This special issue seeks submissions that advance understanding of chronic illness in organizational contexts. The call invites research that develops theoretical frameworks and practical insights into how chronic illnesses affect workplace experiences, employee well-being, and organizational practices.

Appel publié par Journal of Organizational Behavior. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Timeline

• June 1, 2027: Submission window opens
• June 30, 2027: Submission window closes

This special issue seeks to advance leadership research by emphasizing the importance of context in understanding leadership phenomena. The call invites scholars to develop and apply context-sensitive theoretical frameworks that move beyond universal leadership models to examine how organizational, social, cultural, and environmental contexts shape leadership processes and outcomes.

Appel publié par The Leadership Quarterly. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Timeline

• December 1, 2027: Full paper submission deadline

Bruno Fischer, University of Campinas

Aki Harima, Tallinn University of Technology

Sophia Behr, University of Stuttgart

Philip T. Roundy, University of Tennessee Chattanooga

Erik Stam, Utrecht University

Maribel Guerrero, Arizona State University

This special issue examines leadership within entrepreneurial ecosystems as a central yet underexplored phenomenon shaping ecosystem dynamics and outcomes. Rather than treating leadership as a residual category of individual actors or positions, the issue conceptualizes it as a relational process through which direction develops, priorities are negotiated, support is mobilized, and ecosystem development is influenced. The focus spans stable, transforming, and crisis-affected ecosystems, recognizing that contexts such as digitalization, sustainability transitions, and geopolitical disruptions shape how leadership emerges and evolves.

The special issue seeks to move beyond describing static ecosystem structures toward explaining how collective action is generated, coordinated, and sustained over time. It welcomes diverse theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches that develop, challenge, extend, or offer alternative conceptualizations of EE leadership. Research should address who assumes leadership roles, how legitimacy and followership emerge, and how different leadership configurations can compensate for weaknesses in networks, resources, or institutions.

Appel publié par Entrepreneurship & Regional Development. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Conceptualization and theory of entrepreneurial ecosystem (EE) leadership across formal, informal, individual, collective, organizational, distributed, relational, and processual perspectives
• Dimensions and manifestations of EE leadership (e.g., public, entrepreneurial, community)
• Interaction between EE leadership and other ecosystem elements such as networks, institutions, finance, or culture
• Contextual uniqueness shaping forms and theorization of EE leadership across different institutional, cultural, and geographical settings
• Elements of EE leadership affecting how entrepreneurs and supportive agents cohere around shared norms, values, and goals
• Relational characteristics (e.g., coordination, collaboration, communication) supporting effective ecosystem leadership
• Participation, legitimacy, and authority emergence in EE leadership processes
• How characteristics of ecosystem actors (lived experience, place attachment, prosocial orientation, identity) shape participation in ecosystem leadership
• Activities, practices, and processes constituting ecosystem leadership and their collective goals
• Distribution of leadership activities across ecosystem actors and how interactions shape collective direction and coordinated action
• Forms of leadership and agency emergence, evolution, and enabling coordinated action within EEs
• Evolution of ecosystem leadership across phases of development and consequences of different forms
• Conditions under which leadership can compensate for weaknesses in other ecosystem elements
• Differences in EE leadership across unstable, transforming, and crisis-affected contexts
• Direction provision under sustainability pressures, digital transformation, geopolitical tension, or resource disruption
• Negotiation of competing priorities through EE leadership during simultaneous disruptions
• Measurement and integration of EE leadership activities, practices, and relational processes into existing ecosystem measurement frameworks
• Use of network metrics to assess distribution of participation, influence, and coordination within EE leadership processes
• Measures capturing whether EE leadership is concentrated or distributed, formal or informal, and how these configurations change over time

Timeline

• December 14, 2026: Online information and early-ideas session for scholars interested in contributing to the special issue
• February 11, 2027: Paper development workshop within the conference Entrepreneurial Ecosystems in Times of Rapid Transformation in Tallinn, Estonia
• December 31, 2027: Manuscript submission deadline

Anders Örtenblad, University of Agder

Louise Boulter, Lincoln Bishop University

Nilupulee Liyanagamage, University of Wollongong

Horia Moașa, Transilvania University of Brasov

This special issue examines leadership practices that fall between clearly constructive and overtly destructive behaviors—a spectrum termed 'grey leadership'. Grey leadership encompasses ambiguous and relational practices where rules are subtly bent, inaction enables harm, or followers participate in normalization of problematic conduct. These behaviors rarely attract legal attention or public scrutiny but create significant organizational and relational consequences precisely because they resist clear moral classification.

Grey leadership is characterized by mixed ethical intent where moral and self-interested motives coexist, inconsistent moral signaling where espoused and enacted values diverge, and situationally contingent consequences where identical behaviors may yield both positive and negative outcomes depending on context. The concept bridges fragmented literature by integrating ethical, emotional, and contextual dimensions of leadership that have traditionally evolved separately.

Appel publié par Leadership & Organization Development Journal. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Conceptual development of grey leadership
• Perspectives on grey leadership and construction of the continuum
• How grey leadership materializes in the workplace and its implications for followers, leaders, organizations and society
• Can grey leadership ever be beneficial for an organization?
• The role of context in enacting grey leadership
• Case studies of grey leadership
• The ambiguities and potential benefits of leading in the shadows
• The role of HR in addressing grey leadership
• How grey leadership differs from black or destructive leadership
• Strategies to combat grey leadership and prevent its escalation

Timeline

• June 15, 2026: Opening date for manuscripts submissions
• September 30, 2026: Closing date for manuscripts submission

Tony Fang, Memorial University

Jennifer A. Harrison, EM Normandie Business School

Artificial intelligence is reshaping organizations by reconfiguring task structures, skill requirements, and managerial processes. Rather than eliminating jobs, AI adoption fosters new occupational roles and redefines expertise through changed patterns of human-AI collaboration. These developments promise to enhance productivity, though realizing these gains depends critically on the human skills that enable effective technology use.

The concept of skills varies significantly across disciplines, from labour economics viewing skills as human capital to organizational psychology emphasizing cognitive capabilities and sociology examining how skills are socially constructed. This fragmented understanding limits integrated knowledge about how AI shapes skills and productivity. The call seeks to bridge these perspectives by examining how skills are identified, defined, and valued in relation to AI, and how they translate into productivity gains across contexts.

Appel publié par Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• AI adoption and implementation in organizations, including how skills are identified, defined, measured, valued, and linked to productivity
• Human and AI collaboration, work transformation, and the identification and use of skills in changing task contexts
• Defining and developing skills in workplaces using AI (e.g., reskilling, upskilling, lifelong learning) and linking to productivity
• Changes in occupations, expertise, and professional roles, and how skill requirements are defined and evolving with AI
• Organizational and institutional factors shaping how skills are identified, defined, and managed in relation to AI and productivity (e.g., leadership, HR practices, policy contexts)
• Career sustainability, mobility, and inequality in labour markets shaped by AI, with a focus on how skills are defined, accessed, and valued

Timeline

• December 15, 2026: Submission Deadline

Daniela Giménez-Jiménez, TU Dortmund

Magdalena Markowska, Umeå University

Patricia Gabaldón, IE University

Caren Scheepers, Gordon Institute of Business Science

This special issue examines how gendered practices are constructed and enacted within organizations, and what consequences they produce. While gender as social practice is theoretically accepted, understanding how these practices operate across different contexts remains limited. The issue addresses a critical gap: persistent structural inequalities continue to disadvantage women globally, yet equality initiatives sometimes produce unintended negative consequences such as reinforcing stereotypes.

The special issue welcomes diverse approaches examining both intended outcomes of gendered practices and unintended consequences. It seeks to understand how gendered practices at multiple levels are negotiated, resisted, and transformed across different industries and cultural contexts, particularly through feminist theories including intersectional and postcolonial perspectives.

Appel publié par Gender Work and Organization. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Does the (mis)use of gendered practices in organizations and industries affect various occupations?
• How do women and men employees navigate gendered practices in women-dominated versus men-dominated industries? Are there differences across these industries?
• Which specific gendered practices do women and which ones do men (mis)use, and what consequences do these have for organizational culture?
• How are current discourses shaping gendered practices? Do these gendered practices influence organizational outcomes, outputs, or impacts?
• How does the production, reproduction, and construction of gender affect business outcomes? Are the effects the same or different within and outside organisations?
• How do gendered practices influence women's networks, particularly given unique challenges women and minorities face in creating personal networks in organizational contexts?
• What are the consequences of women's programs on their networks, and what are the outcomes of these programs for women and men, as well as for organizations?
• Who are the actors actively constructing, resisting and shaping gendered practices at the different levels? What conditions enable and which ones inhibit production, change, and use of gendered practices?
• How does the portrayal of women and men in business—through media representations and policies—affect leadership stereotypes?
• What roles do masculine and feminine voices play concerning gendered practices? Could individuals influence and confront gendered practices?
• How do women with intersectional identities or social experiences—such as LGBTQIA++ individuals or female migrants—create, build, or construct new gendered practices?
• In what ways do these practices influence organizations, industries, and markets?
• How are gendered practices shaped within women- and men-dominated industries?

Timeline

• January 31, 2027: Submission Deadline

Appel publié par Journal of Business Research. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Timeline

• March 31, 2027: Submission deadline

Joseph A. Allen, University of Utah

Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock, University of Hamburg

Meetings remain one of the most pervasive features of organizational life, serving as a critical venue for communication, collaboration, decision-making, and sensemaking in groups and teams. Yet, despite their ubiquity, meetings continue to spark debate over their effectiveness, efficiency, and impact on individuals, teams, and organizations. Moreover, the nature of group and team meetings in organizations is subject to ongoing change, with respect to meeting formats, purposes, and functions.

The aim of this Special Issue is to move forward and examine new perspectives on meetings in contemporary organizational life. We are interested in interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary submissions that advance the meeting science literature, with a focus on empirical insights into group and team meetings. Both field studies and laboratory research methodology can contribute such insights. However, no studies based on individual-level, self-report, cross-sectional data unless substantiated by additional data will be considered.

Appel publié par Small Group Research. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Advances in meeting design and structuration in face-to-face, virtual, or hybrid group meetings
• Effective meeting leadership and facilitation in various meeting formats
• Psychological safety, inclusion, and equity in meetings
• Meeting participation and engagement (including "pretend participation" or the act of appearing to participate in a meeting without actually contributing meaningfully to the group's goals)
• Pre-meeting and post-meeting tasks
• Decision-making and problem-solving in meetings
• Linking within-meeting dynamics to relevant meeting experiences at the individual and/or team level (e.g., satisfaction, effectiveness, well-being, creativity)
• Technology and meetings (e.g., AI applications in hybrid and virtual formats)
• Meeting overload, fatigue, and recovery
• Emotional dynamics and surface/deep acting in meetings
• Diversity, identity, and power in meeting interactions
• Training and interventions for effective meetings
• Measurement and assessment of meeting quality and effectiveness

Timeline

• October 1, 2026: Full papers submission deadline

Melanie De Ruiter, Nyenrode Business University

Benjamin D. McLarty, Louisiana Tech University

Denise M. Rousseau, Carnegie Mellon University

James M. Vardaman, Memphis University

Despite calls to consider context in Organizational Behavior (OB) and management research, the broader OB and management literature has largely ignored family firms and the experiences and employment dynamics of their employees. OB research samples often are drawn without considering the nature of the settings involved or any potential impact on the variables of interest. Since family firms are a common type of business, ranging from sixty-five to ninety percent worldwide, samples in many OB and management studies likely conflate respondents from family and non-family firms. Such conflation can mask differences in behavioral processes that can result in erroneous inferences.

Treatment of family/non-family business as a dichotomous moderator only allows general differences to be noted without theoretically comparing psychological processes at the individual, team, and organizational levels. Moreover, since there is considerable heterogeneity within family firms, grouping employees working in different family firms together will likely forego important across family firm contextual differences in OB processes. Most studies in family firm research have been described as 'context-less'.

Appel publié par Group & Organization Management. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Development and validation of measurement instruments (including assessment of measurement invariance) that allow a more generic assessment of contextual effects often put forward in family firm research (e.g., socioemotional wealth) to help theorize and understand similarities and differences in OB processes between family and non-family firms, and within family firms
• Explicit tests of theories of context (e.g., trait activation theory; situation strength theory) to explain differences in relationships between personality traits and employee outcomes between family and non-family firms and within different types of family firms (e.g., enhanced understanding of family firm context as a driver for personality activation and impact on workplace performance and behaviors)
• Development and validation of personality measurement instruments specific to the context of family for use in family firms, and meaningful contextual comparisons across family firms (including assessment of measurement invariance)
• Enhanced theoretical understanding of how bifurcation bias based on family firm context as a potential motivational force for driving employee attitudes and behaviors
• Multilevel research to better understand how the family firm context affects the extent to which leadership styles may (or may not) trickle down from family executives to family and non-family managers and in turn affect non-family employee outcomes in different types of family firms
• An exploration of how critical events within the family firm context and family/non-family member dynamics shape employee and non-family manager perceptions and evaluations of their employment relationship with the family firm

Timeline

• December 15, 2025: Proposal submission deadline
• February 15, 2026: Decisions and feedback on proposals
• February 1, 2027: Full manuscript submission deadline
• May 1, 2027: Decisions and reviews on manuscripts
• August 1, 2027: Revised manuscripts due
• November 1, 2027: Second round decisions and reviews on revised manuscripts
• February 1, 2028: Second round revised manuscripts due
• April 1, 2028: SI editorial final review round and decisions on revised manuscripts
• May 15, 2028: Final submissions of manuscripts
• June 1, 2028: Final decision by guest editors
• July 1, 2028: Accepted manuscripts to publisher

James Bort, DePaul University

Veroniek Collewaert, Vlerick Business School

Yuval Engel, University of Amsterdam

Evy Van Lancker, Ghent University

Johan Wiklund, Syracuse University

The startup workforce represents a distinct and consequential stakeholder in entrepreneurship that has been systematically understudied relative to founders and funders. Early insights from the Stanford Project on Emerging Companies revealed how organizational changes within startups disproportionately impacted long-tenured employees. This pioneering work laid the foundation for understanding how startups differ from established firms in their approach to human capital, including fundamental aspects such as compensation, staffing, and performance management.

Contemporary research has deepened our understanding of the unique dynamics between startups and their employees. Whereas early research identified demographic patterns, illustrating that startup employees tend to be younger and risk-tolerant, recent work has uncovered more nuanced dynamics. For example, experienced employees often join startups when they have partners with stable careers, but can also command wage premiums as firms grow. Startup employees are drawn in by passionate founders, opportunities for greater freedom and responsibility, and the potential for significant financial upside.

Appel publié par Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Employee motivations and retention across venture stages
• Recruitment, employer branding, and the role of prior affiliations in startup hiring
• The influence of early employees on organizational culture, routines, and strategic direction
• Compensation structures, equity arrangements, and evolving psychological contracts
• Workforce well-being, occupational stress, and founder-employee emotional spillovers
• The impact of hybrid and remote work on startup employment dynamics
• The opportunities and adversity of AI in light of startup employment and work ethic, and workforce diversity, inclusion, and the role of HR professionalization in early-stage ventures
• Worker voice, collective action, and power asymmetries in startups, including unionization, whistleblowing, hustle culture and exploitation, equity and vesting disputes, and the dark side of founder–employee relations
• The regulatory and institutional environment of startup employment, including non-compete enforcement, worker classification, equity taxation, and visa regimes
• Non-standard and hybrid labor forms, including contractors, fractional executives, agencies, platform and ghost work, and globally distributed teams
• Post-startup career trajectories, including employee mobility, alumni networks, and entrepreneurial spawning after exit, acquisition, or failure
• The scaleup transition and its workforce implications, including when and how a startup workforce ceases to be one and how HR professionalization reshapes the employment relation
• AI-native ventures as a new organizational form, where a small number of humans operate agentic systems and the category of workforce is itself reconstituted
• Startup workforces outside North America and Western Europe, including emerging-economy, informal, and cross-border contexts

Timeline

• Invalid DateTime: Academy of Management PDW
• December 31, 2026: Extended abstracts due for participation in May workshop
• May 1, 2027: Special issue editorial workshop for invited participants based on proposals (hosted in United States)
• August 30, 2027: Full papers due for submission following second workshop
• November 1, 2027: Special issue editorial workshop for invited participants based on full papers (hosted in Europe)
• January 1, 2028: Full papers invited for submission

Iris K. Gauglitz, University of Bamberg

Peter Harms, University of Alabama's Culverhouse College of Business

Urszula Lagowska, NEOMA Business School

Birgit Schyns, NEOMA Business School

Kimberley Breevaart, Erasmus University Rotterdam

Leadership research increasingly recognizes the importance of examining both leader behaviours and their interpretations across organizational levels. Rather than treating behaviour and perception as competing perspectives, this special issue seeks to integrate them and explore how different organizational actors understand and react to leader actions in complex, modern workplaces.

The issue addresses gaps in current understanding, including how leader behaviours and their perceptions vary outside the leader-follower dyad, discrepancies between leader intentions and follower interpretations, and the effectiveness of leadership development programs. Contributors are encouraged to employ multilevel analytical approaches and diverse methodologies to capture the complexity of leadership dynamics.

Research submissions are invited across multiple areas: theoretical development of multilevel leadership models, investigation of underlying processes and contextual factors affecting behaviour perception, examination of interactions between organizational actors, and methodological innovations in measuring leader behaviour and perceptual biases.

Appel publié par European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Theoretical models proposing new or conceptually advanced configurations of leader behaviour and its perceptions, which consider the role of new working contexts in shaping leader behaviours and their perceptions
• Multi-level conceptualizations of the impact of leader behaviour at multiple levels of organizations with a view to understand how and why perceptions across levels differ
• Studies including models that explain why and under which conditions leader behaviour and its perceptions affect workplace outcomes, notably when leaders and others differ in their perceptions/(perceived) intentions or when behaviour is perceived as inconsistent or ambivalent
• Research that investigates polarisation in follower perceptions—why perceptions of the same behaviour may diverge significantly
• Studies looking at leader and follower behaviour and their interaction, such as how behaviours from one party trigger behavioural reactions of the other party and what that means for an effective collaboration
• Studies considering the role of organisational hierarchy in how leaders behave and how their behaviour is perceived
• Contributions considering interactions between personality traits (e.g., leader–follower trait congruence) in shaping behavioural expressions and perceptual accuracy; team outcomes of leader behaviour, for example, perception differences between team members and how this affects outcomes; and relative leader behaviour, that is, perceptions of how one follower is treated compared to others
• Studies that develop and validate new measures of leader behaviour (e.g., behavioural indicators)
• Studies that develop new measures that allow for the measurement of perceptual biases in leadership ratings and studies using advanced statistical approaches (e.g., polynomial regression analyses, multilevel modelling, pattern approaches)

Timeline

• February 1, 2026: Abstract deadline
• April 1, 2026: Decision on abstract
• December 1, 2026: Full paper submission deadline
• December 1, 2026: Review Round 1
• March 1, 2027: Decision on first revision communicated
• June 1, 2027: 1st revisions due
• September 1, 2027: Decision on second revision communicated
• November 1, 2027: 2nd revision due
• December 1, 2027: Final decision communicated
• February 1, 2028: Publication of special issue

Jon F. Kirchoff, East Carolina University

Ying Liao, East Carolina University

Shingirai Chris Kwaramba, Virginia Commonwealth University

Supply chain risk management traditionally assumes decision-makers are rational and risk-neutral, but practitioners operate under bounded rationality and cognitive biases, deviating from optimal choices when facing uncertainty. These behavioral deviations affect risk identification, assessment, and mitigation, yet existing theories fail to account for them, resulting in suboptimal strategies and reduced organizational efficiency.

Current behavioral SCRM research focuses primarily on individual factors with limited exploration of how organizational and inter-organizational contexts shape behavior. This special issue examines behavioral issues across multiple analytical levels: individuals, organizations, and supply chain networks. The editors seek research that identifies limitations in existing theories or introduces innovative frameworks addressing SCRM complexities through interdisciplinary perspectives from psychology, organizational studies, and decision-making research.

Appel publié par International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Behavioral supply chain risk management
• Decision-making biases in supply chain contexts
• Risk identification and assessment
• Risk mitigation strategies
• Individual risk preferences and decision styles
• Organizational risk culture and appetite
• Inter-organizational power dynamics and dependencies
• Micro-level behavioral dynamics
• Macro-level organizational decision-making
• Inter-organizational supply chain networks
• Information manipulation and risk signaling
• Inter-firm risk-sharing mechanisms
• Behavioral resilience and recovery
• AI and human decision-making in risk management
• Cyber risk management behavior
• Social conflict risks in supply chains
• Supplier-buyer relationship dynamics
• Technology adoption and behavioral change
• Bounded rationality in supply chains
• Trust and opportunism in supply networks

Timeline

• March 15, 2026: Opening date for manuscripts submissions
• April 15, 2026: Closing date for abstract submission
• November 15, 2026: Closing date for manuscripts submission

Business tournament rituals (BTRs) are ritualistic ceremonies or events organised to serve solidarity and confer social prestige and endorsements on firms in which participating firms and winners receive accolades and prestigious non-monetary prizes. They offer opportunities for firms to showcase their capabilities and hard market power. Beyond approving and reinforcing status hierarchies and the solidarity purpose they serve across industries, BTR awards as nonmarket-oriented artifacts have been promoted as strategic third-party honours and marketplace endorsements that spur productivity and performance, facilitate innovation, and stimulate the adoption of good business practices.

Appel publié par Journal of Managerial Psychology. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Managerial mentalities and motivations to competing in BTRs year in year out
• Managerial discursive framing of awards within the contingencies of competitive interactions and stakeholders' engagement
• Roles played by managers and internal and external audiences in navigating tacit norms of organizational display of business awards
• Unpacking managerial extravagance through the context of business tournament rituals
• How managers justify and rationalise their ideational investments in business awards
• How managers consume and account for their BTR entries and experiences
• How managers craft and communicate information about themselves and their organizations business awards
• Multi-industry and national cross-industry context dynamics of BTRs
• Narratives of award-winning managers participating in business awards
• How managers deploy business awards to attract favourable audience attention
• Is it possible that different managers and their firms benefit from different forms of BTRs or that diversity reflects incomplete diffusion?
• When and how may BTRs be perceived differently by managers in other regions or industries?
• The cognitive processes of managers in (not) recognising the possibilities, potentialities, and limits of BTRs

Timeline

• January 10, 2026: Opening date for manuscripts submissions
• January 31, 2027: Closing date for manuscripts submission