Who is responsible—and for what? An antenarrative perspective on organizational members’ crisis sensemaking of responsibility during a corporate scandal
{"title":"Who is responsible—and for what? An antenarrative perspective on organizational members’ crisis sensemaking of responsibility during a corporate scandal","authors":"Sanne Frandsen, Marita Svane, Didde Maria Humle","doi":"10.1177/00187267231205781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We investigate organizational members’ crisis sensemaking and construction of responsibility at the peak of a corporate scandal. We focus on those organizational members, who are not directly involved in the scandal but are still affected by it, as they are questioned about their collective and moral responsibility for being members of an organization that has engaged in wrongdoing. Our study is based on interviews with and observations of frontline employees and their managers at Danske Banke—a bank involved in a money laundering scandal of historical magnitude. We propose an antenarrative crisis sensemaking framework that enables us to contribute to the literature on crisis sensemaking in two significant ways. First, we advance existing knowledge on crisis sensemaking by focusing on the less visible, unfinished, fragmented, and polyphonic sensemaking of organizational members during a corporate scandal. Second, we demonstrate that organizational members at the peak of a scandal place responsibility in different timespaces as they construct others’ and their own responsibility both retrospectively and prospectively.","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267231205781","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
We investigate organizational members’ crisis sensemaking and construction of responsibility at the peak of a corporate scandal. We focus on those organizational members, who are not directly involved in the scandal but are still affected by it, as they are questioned about their collective and moral responsibility for being members of an organization that has engaged in wrongdoing. Our study is based on interviews with and observations of frontline employees and their managers at Danske Banke—a bank involved in a money laundering scandal of historical magnitude. We propose an antenarrative crisis sensemaking framework that enables us to contribute to the literature on crisis sensemaking in two significant ways. First, we advance existing knowledge on crisis sensemaking by focusing on the less visible, unfinished, fragmented, and polyphonic sensemaking of organizational members during a corporate scandal. Second, we demonstrate that organizational members at the peak of a scandal place responsibility in different timespaces as they construct others’ and their own responsibility both retrospectively and prospectively.
期刊介绍:
Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.