face complex challenges and opportunities in a rapidly changing global environment.

We invite research papers/presentations from following research themes and questions:

1. Innovation and Entrepreneurial Strategies

- How do creative entrepreneurs integrate artistic practices with business models to foster innovation?

- What role do interdisciplinary collaborations play in generating new cultural and economic value?

- How can creative ecosystems support micro-entrepreneurship and regional vitality?

2. Sustainability and Cultural Tourism

- How can cultural tourism contribute to sustainable regional development?

- How do artist residencies influence urban and rural regeneration?

- How can creative tourism models promote cultural sustainability and inclusivity in marginalized regions?

- In what ways can artist residencies serve as catalysts for circular and regenerative economies?

3. Digital Transformation and Creative Practices

- What are the implications of emerging technologies for intellectual property and cultural policy?

- How do digital platforms enable global reach while maintaining local identity?

- What new forms of digital curation, participation, and AI applications are emerging in virtual art and cultural spaces?

4. Impact Studies in Creative Industries

- What measurable impacts do artist residencies have on local economies, cultural vitality, and innovation ecosystems?

- How does the cultural sector contribute to social cohesion, identity formation, and regional competitiveness?

- What measurable cultural, social, and economic impacts emerge from artist-in-residence programs?

- How can mixed-method and participatory approaches better capture the intangible value of creative practices?

- Which frameworks or indicators most effectively assess cultural impact and sustainability outcomes?

- In what ways do artists, communities, and institutions collaborate to regenerate ecosystems?

- What role do co-creation and participatory evaluation play in shaping sustainable cultural policies?

Topics for paper presentations can also include: 

• Artist residencies as catalysts for innovation and development
• Cultural tourism and its socio-economic impacts
• Digital tools and platforms in creative production
• Intellectual property and copyright in the digital age
• Policy frameworks for supporting creative ecosystems
• Impact assessment of cultural and creative sectors
• Cross-sector collaboration between science, art, and business

In general this track encourages contributions that combine theoretical insights with empirical evidence, including case studies, comparative analyses, and policy evaluations. By integrating impact studies, we aim to deepen understanding of how creative industries generate tangible benefits for communities and economies. Submissions may address both micro-level dynamics—such as individual artist residencies—and macro-level trends shaping cultural sectors globally.

Through these discussions, the track will provide a platform for interdisciplinary exchange, offering new perspectives on how creativity can drive sustainable development and digital innovation. We invite scholars to share research that informs policy, strengthens creative ecosystems, and highlights the transformative potential of culture in a rapidly changing world.

Oelrich S¹, Hedegaard Tønnesen M²

¹Aarhus University, Center for Accounting, ²Aarhus University, Behavioral Economics & Business Ethics Lab (BEBE)

Organizational wrongdoing is a “behavior in or by an organization that a social-control agent judges to transgress a line separating right from wrong” (Greve et al. 2010, 56). Wrongdoing, such as corrupt business practices, workplace abuses, fraudulent activities, or immoral and unethical conduct, is a phenomenon that continues to present a significant challenge at a global scale, with substantial impact on individuals, organizations, and societies. For instance, in the Nordic countries, cases such as the money laundering scandals of Danske Bank and the Statoil corruption case have highlighted the importance of understanding this phenomenon as it undermines democracy, induces harm to society, erodes public trust, and binds valuable resources. 

Furthermore, research points to how social control agents may judge LGBTQ-related advocacy work, marihuana sale, abortion clinics, or organizations operating in the arms industry as “wrongdoers” or “sinful”, subjecting organizations to stigmatization (Hudson 2008, Piazza & Augustine 2022). Employees working in organizations facing a scandal also experience stigma inside and outside their work, causing severe emotional strain (Frandsen & Morsing 2021). 

Yet, despite the global prevalence and widespread consequences, solutions are hardly a one-size-fits-all and our understanding of the phenomenon in its different facets is still emerging. For instance, scholars have been interested in the different forms of organizational wrongdoing, such as top management fraud (Zahra et al. 2005), collusion (Tønnesen et al. 2024, Zickfeld et al. 2023), organized crime (Mallon & Fainshmidt 2022) and stigmatized behaviors (Hudson & Okhuysen 2009); the trajectories leading to wrongdoing (Ashforth & Anand 2003, Elbæk & Mitkidis 2023); and the outcomes and consequences of wrongdoing (Greve et al. 2010, Piazza & Jourdan 2018). Others have focused on detection and prevention measures, including social norm cues (Zickfeld et al. 2025), management controls (Burbano & Chiles 2022), whistleblowing (Dyck et al. 2010, Oelrich 2021, Vadera et al. 2025); and the role of social control agents, such as the media and related audiences (Campa & Laguecir 2025, Choi & Valente 2023, Oelrich 2024). Scholars are also increasingly interested in the dynamics and processes of scandalization, stigmatization, and legitimization (Frandsen et al. 2025, Oelrich & Siebold 2024, Patterson et al. 2019, Piazza & Jourdan 2024).

Building on management research across accounting, business ethics, organization studies, and psychology, this track aims to bring together researchers who examine organizational wrongdoing in its various facets and forms. We welcome submissions across a wide range of theoretical and empirical perspectives on organizational wrongdoing across management, including:

• Various forms of deviance, such as misconduct, pink- and greenwashing activities, or stigmatized behaviors
• Collusion and corrupt collaborations in organizations, including leader-subordinate dynamics and team behavior
• Organizational wrongdoing across types of organizations, including for-profit, not-for-profit, public institutions, NGOs, the third sector
• Psychological, structural, and social drivers of organizational wrongdoing
• Scandalization processes, stigmatization, and stigma management
• Effects and outcomes of organizational wrongdoing, including consequences for perpetrators, negative externalities, or public trust
• Detection and regulation mechanisms against wrongdoing, such as whistleblowing, social control agents, and regulation 

Pogner K¹, Pässilä A², Williamsson J³

¹Dept. of Management, Society, and Communication, Copenhagen Business School, ²LUT University, School of Engineering Science, Industrial Engineering and Management, ³University of Gothenburg, School of Business, Economics and Law, Industrial and Financial Management & Logistics

We want to continue our conversations about smart and / or livable cities which we have stimulated at the NFF conferences in Bodø,  Vaasa, Örebro, and Reykjavik by focusing on how governance, organization, and leadership could enable and constrain participation and engagement of the “city-zens”. 

Research has investigated how culture, arts, and creativity can raise the imaginative capability of citizens. Studies have also analyzed how technology, urban planning, architecture, and public innovation could be envisioned as intertwined practices of self-organization, as well as emerging and controlling forces. 

The success of cooperation and co-creating projects and policies, civil engagement and participation,  as well as urban planning within and between the public sector,  public institutions (e.g., in health care), public administration, political bodies, civil society, and private sector seems to be dependent on a merger of top-down rules and bottom-up activities and processes. 

Therefore,  we call for empirical (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods as well as theoretical or conceptual contributions on analyzing and discussing these activities. We are especially – but not exclusive  - interested in case and other organizational, cultural, political, and sociological studies investigating the relationships between technologies(in a broad sense), infrastructures, management / governance, citizens' engagement and involvement, policy instruments etc. We also invite you to contribute with studies of innovative, sustainable, and responsible transitions of urban / town/ village cultures, structures, and lives. 

Our interdisciplinary track aims at  bringing  together researchers and (other) practitioners to shed light on the interface, interplay, and meshing of urban and rural spheres and values in communities, cultures, and processes.

Keywords: City Governance,  Innovation, Sustainability, Participation, Village in Town

Hatami A¹, Garcia-Rosell Eskenazi J¹, Ulkuniemi P¹, Keränen A¹

¹University Of Oulu

Cross-sector collaboration can turn global initiatives and guidelines into practical, context-sensitive solutions. When the public and private sectors work together with civil society and academia, they can pool their resources, knowledge, and creativity to co-create innovative solutions that generate shared value. Such collaboration supports local community development and builds their capacity for resilience and adaptation, while making them stronger to take steps in dealing with global challenges.  One of the main considerations in cross-sectoral collaboration is the ethical dimension.   Indeed, having an ethical lens helps ensure inclusivity, transparency, and respect for the diverse institutional logics and values of all actors involved. This, in turn, contributes to trust, legitimacy, and the sustainability of the outcomes of such a collaboration. 

Despite the role of ethics in cross-sector collaboration, studies usually treat ethical considerations as implicit, leaving them underexplored. This could be driven by the assumption that the ethicality of collaborative practices can be assessed through a single, universal standard, overlooking the diversity of moral values, stakeholder relationships, and the local contexts in which collaboration occurs. This gap stresses the need to gain deeper insights into the diversity of ethical practices that guide collaboration, recognizing the multiple perspectives and values of all actors involved. To understand the current discussion of ethical practices in cross-sectoral collaboration, we are particularly interested in the case studies with empirical cases to show how cross-sectoral collaboration can orchestrate diverse values to create more sustainable societies. Operating in a diverse context provides an opportunity to have a reflective approach to collaboration practices. 

This track aims to explore the dynamics, tensions, and possibilities of collaborative responses to global challenges. A dynamic approach to collaboration can help researchers understand the complexity inherent in this collaboration. 

List of the possible track-related topics covered:  

- Responsible leadership in cross-sectoral collaboration 

- Ethics and value conflict in cross-sectoral collaboration 

- Local collaboration as a pilot to exercise global collaboration 

- Cross-sectoral collaboration: Gaining legitimacy or finding a solution 

- Resource sharing: challenges and opportunities 

- Meeting diverse values in cross-sectoral collaboration 

- Unintentional irresponsibility in cross-sectoral collaboration 

- Cultural relativism and ethical challenges in collaboration   

- Employee resilience in encountering diverse values 

- Ethical implications of language and representation in collaboration 

- Dynamics of collaboration in the age of uncertainty 

- Navigating ethical conflicts in multistakeholder collaboration 

- Ethics of inclusion and representation in collaborative decision-making 

- Mitigating ethical risks in collaboration: the role of language and discourse 

Lundgren-Henriksson E, Heikkinen S, Johansson J

In this track, we are interested in how feminist approaches can challenge and problematise the security concept. Organisations play a key role in both constructing and tackling grand challenges (Benschop, 2021), including those related to security. Within organisational contexts, security represents a complex interplay of individual and collective experiences, the instrumental and tactical use of (in)security, and its more profound ontological implications such as being safe. Governments and organisations alike often mobilise “security” rhetorically to justify control and manage risks, thereby often reproducing insecurity for marginalised groups. Within organisational settings, (in)security manifests as both an affective condition and a structural phenomenon shaped by socio-political, economic, and environmental dynamics.

We advocate a critical, reflective approach to understanding how humans, organisations, and societies engage with the concept of security and its implications i.e. insecurity and being safe. Traditional understandings of security originate from military studies, yet feminist lenses open other ways of knowing and being with the world (Benschop, 2021). We are not only limited to an organisational perspective but also interested in exploring the intersections between organisations and society, as well as the present and future. Submissions that examine private, public, and third-sector organisations are encouraged. Contributions may include but are not limited to discursive, multimodal, and narrative-oriented theoretical and methodological perspectives. We welcome contributions that deploy conceptual, empirical, and methodological feminist-inspired approaches to (in)security as a grand challenge.

The following questions are designed to inspire deeper exploration:

• How do various organisational practices of establishing, framing, or challenging security manifest, trigger and contribute to notions of a ‘safe’ society and for whom?

• How do practices in organisations and beyond sustain or challenge established notions of (in)secure human and non-human relationships with the surrounding world?

• How do gendered notions of security contribute to the inclusion/exclusion of actor groups in organisations and society?

• How can feminist inspired theories offer alternative framings of grand challenges and security?

• How can we study (in)securities within and beyond organisations through a feminist lens, and what are the methodological implications and challenges?

• How can we write differently about crisis, war, defence, and security, to foster responsibility towards others?

Ojasoo M¹

¹Tallinn University Of Technology

The urgency of global sustainability transformations places leadership at the core of achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and following environmental, social and governance ESG principles. Sustainability goals require not only technological innovation and policy support but also effective leadership capable of managing complexity, uncertainty, and cross-sector collaboration. However, leaders today face severe challenges — navigating regulatory pressures, stakeholder expectations, technological innovation, and systemic change across global value chains. This session examines how leadership models, diversity, and innovative, inclusive business strategies can be aligned to drive measurable progress toward sustainability and climate neutrality. In this session, special attention will be paid to the management of healthcare institutions and the role of women in top management. It invites critical discussion on adaptive, ethical, diverse and transformative leadership practices that can bridge the gap between ambition and action in corporate, public, and academic contexts.

By connecting research on leadership theory and practice, ESG frameworks, and systems thinking, papers reflecting the following topics are welcome:

• leadership competencies for advancing sustainability transitions;
• barriers and supporters to organisational change and cross-sector collaboration;
• implementing SDG/ESG principles within corporate strategies, governance structures, and performance systems;
• the role of governance, ethics, and transparency in leadership;
• multi-level leadership for cross-sector collaboration and policy integration;
• building organisational cultures that enable sustainable innovation;
• measuring leadership impact on ESG and SDG outcomes;
• future healthcare leadership in an ageing society;
• •education and development of next-generation sustainable leaders;
• women in top management – where are you?
• What should male top managers do to support women in top management?
• What are the education and capacity-building pathways for sustainable leadership development?

Target Audience:

Researchers in management, sustainability, and leadership studies, Policymakers and sustainability officers, Business leaders and consultants engaged in ESG and climate strategy, Educators in sustainability and organisational change,

Graduate and doctoral students exploring leadership and SDG topics.

Kork A¹, Sinervo L

¹University Of Vaasa

This track explores how organizations respond to global challenges – climate change, economic instability, digitalization, demographic shifts – through locally grounded strategies and value-based policies. We focus on how organizations interpret societal challenges in decision-making and performance management. 

We invite contributions that examine e.g. how knowledge becomes action, how reforms are institutionalized, or how organizations build sustainability, resilience, and public trust. Submissions are encouraged that explore the balance between short-term performance and long-term sustainability goals, integration of ecological, social, and economic sustainability into performance and strategic management, and the ways organizations engage stakeholders to foster societal impact. 

Aligned with the conference theme, we emphasize responsive, evidence-informed, context-sensitive approaches to addressing global challenges. We welcome interdisciplinary and comparative research on mechanisms of change, leadership, and strategic work in organizations.

Special attention is given to municipalities and cities as key arenas for implementing strategies in healthcare, education, and social services with significant implications for citizen health, welfare and societal development. Topics may include, but are not limited to: sustainability strategies, management reforms, organizational learning, value co-creation, and participatory governance.

Koch C¹, Martine B², Gottlieb S¹, Frederiksen N¹, Friis O³

¹University of Southern Denmark, ²Chalmers University of Technology, ³Aalborg University

The building and real estate sector is responsible for around 30% of global total CO2e emission, and recycling and reuse of building materials is an important mitigation strategy. Yet, at present, less than 10% of building materials are actually recycled, while scary amounts are incinerated. 

This status has attracted attention from a range of players and institutions. EU regulation – the Sustainable Finance Act (“the taxonomy”) – positions circularity as one out of seven central actions. Concurrently, clients and investors are introducing sustainability requirements into procurement processes, while start-ups are developing platforms to facilitate the exchange of secondary building material. These platforms aim to connect possible suppliers and buyers, establish transparent pricing mechanisms, and convert material waste to economic value. 

Despite these initiatives, recent assessments suggest that the transition toward circularity is proceeding at an insufficient pace to meet national and supranational climate targets. Some even highlight potential reversals, such as the implications of the ongoing EU Omnibus reform. Against this backdrop, a pressing question emerges: what pathways can accelerate transformative change in the sector?

This track invites studies of social action. We propose drawing on frameworks from social movement theory, collective action, organizational collectives, and ecological class analysis to conceptualize forward-moving social dynamics. Achieving meaningful progress toward circularity will likely depend on the emergence of broad, cross-sectoral coalitions and coordinated strategies for systemic change.
 

Track-related topics covered

We welcome contributions from a range of disciplines and assert that interdisciplinary approaches especially should be further developed. 

Topics include (non-exhaustive list):

• Mechanisms that enable or constrain circularity
• Processes of circular market shaping in construction
• Social inaction in NGOs officially working for sustainability in the built environment 

Organizers

Martine Buser, Associate Professor at Building Design, Architectural and Civil Engineering, Chalmers Institute of Technology.  Study the social and institutional dimensions of environmental and technical changes in the context of climate adaptation, sustainability and circularity in the construction sector.

Stefan Gottlieb University of Southern Denmark, Associate Professor, Civil and Architectural Engineering, Department of Technology and Innovation. Sociotechnical and institutional studies of construction sector change. Recent studies include market formation of circular building and knowledge commons in construction.

Nicolaj Frederiksen, University of Southern Denmark, Assistant Professor, Civil and Architectural Engineering, Department of Technology and Innovation. Institutional and organizational studies of organizational and sectoral change in construction. Recent studies include organizational collectives for sustainable change, circular transitions, and interorganizational collaboration.

Christian Koch, University of Southern Denmark, Professor of Civil and Architectural Engineering. Interdisciplinary studies of society and technology, building processes, management and organization. Recent studies include market formation of circular building and electrical construction machines. 

Ole Friis, Associate Professor, Aalborg School of Business, Aalborg University. Research in strategy processes, viewing them as practices. Cocreation and collaboration in public organization climate transition

Pallas J, Cassinger C, Gustafsson N, Valtonen A, Karlsson I, Eiríksdóttir L

¹Uppsala University

This track connects to the NFF 2026 theme Global challenges, local strategies by examining how resilience is understood and enacted in locally situated organizational and communicative practices in the face of global disruptions.

Resilience has shifted from a marginal technical term to a ubiquitous reference point in public policy, organizational strategies and everyday talk. It is invoked in relation to war and security threats, pandemics and climate emergencies, economic turbulence and democratic backsliding. Beyond “bouncing back”, resilience concerns how people, organizations and societies make sense of vulnerability and disruption, and how they imagine and communicate livable futures. 

Despite its popularity, we still know little about the everyday work through which resilience is conceptualized, translated and conveyed in organizational and institutional settings. How do policymakers, professionals, managers, activists and local communities construct shared – or contested – understandings of threats, crises and futures? How are ideas of resilience entangled with power relations, for instance when resilience discourse “responsibilizes” individuals and communities or, alternatively, serves as a resource for critique, resistance and democratic renewal?

A key part of this work is communicative: not just information provision, but ongoing meaning-making through interactions, texts, images, media infrastructures and digital platforms. Organizational and democratic resilience is shaped by how stories about crisis and livable futures circulate, how conflicting interpretations are negotiated, and how some voices and experiences are amplified while others are silenced.

We therefore welcome empirically oriented papers that examine practices, relations and infrastructures through which resilience is made sense of and enacted in and between:

• public authorities and welfare institutions
• security and defence organizations
• municipalities, schools and universities
• NGOs and social movements
• cultural institutions, news media and platforms

We invite also theoretical contributions that mobilize and challenge organization theory to engage with resilience as a contested and philosophically charged concept, and that build bridges to communication and media research. We especially welcome perspectives connecting organizational analysis with phenomenology, critical theory, political and democratic theory, socio-ecological thought and communication studies. 

Of particular interest are papers that:

1. Trace how specific understandings of resilience travel across fields, media environments, organizational levels and contexts.
2. Explore how organizational and communicative practices shape whose lives and futures are rendered “livable” and whose are rendered expendable.
3. Develop conceptual tools for thinking resilience beyond narrow managerial or neoliberal framings, in ways that speak to democratic resilience and livable life.

References:

Cassinger & Porzionato (2025). Rethinking ethics in city branding: from competition to vulnerability. Lessons from Venice and Gothenburg. In City Branding (pp. 15-28). Edward Elgar Publishing.

Eiríksdóttir & Pallas (2024). Practicing Uncertainty as Resilience. Filozofia.

Holloway & Manwaring (2022). How well does ‘resilience’ apply to democracy? A systematic review. Contemporary Politics, 29(1)

Koubova (2024). Which Resilience? Thinking Democratic Subjectivity in the Polycrisis. Filozofia, 79(10).

Lührmann & Merkel (2023). Resilience of democracy: Responses to illiberal and authoritarian challenges. Routledge.

Raetze  et al. (2021). Resilience in organizations: An integrative multilevel review and editorial introduction. Group & Organization Management, 46(4).

Jaskari M¹

¹Vaasan Yliopisto

Teaching and learning in business schools are in transformation. The growth of AI, new learning technologies, hybrid teaching, and recent global crises are reshaping what, how, and why we teach. A key question is: how can we keep learning meaningful in an increasingly digital and performance-driven environment?

This track invites research on how business education can respond to these changes—from redesigning curricula and teaching practices to building critical, ethical, and systems thinking in students.

We welcome both conceptual and empirical papers on topics including but not limited to:

• students learning and engagement
• competence development
• integrating sustainability goals into education
• the role of reflexivity and resilience in teaching and learning
• curriculum design and renewal
• pedagogical innovations (on-site, online, hybrid)
• assessment methods that support deep learning
• learning analytics
• ethics, inclusion, and well-being
• institutional and faculty perspectives
• teacher identity and development

The track is open to different disciplines and methods. Furthermore, if you are considering submitting your research to journals like the Journal of Marketing Education, Journal of Education for Business, or Journal of Accounting Education, this conference track would be particularly relevant for you.

Sigurjonsson T¹

¹University of Iceland

Global challenges, including climate change, geopolitical turbulence, digital disruption, and pandemic preparedness, have exposed the limitations of conventional management assumptions. While these issues are global in scale, their most successful responses are often rooted in localized experimentation and context-sensitive problem-solving. Small societies—characterized by compact markets, close institutional ties, and agile decision-making environments—provide a powerful and underexplored lens for understanding how organizations can navigate global uncertainty through locally grounded strategies.

This track invites scholars to explore how small societies function as dynamic laboratories for organizational innovation, public–private collaboration, and responsible business practices. Reduced structural complexity, direct stakeholder networks, and strong community ties create opportunities for rapid policy deployment, institutional learning, and cross-sector coordination. These settings can foster trust, experimentation, and entrepreneurial activity, generating business insights that scale beyond their borders.

At the same time, small societies face distinct vulnerabilities, including talent and resource scarcity, reliance on international markets, political concentration, and heightened exposure to global shocks. These features introduce unique tensions in areas such as governance, sustainability, ethical leadership, financial systems, and digital development. Understanding how organizations, public bodies, and civil society actors respond within such environments provides fertile ground for advancing management theory, refining methodologies, and generating practical lessons for broader economies.

We encourage diverse methodological approaches, including qualitative, quantitative, comparative, and conceptual, as well as interdisciplinary contributions. This track aims to deepen scholarly understanding of how compact societal settings foster innovation, resilience, and ethical practice in the face of global challenges, and to examine how these lessons can meaningfully inform and influence management research, practice, and policy worldwide.

Track-Related Topics

We welcome submissions from a broad range of perspectives, including but not limited to:

• Strategic agility and crisis management in small or compact contexts
• Innovation ecosystems and entrepreneurship in small-scale environments
• Public–private collaboration and agile governance
• Digital transformation and data governance in small societies
• Sustainability and circular-economy initiatives at the local scale
• Ethical leadership, trust, and relational governance dynamics
• Institutional capacity, capability building, and talent flows
• Methodological challenges and opportunities in researching small societies
• Global relevance and transferability of findings from small contexts
• Democratic organization

Sløk C¹, Heikkinen S², Riivari E³

¹Copenhagen Business School, ²School of Business and Economics, ³The Open University of the University of Jyväskylä

Teaching adults is not merely a pedagogical act; it is an encounter between lived experience and the possibility of responsible transformation. Adult learners bring with them stories, identities, and responsibilities that shape how they learn and what they expect from education. Teaching them, therefore, requires more than transmitting knowledge; it also calls for emotional sensitivity, generational awareness, ethical astuteness, and respect for accumulated wisdom.

This conference track explores the question: What does it mean to teach adults today? It invites contributions that examine the complex emotional and generational dynamics involved in adult education. How do teachers engage learners who may be returning to formal education after decades, balancing work, family, and self-understanding? How does generational diversity in classrooms, where younger adults meet those with lifelong careers, shape our ideas of authority, curiosity, and vulnerability? How do online and virtual environments shape teaching and pedagogical choices in management education today?

The track welcomes empirical and conceptual work addressing how adult education can foster both professional renewal and personal meaning. We invite papers that for instance contain these subjects:

1. The emotional and relational dimensions of teaching adults: how trust, empathy, fear, and pride shape learning encounters and pedagogical practices.

2. Generational dynamics in adult education: how differences in age, experience, and social context influence authority, curiosity, and mutual learning.

3. The role of adult education in personal and professional transformation: how learning later in life supports renewal, identity work, and meaning-making.

4. The educator’s role as facilitator and interlocutor: how teaching and different pedagogical choices/approaches can bridge life stories, responsibilities, and aspirations across generations.

Ultimately, to teach adults is to teach with ethical sensitivity across time: to meet people as they are, while inviting them to imagine who they might still become. This track seeks to create a space for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to share insights into how education can honour the depth of adult experience while sustaining the courage to change.

Nilsson A¹, Kremel A¹

¹Örebro University School of Business
 

In global political arenas, presidents and world leaders often deploy lies strategically to advance their agendas, manage public perceptions, or influence constituencies (Gaspar, Levine & Schweitzer, 2015). Such acts of deception can shape geopolitical dynamics, affect policy debates, and contribute to broader narratives that legitimize or undermine political authority. These high-stakes contexts illustrate how deception can operate not merely as an individual moral failing, but as a deliberate instrument embedded within systems of power, persuasion, and governance.

Beyond these visible and consequential settings, deception also permeates the fabric of everyday social interactions. In organizational and professional life, for instance, lies may be used to secure sales, influence negotiations, or shape follower behaviour, revealing how deception can become normalized within economic and managerial practices (Alvehus, 2025; Patri, Madhavan & Manayath, 2025). Individuals may also engage in lying to preserve or enhance their reputations, to navigate complex social expectations, or to avoid interpersonal conflict. Importantly, deception is not always motivated by self-interest or malicious intent. In some cases, it may serve prosocial or seemingly ethical purposes—for example, by protecting another person from harm, preventing the escalation of a difficult situation, or upholding norms of politeness and emotional management (Gaspar, Levine & Schweitzer, 2015).

At times, deception fulfils pragmatic and functional roles that highlight its ambivalent status in social life. Lies may be necessary to safeguard sensitive information, maintain confidentiality, or adhere to organizational secrecy requirements. In other instances, individuals lie to manage competing demands or to cope with precarious personal, social, or professional circumstances.

We welcome diverse methodological approaches, including qualitative case studies, experimental designs, and large-scale data analyses in which truths or lies are employed in (un)conventional ways, with particular attention to the consequences for both the deceiver and those being deceived. 

Submissions may address, but are not limited to:

• Situations in which truth is undeniable or of exceptional value
• The use of half-truths to strategically withhold information
• Lies told to advance or promote others
• Lies intended to protect others
• Lies used as a means of survival

References

Alvehus, J. (2025). Sweet little lies? Towards a mendaciology of leadership. Leadership, 17427150251388559.

Gaspar, J. P., Levine, E. E., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2015). Why we should lie. Organizational Dynamics, 44(4), 306-309.

Patri, R., Madhavan, V., K, V. P., & Manayath, D. (2025). Truthfulness in business managers: views on perception of integrity, ethical challenges, and strategic responses. Asian Journal of Business Ethics, 1-31.

Simunaniemi A¹, Komonen P², Ekonen M¹, Gordon A³

¹Jamk University Of Applied Sciences, ²VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, ³Aarhus University

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is transforming how organizations innovate, strategize, and lead. Moving beyond automation, GenAI enables creative problem-solving, predictive modeling, and scenario-based thinking across business functions—from marketing and product development to operations and human resource management. Its potential to accelerate innovation and strategic foresight makes it a critical area for research and practice.

This track explores how leaders can utilize GenAI to enhance decision-making, foster agility, and design resilient strategies in the face of global uncertainty. We invite studies on integrating GenAI into leadership and organizational processes to address global challenges while enabling locally grounded strategies. In addition to organizational transformation, this track encourages research on how GenAI fosters collaboration across industries, academia, and public institutions to co-create sustainable solutions. We also welcome contributions examining societal implications, workforce adaptation, and the role of inclusive leadership in ensuring that GenAI-driven innovation benefits diverse stakeholders globally. Ethical, cultural, and governance considerations are central to this discussion.

Contributions may include theoretical frameworks, empirical studies, and interdisciplinary approaches combining leadership, organizational management, and sustainability perspectives with strategic foresight. The aim is to advance understanding of how GenAI-powered strategies can mitigate global risks, anticipate future scenarios, and unlock new business models. By focusing on leadership and strategic management, this track highlights how GenAI can empower organizations to navigate complexity responsibly and creatively.

Proposed subtopics include but are not limited to: 

• Leadership and organizational transformation: What requirements does the era of artificial intelligence place on leadership to ensure that AI can be used sustainably in organizations to foster innovation? How GenAI reshapes leadership roles, decision-making, structures, and collaboration patterns while balancing risks and opportunities?
• Generative AI in innovation: How organizations use GenAI across stages of innovation and what capabilities enable successful adoption.
• Building collective intelligence and strategic capabilities: How firms co-create knowledge and develop leadership competencies for GenAI adoption, and the role of open innovation ecosystems.
• Long-term implications and future scenarios: What scenarios emerge from widespread GenAI adoption, and how organizations can prepare for disruptive developments.
• Cross-sector collaboration and societal impact: How GenAI fosters collaboration among industries, academia, and public institutions, from the perspectives of societal implications, inclusive leadership, and workforce adaptation strategies.

Dr Shruti Kashyap^1,2, Dr. Megan Meacham³

¹Royal Swedish Academy Of Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden, ²Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, ³Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

Organizations today face converging systemic challenges from climate change, biodiversity loss, geopolitical instability, and intensifying sustainability pressures. At the same time, rapid developments in digitalization and artificial intelligence are transforming information environments, decision-making practices, and organizational control systems. Together, these planetary and technological shifts generate significant uncertainties about future conditions and about the quality and reliability of the knowledge organizations rely on. These uncertainties shape organizations’ ability to make strategic and operational decisions as well as to comply with regulatory and stakeholder demands.

In this context, organizations must develop and maintain robust, transparent, and scientifically grounded infrastructures for risk management, accounting, governance, and management control. Yet significant gaps remain. Amid proliferating sustainability frameworks and reporting standards (e.g., ESRS, CSRD, GRI, TCFD, TNFD, CSDDD, EU Taxonomy) and stakeholder demands for greater sustainability progress, organizations struggle to translate complex environmental and societal realities into practical measurement systems, decision routines, and assurance processes. The sustainability reporting landscape is fragmented; definitions of materiality and accountability are contested; and digital tools (sensory and imaging technologies, AI, IoT, and platform infrastructures, among other innovations) are unevenly adopted and poorly understood.

This track invites scholars to analyze how organizations create reliable, evidence-based systems of governance, accounting, and control, and how these systems support risk management and decision-making in a world defined by ecological disruption and rapid digital innovation. We welcome conceptual, empirical, legal-regulatory, and methodological contributions, and are particularly interested in the following themes:

• Risk governance and management under planetary and technological uncertainties;
• The meaning and implications of nature-positive approaches for organizations and the environments in which they function;
• Sustainability-focused measurement, reporting, and assurance;
• Management control systems for climate, biodiversity, and broader sustainability impacts and risks;
• Double materiality approaches to risk management, strategic management, and regulatory compliance;
• Legal and regulatory developments (e.g., CSRD, ESRS, TNFD) and their implications for sustainability reporting, management, control, risk management, and governance;
• The role of AI, digitalization, and data infrastructures in sustainability monitoring, reporting, and verification;
• Accountability, transparency, and materiality in sustainability governance;
• How systemic risks are understood and translated into organizational reporting, management, and control;
• Links between corporate governance and firm performance as related to sustainability and/or technological innovation;
• How digital innovation is shaping sustainability transitions;
• How organizations are contending with physical and transition risks in governance, accounting, and control, and the implications that arise;
• Intersections of digital innovation, risk governance, and management control in public or private sector organizations;
• How public-sector authorities and other oversight bodies incorporate sustainability and technological considerations into market and actor governance.

The track includes a symposium session featuring short presentations from four panelists with diverse disciplinary backgrounds, followed by a moderated discussion on emerging tensions, opportunities, and research pathways.

Biography: 

Dr. Shruti Kashyap
Shruti Kashyap (J.D., PhD) is a scholar of risk and resilience specializing in organizational and systemic risk management. Her work focuses on transparency, accountability, and compliance in sustainability and digitalization. Her current research examines innovation and sustainability-related risks and uncertainties in management, control, and governance, with a particular emphasis on prudential governance and corporate reporting. She is a Senior Researcher at the Swedish Royal Academy of Sciences and the Sustainable Finance Lab, and a Researcher at the Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University.

Dr. Megan Meacham
Megan Meacham (PhD) is a researcher at the Stockholm Resilience Centre, where her work focuses on how people benefit from nature (ecosystem services) and how these benefits are produced. Her research highlights the importance of understanding relationships among ecosystem services and managing recurring bundles of these services. She is also the Projectt Manager for two major research initiatives: Finance to Revive Biodiversity (FinBio), funded by Mistra, which explores how financial systems can support biodiversity and nature-positive outcomes; and Advancing the Research Frontier of Biosphere Stewardship, a strategic collaboration and postdoctoral program between the Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, and the Natural Capital Project at Stanford University, funded by the Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg Foundation.

Dr. Maria Elo¹, Prof. Leo-Paul Dana²

¹SDU, ²Dalhousie University

In a world marked by global disruptions—from the COVID-19 pandemic and the climate crisis to digital transformation and geopolitical conflict—diasporic and transnational actors play a crucial role in linking global challenges with local strategies and capacity building (Kotabe et al., 2013; Elo, 2025). Interestingly, the particular importance of second and further diaspora generations, who strategically navigate and reinterpret the meaning of “home,” identity, and belonging across borders remains under-researched (Dana, 2007). Their hybrid positionality enables innovative approaches to entrepreneurship, knowledge exchange, and market creation that connect local embeddedness with global reach (cf. Elo, Täube & Volovelsky, 2019; Koinova, 2021).

Research on second-generation returnees (King & Christou, 2010) and diasporic identity formation (Christou & King, 2010; Elo & Dana, 2019) demonstrates that these actors construct transnational lives and leverage dual cultural and institutional familiarity as strategic assets (Haq et al. 2024). Additionally, urban diasporas enact as incubators for entrepreneurial innovation (Kourtit, Nijkamp & van Leeuwen, 2013). Diaspora strategies are enacted through multiple actors, spaces, and relational networks (Cohen, 2017; Elo & Dana, 2019).

Building on this foundation, international business research (Elo & Minto-Coy, 2018; Elo, Minto-Coy, Silva, & Zhang, 2020; Elo, Täube & Servais, 2022; Sternberg et al., 2023) conceptualizes diaspora networks as dynamic mechanisms for market dibusion and internationalization. Second- and third-generation diaspora entrepreneurs, in particular, use digital tools and transnational social capital to adapt to and mitigate global crises while promoting locally
grounded resilience.

This track invites conceptual and empirical contributions examining how second and subsequent diaspora generations develop, mobilize, and sustain transnational strategies that
bridge global and local contexts. We explore how these generations contribute to business innovation, sustainable development, and socio-economic adaptation under conditions of uncertainty—aligning with the NFF 2025 theme, “Global Challenges and Local Strategies.”

References:

Christou, A., & King, R. (2010). Imagining ‘home’: Diasporic landscapes of the Greek-German second generation. Geoforum, 41(4), 638–646.
Cohen, N. (2017). Diaspora strategies: Actors, members, and spaces. Geography Compass, 11(3), e12308.
Dana, L. P. (Ed.). (2007). Handbook of research on ethnic minority entrepreneurship: A coevolutionary view on resource management. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Elo, M. (2025). Diasporas and Global Grand Challenges: Reflecting Viewpoints on Diaspora Role and Positionality. Georgetown Journal of International AHairs, 26(1), 75-81.
Elo, M., & Dana, L. P. (2019). Embeddedness and entrepreneurial traditions: Entrepreneurship of Bukharian Jews in diaspora. Journal of Family Business Management.
Elo, M., & Minto-Coy, I. (Eds.). (2018). Diaspora networks in international business. Springer.
Elo, M., Minto-Coy, I., Silva, S. C. E., & Zhang, X. (2020). Diaspora networks in international marketing: How do ethnic products dibuse to foreign markets? European Journal of International Management, 14(4), 693–729.
Elo, M., Täube, F., & Volovelsky, E. K. (2019). Migration ‘against the tide’: Location and Jewish diaspora entrepreneurs. Regional Studies, 53(1), 95-106.
King, R., & Christou, A. (2010). Diaspora, migration and transnationalism: Insights from the study of second-generation ‘returnees’. In R. Bauböck & T. Faist (Eds.), Diaspora and transnationalism: Concepts, theories and methods (pp. 167–183). Amsterdam University Press.
Haq, M., Johanson, M., Davies, J., Ng, W., & Dana, L. P. (2024). Bourdieusian and resourcebased perspectives on ethnic minority microbusinesses: The construction of a culture-induced entrepreneurship model. Journal of Small Business Management, 62(4), 1982-2015.
Koinova, M. (2021). Diaspora entrepreneurs and contested states. Oxford University Press.
Kourtit, K., Nijkamp, P., & van Leeuwen, E. (2013). New entrepreneurship in urban diasporas in our modern world. Journal of Urban Management, 2(1), 25–47.
Kotabe, M., Riddle, L., Sonderegger, P., & Täube, F. A. (2013). Diaspora investment and entrepreneurship: the role of people, their movements, and capital in the international economy. Journal of International Management, 19(1), 3-5.
Sternberg, R., Elo, M., Levie, J., & Amorós, J. E. (Eds.). (2023). Research handbook on transnational diaspora entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Prof. Maria Elo
Maria Elo, Full professor, University of Southern Denmark, professor, Belt and Road Institute of International Business at Shanghai University, senior research fellow, University of Turku and adjunct professor, Åbo Akademi University works on international business, -entrepreneurship and -migration with topics such as internationalization, resources of skilled migrants and returnees, migrant and diaspora entrepreneurship, transnational and family businesses, diaspora networks, diaspora investment and remittances. She has published books and articles, for example, in Journal of World Business, Journal of International Business Policy, Industrial Marketing Management, Regional Studies, Journal of International Entrepreneurship and International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business. In 2024, she was recognized as a Top Scholar from ScholarGPS ranking #9 globally within the field of diaspora research and #1 in Jewish diaspora.

Prof. Leo-Paul Dana
Professor Léo-Paul Dana is a widely recognised scholar in entrepreneurship and international business. He holds degrees from McGill University and HEC Montréal, and early in his career served as a Marie Curie Fellow at Princeton University. He currently holds a professorship at Dalhousie University (Canada). Professor Dana has authored and edited many influential works in entrepreneurship studies, with research interests including transnational entrepreneurship, diaspora networks, indigenous entrepreneurship and the internationalisation of new ventures. His work spans leading journals such as Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, International Business Review, Small Business Economics and others. With an international teaching and research background, he brings a global perspective to entrepreneurship scholarship. He has built his academic career through extensive global engagement and contributions to the field of entrepreneurship. He is one of the most cited entrepreneurship scholars and among the world’s top 2% scientists.

The Open Track welcomes submissions from all fields of management and related disciplines that do not clearly align with the established thematic tracks. All submissions are welcome, but we particularly encourage interdisciplinary or innovative contributions that cut across traditional topic areas. Organizers will review all submissions and form sessions based on accepted abstracts

Nygaard K¹, Nowinska A, Klyver K, Elo M, Clemente J

¹Aalborg Univerist

Migration is a defining megatrend, with over 3 percent of the global population living outside their country of birth (Barnard et al., 2019) because of economic reasons or due to global crisis and disruptions. Migrants’ career trajectories often diverge from those of native-born populations, shaped by non-linear paths, discrimination, and the “liability of foreignness” (Fang et al., 2013; Christiansen & Kristjánsdóttir, 2022; Colakoglu et al., 2018). Migrant entrepreneurship and self-initiated expatriation are frequently framed as a pathway to economic inclusion in the new home country, it also raises critical questions about structural constraints, policy environments, and the lived experiences of migrants.

This symposium explores migrant (including company assigned employees who moved across borders) career dynamics as a mechanism for labor market integration, focusing on how migrants build social and human capital (Coleman, 2001), navigate institutional and organizational barriers, and transform marginalization into opportunity (Nowinska & Solheim, 2024). Drawing on theoretical frameworks from international business and human relations management, migration studies, and sociology—including embeddedness, career orientation, and institutional theory—the panel will examine how micro-level factors such as home-country backgrounds, human, social capital, agency and others and macro-level factors such as migration regimes, labor market regulations, and societal trust shape career dynamics and outcomes (Gaur et al., 2007; Acosta & Marinoni, 2023; Kim & Pei, 2022).

Panelists will present empirical studies highlighting how migrant workers and entrepreneurs mobilize transnational networks, engage with host-country institutions, and build careers. The session will also address how ethnicity, gender, and migration status intersect with entrepreneurial strategies and labor market participation (Waldinger, 2013; Berry, 2006).

Structured as an interactive dialogue, the symposium will feature four presentations followed by a moderated discussion and audience engagement. It aims to generate new insights into the evolving role of migrants and labor market integration and to foster interdisciplinary collaboration.

References: 

Acosta & Marinoni (2023). Uncertainty and immigrant entrepreneurship: Evidence from brexit. Organization Science.

Barnard, Deeds, Mudambi, & Vaaler (2019). Migrants, migration policies, and international business research: Current trends and new directions

Berry (2006). Acculturation: A conceptual overview. Acculturation and parent-child relationships, 13–32.

Christiansen & Kristj´ansd´ottir (2022). “whether you like my skin or not, i am here. Journal of Global Mobility, 10 (4), 496–514.

Colakoglu, Yunlu, & Arman (2018). High-skilled female immigrants: Career strategies and experiences. Journal of Global Mobility, 6 (3/4), 258–284.

Coleman (2001). Social and human capital. Social sciences and modernity, 3, 122–139.

Fang, Samnani, Novicevic, & Bing (2013). Liability-of-foreignness effects on job success of immigrant job seekers. Journal of World Business, 48 (1), 98–109.

Gaur, Delios, & Singh (2007). Institutional environments, staffing strategies, and subsidiary performance. Journal of Management, 33 (4), 611–636.

Kim & Pei(2022). Monopsony in the high-skilled migrant labor market-evidence from h-1b visa program. Available at SSRN 4010152

Nowinska, & Solheim (2024). Unpacking the influence of foreignness on employment prospects within a multinational enterprise: Journal of Global Mobility, (ahead-of-print).

Waldinger (2013). Immigrant transnationalism. Current Sociology, 61 (5-6), 756–777.

Gordon A¹, Vecchiato R², Phadnis S³

¹Aarhus University, ²University of Kingston, ³Asia School of Business

Few would disagree that the way organizations anticipate a changing environment should be front and center of the management agenda. It is evident in the global, interconnected world we live in, that emerging issues and industry disruptions can upend industries in very short time spans, decimating company or public sector value. To be “in the right place at the right time” with the right product or necessary public service requires insight into macro- and industry-change.

Against this backdrop, management scholarship in macro-change analysis and organizational foresight is developing rapidly. This is not to be misunderstood as a prediction facility -- no organization and no quantitative model has ever predicted open-future systems behaviour validly and reliably enough to reliably guide management decision making, and there is no indication this will change anytime soon. In contrast to modelling, qualitative organizational foresight is an open-ended enquiry into the forces and factors of change, in pursuit of a high-quality view of external macro-conditions that managers may plausibly face (Gordon, 2020; Sarpong, Maclean, & Alexander, 2013; Lusting, 2015; Hines & Bishop 2007; Tsoukas & Shepherd, 2004). Within the resource-based view of the firm, this has been defined the “dynamic” capability to see and interpret changes in the environment, outline plausible future environments based on these changes, and use this to seize new positions of advantage and transform organizations to grasp them (Teece 1997; Fergnani 2022). Organizational foresight is profoundly intertwined with strategic leadership, as strategic choices are determined based on assumptions about how the future(s) of the business environment around the organization may or will unfold (Vecchiatto 2014, 2019; Shardhul 2016, 2022; van der Hejden, 1995; Wack, 1985a, 1985b). 

The aim of the symposium is to introduce participants to the principal theories and methods of the macro-change analysis / industry foresight field and explore ways in which management scholars might incorporate the insights of this body of work into research projects that seek to advance management scholarship, and through scholarship into practice. Presentations will examine how major theories and concepts in strategic management (e.g. behavioral strategy, competitive advantage, dynamic capabilities, strategy-as-practice) and the management sciences more broadly conceived (e.g. the behavioral theory of the firm, leadership contingency theory), together with major domains of application (e.g. organizational change & development, supply chain management) may benefit from the integration of key ideas and techniques or macro-change researchers, and vice-versa how the macro-change field may advance its scope by working within the classic realms of strategy, management and leadership (Ehls, 2022; Gordon 2024).

In both regards, the aim of the symposium is to enable dialogue and encourage synthesis draw new research agendas across these fields. The symposium will also specifically include practitioner realities in managing global macro-challenges, seeking opportunities to infuse research into senior management and board processes to enhance capacities for non-predictively anticipating macro-environment shifts, and developing organization response capabilities towards a status of genuine antifragility: the ability to exploit opportunities and mitigate threats brought by macro-change.

Högberg A¹

¹Linnaeus University

With this symposia we aim to explore how collaborative cultural entrepreneurship can serve as a strategic response to global challenges by leveraging local capacities, creativity, and co-creation. Drawing on results from the ongoing project InKuiS (Innovative Cultural Entrepreneurship in Collaborative Co-creative Research) this session will critically analyse how actors in the cultural sector may engage in entrepreneurial practices that foster social sustainability, regional development, and institutional innovation.

With focus on collaborative research, we will draw from empirical cases from on-going research to discuss conceptual frameworks that illustrate the transformative potential of cultural entrepreneurship. Topics include cultural and creative tourism, cultural entrepreneurship in the field of music, museums, and design, digitalisation, and cooperation between private, public and non-profit societal sectors in rural areas. The presentations will serve as starting point for an open discussion on: 

• co-creative research methodologies that enable inclusive knowledge production and implementation beyond academia
• organising resources creatively and collectively to generate cultural, economic, and social value

With this symposium, we invite discussions on how cultural entrepreneurship can be mobilised to address societal issues through locally grounded yet globally resonant strategies. It aims to explore the role of cultural actors as innovators of societal institutions and contributors to sustainable futures. 

Muhos M¹, Dana L², Jensen T³, Hytti U⁴

¹University Of Oulu, ²Dalhousie University, ³Stockholm University, ⁴University of Turku.

Publishing Nordic Research for Global Impact: Editorial Policies and the Role of AI 

This “meet-the-editors” symposium brings together Editors-in-Chief from Nordic and international academic journals to discuss the evolving landscape of academic publishing. It offers a rare opportunity for researchers to engage directly with journal editors, ask questions, and gain insights into editorial policies, peer review practices, and publishing strategies. 

The session will highlight the distinctive strengths of Nordic management research, including its emphasis on sustainability, public value, inclusive innovation, and context-sensitive approaches to entrepreneurship and governance. These qualities position Nordic scholarship to make meaningful contributions to global academic discourse while retaining regional relevance. 

A central theme will be the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in academic publishing. Panelists will explore how AI changes the landscape from manuscript screening and plagiarism detection to ethical considerations and transparency in authorship. The discussion will also address how AI may influence the future of editorial decision-making, and academic integrity. 

Designed as an interactive dialogue, the symposium encourages audience participation and aims to foster collaboration between scholars and editors. It will be particularly valuable for early-career researchers and those seeking to publish in high-impact journals and contribute to the internationalization of Nordic scholarship.

Session organizer

• Prof. Matti Muhos – Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development

Session speakers

• Prof. Leo-Paul Dana – Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business
• Prof. Tommy Jensen – Editor-in-Chief, Scandinavian Journal of Management
• Prof. Ulla Hytti – Associate Editor of Entrepreneurship & Regional Development and Research Editor of Entrepreneurship Education & Pedagogy
• Prof. Matti Muhos – Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development

Session facilitator

• Prof. Felicity Kelliher, South East Technological University, Ireland

Montonen T¹, Jong S¹, Eriksson P¹

¹University Of Eastern Finland

Health innovation is in high demand across the world, as societies seek new ways to address health as one of the grand challenges of our time. Business scholars and experts are well positioned to contribute to this effort. While health issues are big in scale, research shows that small and locally grounded innovations are often more feasible, and equally important, than large-scale technological breakthroughs.

Business school scholars contribute by developing new understanding of how health innovations emerge, spread, and become embedded within social and economic systems. They also educate future professionals and leaders to navigate the complex intersections of healthcare, technology, and business, and of steering responsible and sustainable innovation.

This symposium invites scholars to explore how business actors and academics can engage more actively and critically with the changing health sector through research, education, and collaboration with society. The presentations and the discussion will focus on how we can help shape the future of health innovation, advancing both knowledge and practice.

Barner-Rasmussen W¹

¹Åbo Akademi University, School of Business and Economics

This symposium examines the role of entrepreneurship in the inclusion of international migrants in Nordic business life, engaging directly with the conference theme “Global challenges and local strategies.” The Nordic countries face demographic pressures, skill shortages, and tightening migration regimes, yet small open economies depend on talent inflow and circulation to sustain innovation and competitiveness. Entrepreneurship is frequently promoted as a pathway for migrants to participate in working life, and the employment of migrants is seen as a mechanism for firms in the receiving location to benefit from international perspectives, networks and languages. Yet the actual dynamics are more complex, requiring a nuanced discussion.

Working in a small firm or starting one may offer migrants accessible entry points to local labor markets, and many migrants indeed engage in entrepreneurship, contributing importantly to local economies. Recruiting international employees may enhance SMEs’ competitiveness, for example through cultural brokerage, market access and multilingual capabilities. On the other hand, SMEs often operate with limited resources, few formal HR practices, and strong reliance on local language proficiency, hampering their ability to hire, support, and retain internationally mobile workers. Entrepreneurship may therefore function as an adaptive strategy for migrants facing job market barriers, and may be a genuine opportunity, but it can also reflect structural constraints or necessity. Furthermore, in the gig economy firms may rely on entrepreneurial arrangements to circumvent institutional rigidities, shifting risks onto individuals.

Against this background, the symposium highlights perspectives on migrant entrepreneurship from international business, entrepreneurship, HRM, intersectional studies, migration research and public policy. It aims to foster dialogue on the relationship between international mobility, migrant inclusion and entrepreneurship. We seek to generate new insights into how Nordic societies, firms and other stakeholders can jointly craft locally grounded strategies and practices in this arena to meet growing global challenges.

Kashyap S^1,2, Meacham M³

¹Royal Swedish Academy Of Sciences, ²Uppsala University, ³Stockholm University 

Organizations today face converging challenges from climate change, biodiversity loss, geopolitical instability, and rising sustainability pressures. Rapid developments in digitalization and artificial intelligence intensify these issues. Collectively, they create significant uncertainties about future conditions and about the strength of the knowledge on which organizations must rely. As a result, organizations need robust management, accounting, and control infrastructures to navigate this shifting landscape. 

To maintain legitimacy and competitiveness, organizational responses must be grounded in science, supported by evidence, and transparently communicated to relevant decision-makers and stakeholders. However, it remains unclear whether current approaches are sufficient. Many organizations struggle to translate planetary realities into practical structures, systems, and routines. Large gaps remain in how sustainability information is defined, measured, communicated, and assured within governance structures. The landscape of biodiversity reporting standards (e.g., ESRS, GRI, TCFD, TNFD) is also fragmented. Although technological innovations are beginning to influence these areas, their use is uneven, their dynamics are opaque, and their effects remain uncertain.

These factors highlight the need for sustained scholarly attention to how organizations develop science- and evidence-based, transparent, and resilient approaches to management, accounting, control, and decision-making under rapidly changing environmental, societal, and technological conditions. For scholars, this raises core questions about risk, transparency, accountability, materiality, and the assumptions underlying governance, reporting and control.

This symposium brings together scholars working at the intersection of sustainability and digitalization to examine how planetary and technological shifts reshape management, accounting, control, and decision-making. The session will include short presentations from four panelists with conceptual, empirical, and methodological expertise, followed by a moderated discussion that will focus on: (1) sustainability-focused measurement, reporting, and management control; (2) the role of AI and digital infrastructures in sustainability monitoring and reporting; and (3) the implications of evolving governance frameworks (e.g., CSRD, ESRS, TNFD).

The overarching objective is to identify emerging research pathways, stimulate collaborative inquiry, and contribute to the development of tools and infrastructures to support decision-making and navigate planetary risks. Our ambition is to connect ongoing research, highlight areas where knowledge remains limited, and strengthen the scholarly community working at this critical intersection.

Panel: 

(1) Dr. Mario Abela (Bain & Co.) 

(2) Dr. Niak Sian Koh (Oxford University, IPBES)

(3) Dr. Einar Iveroth (Uppsala University)

(4) Dr. Mikko Ranta (Jönköping University)