Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  MED Response to US Executive Order on Immigration and International Management Educators - creating voice and support

    Posted 02-03-2017 16:24
    Mary Finney has encouraged us to become aware of what other Interest Groups and Divisions are doing, so I thought I would forward this message from MED. I did not know about the Scholars at Risk program described below, and that seems an important organization to explore.

    Judi Neal



    On 2/3/17, 1:28 PM, "Peter Mc Namara, MED Chairperson" <peter.mcnamara@nuim.ie> wrote:

    Dear MED Colleagues,

    I know that a number of us have been concerned by the response of the AOM to issues surrounding the ability of colleagues to travel to the US for the AOM conference in August. Some have also expressed concern that more immediately this order impacts upon members ability to travel to the US for the purposes of collaborative research, teaching and the freedom to think, question and share ideas with colleagues, students and others in the US.

    The AOM headquarters have issued a detailed response, which does not address these more immediate concerns, but does offer an assurance that if a member from any country is unable to attend the conference due to an immigration order that they can present their paper remotely. We will be asking the AOM to consider in these cases that the conference fee be significantly reduced, or waived. We are also asking that if a presentation must occur remotely, that all MED members attending the conference physically make every effort to attend such presentations to show solidarity for our colleagues. AOM note that we are a non-political organisation and as such framed the response in an operational way around the annual meeting.

    As a committee we come from North America, Latin America, Europe and Eurasia. In our day to day teaching and research lives we work with students, businesses and researchers from a diverse range of countries. Managing diversity, sharing, listening and acting on ideas and evidence is both a challenge and opportunity in our professional lives. It can be difficult to work with others. To understand or accept their different perspectives. It can be a joy to work with others. It can be at the heart of successful business and innovation to combine the different skills, ideas and resources of others. For us, therefore, we see the debate around this immigration order, as an opportunity to reflect on the power of diversity and the need to listen to the voices of others, to protect the freedom of educators to think freely, to share their ideas and to question the ideas of others as this is at the heart of what it means to be an educator and researcher.

    In the recent letter of the President of the AOM, she notes that we do have a core value that we believe is about the protection of academic freedom and voice ("The AOM fervently values all its members. We are committed to inclusion, supportive communities, and social and academic freedom as fundamental and undeniable tenets of scholarly association." AOM letter re the US Executive Order on Immigration, 31/1/2017). We therefore would like to take some immediate practical steps to support this diversity value and encourage members to share other positive ideas with each other. Here is what we are doing and encourage others to think about.


    1. Promote and actively engage in the Scholars at Risk movement https://www.scholarsatrisk.org

    Scholars from within the seven countries impacted by this immigration order face real challenges in undertaking their research and education activities. They face risk to their liberty and threats to their person as a consequence of sharing their research ideas, questioning the ideas of others and being active academic citizens. For example 27 academics from these countries are currently seeking an emergency academic home due to immediate and active threats to their life or person. Eight of the scholars at risk seeking immediate help are from management, economics or finance backgrounds. 446 member universities inside the USA, Europe and Africa are actively working to protect these scholars through the Scholars at Risk organisation. Seven network organisations, with hundreds of members support this initiative (though at present AOM is not one of these). We are committed to working inside our networks to supporting this work and hope that others might consider this a practical action to support the free exchange of ideas and leveraging of diversity that is at the heart of business success.

    At its core the Scholars at Risk organization is about "protecting scholars and the freedom to think, question and share ideas". As academics and members of AOM is this not something that we can all agree on as an important value? Can we not seek to become members of SAR as an institution (AOM) and encourage our universities to do the same?

    2. MED Newsletter series: Global Voices - the Global World of Management education
    76% of all AOM members are from either North America or Europe, yet these regions represent only 14.6% of the world's population (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/#region). These are the voices that we hear from most readily at the AOM conference. We hear little, therefore from representatives of the vast majority of the world's population. Lets learn more about what are the approaches to management education and research in these areas. To this end we plan to invite some management educators from these regions to write a page on what the approach to management education in their region is; what are the challenges they face; what are the opportunities they leverage and how; what kinds of research are they doing and need? Some may not be able to travel to the conference for many reasons to share their ideas in person, but through a global voices program we can learn a little about their management education world.

    3. MED Ambassadors
    The membership committee are currently working on reviving the MED Ambassadors program. The application process will be going live in the near future and will be announced in future MED newsletters. MED ambassadors can be a source of voice for their region, letting us know about their region, to let us be an advocacy voice for their issues in AOM, to encourage MED membership in their region (be our advocates), and to be a source that MED members can call upon (a friendly informed voice) if they are looking to connect into the region of the ambassador. Through friendly MED diplomacy we can share ideas, challenge ideas, and learn to be more effective management educators and development mentors.

    We wish to stand in solidarity with the full diversity of our members (be that nationality, creed, sexuality, political perspectives, disability and a wealth of other features that contribute to diversity of the human experience) in our common goal of advancing management education through the development and sharing of our research and skills development as educators.

    Sincerely,


    MED Committee members, including
    Peter Mc Namara, Chairperson
    Barbara Ritter, Past Chairperson
    Miguel Olivas-Lujan, Chairperson Elect
    Paul Hibbert, Program Chairperson
    Kim Gower, PDW Chairperson
    Olga Ryazanova, Secretary


  • 2.  MED Response to US Executive Order on Immigration and International Management Educators - creating voice and support

    Posted 02-04-2017 00:49

    Dear MSR Listserv Members,

     

    Thanks for your posts below Stacie, Lee and Judi, -  all inspiring and helps me to learn more, be encouraged by others and stay open.   

     

    Today , Friday – Feb. 3, 2017 --- my thoughts and actions are focused on Athens, Ohio – my place, where I live and work.  Today I joined a march organized by the Ohio University medical school faculty, medical students, medical professionals and other OU faculty, students and community members.  We chanted – "NO HATE, NO FEAR, IMMIGRANTS ARE WELCOME HERE!" over and over again – as we marched down the streets, onto campus – through the Baker Student Union, and down the main street of town and around the town and heard speeches in a rally at the end. 

     

    Two days earlier there was another march that started on Ohio University Athens campus – with international and domestic faculty, students and community members.  There was a rally in front of the Court House with many speakers.    The marched ended and hundreds of university students continued by engaging in a sit -in protest in the OU Baker Center after their march.   In was a peaceful, non-violent demonstration.  They requested the university leaders to hear them out related to wanting to have OU to be a sanctuary campus. They wanted the leaders of the university to speak up very strongly against the Trump executive order to ban travel from 7 mainly Muslim countries.  After a couple of hours – 70 students were arrested.   This is very serious for the domestic students and especially for the international students who were arrested in the peaceful demonstration.  

     

    Students are hoping to be successful in encouraging heir faculty and campus leaders to show courage and to stand up for their deepest values and ethics -  as they stand together against the ban.

     

    What can we learn from how we & our students, faculty and university leaders are working on this – with courage, wisdom and hope?    What are the BEST practices of our own & their engagement as we/they strive to make a difference for the sake of high quality relationships with international students, faculty and community members – working for diversity and inclusion at all levels?    Are we/ they seeing our campus leaders or organizational leaders standing up strong now for human rights for all?   How do we change ourselves and our own institutions as we work in collaboration with others on these issues?       Mary

     

    Read about it here-----

     

    Story about the arrest of the 70 student at Ohio University this week:

    http://inthesetimes.com/article/19864

     

      

    In These Times With liberty and justice for all...

     

    Shortly after the arrests, administrators released a statement condemning the action for disrupting university operations. (Photo credit: Tess Hickey)

    Web Only / Features » February 3, 2017

     

    70 Arrested as Students at Ohio University Take a Stand by Sitting Down

    As Trump's frightful campaign promises become law, students at Ohio University demand their school become a "sanctuary campus."

    BY Carlos Ballesteros

     

    'We need the university to take a strong position against fascism and racism-that means becoming a sanctuary campus.'

    Days after President Donald Trump's order banning refugees and immigrants from several Muslim countries effectively stranded more than 17,000 students who hail from the seven blacklisted nations, some 70 protesters were arrested at Ohio University for holding a sit-in to demand their school declare itself a "sanctuary campus." Like a "sanctuary city," sanctuary campus does not have a legal definition but is used to describe a school that aims to protect its undocumented and immigrant students from deportation and persecution.

    The sit-in happened Wednesday night after hundreds of people marched to Baker University Center, a popular campus hub. Upon arrival, protestors took over the fourth and fifth floors of the building and announced they would not leave until Ohio University met their demands that the university commit to not share students' immigration status with law enforcement, not allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers on campus, protect undocumented students from deportation and provide "distance learning options for deported students." In total, more than 70 people were arrested for refusing to disperse and charged with criminal trespassing.

    Shortly after the arrests, administrators released a statement condemning the action for disrupting university operations. Meanwhile, the Ohio University student senate passed a bill asking that the university be designated a sanctuary campus.

    The demonstration occurred just days after outgoing Ohio University president Roderick J. McDavis issued a statement on Trump's ban, saying that he shares "the increasing concerns from many members of the Ohio University community" over the executive order. He wrote that the university is "committed to admitting students and recruiting faculty in a manner consistent with the tenets we hold true, and we are committed to fostering an environment that prepares them for success as global citizens."

    But for many students, including Bobby Walker, a senior at Ohio University and one of the organizers of Wednesday's protest, McDavis' statement wasn't nearly forceful enough.

    "He isn't even brave enough to say that the executive order is not in line with the university's ideals," she says. "We need the university to take a strong position against fascism and racism-that means becoming a sanctuary campus."

    The movement for sanctuary campuses exploded after the election. Administrators at Pomona College, in Claremont, California, published a statement in support of DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) students in November, saying that it is a "both a moral imperative and a national necessity" to provide "the opportunity for all our students to pursue their learning and life goals." As of Friday, more than 600 college and university presidents, including McDavis, have co-signed that statement.

    However, as reported in the New York Times, schools "have had differing ideas about what [providing sanctuary] would mean in practice." Some predominantly liberal institutions have offered free legal services for their undocumented and immigrant students, prohibited immigration agents from stepping on campus without a warrant and stated that they will not voluntarily assist any efforts by federal authorities to deport students. In contrast, other more conservative-leaning institutions, like the University System of Georgia, have rejected the idea of sanctuary campuses on the basis of that it encourages institutions and employees to break the law.

    Ohio University's position is unclear. Its public statements indicate that it is, at the very least, concerned about Trump's new immigration protocols. Yet, as reported by the Athens News, Ohio University has not taken a clear stance on whether or not the university and its police department "will decline to work with federal immigration officials unless they are forced to by law." For Walker, that ambiguity is unacceptable.

    "We want our university administrators to stand firmly against racism and Islamophobia," she said. "There are people here prepared to fight until that happens."

    .......................................

     

    Never has independent journalism mattered more. Help hold power to account: Subscribe to In These Times magazine, or make a tax-deductible donation to fund this reporting.

    Carlos Ballesteros

    Carlos Ballesteros is a freelance writer based in Chicago. He was born and raised in the South Side and recently graduated from Claremont McKenna College with a B.A. in History.

     

    •••••

    Ohio University No Ban No Wall Protest – Wednesday – Feb 1,  2017  ----  YOU TUBE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKANW-GcLAc    click to see the March

     

     

    •••••

    From the ATHENS NEWS

     

    http://www.athensnews.com/news/campus/more-than-protesters-arrested-after-sit-in-at-baker-center/article_be075b34-e8d4-11e6-97bd-37b4d959c9af.html

     

    More than 70 protesters arrested after sit-in at Baker Center

     

    ................................................................................................................

     

    On 2/3/17, 4:24 PM, "Management, Spirituality & Religion on behalf of Judith Neal" <MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG on behalf of judi@EDGEWALKERS.ORG> wrote:

     

        Mary Finney has encouraged us to become aware of what other Interest Groups and Divisions are doing, so I thought I would forward this message from MED.  I did not know about the Scholars at Risk program described below, and that seems an important organization to explore.

       

        Judi Neal

       

        

        

        On 2/3/17, 1:28 PM, "Peter Mc Namara, MED Chairperson" <peter.mcnamara@nuim.ie> wrote:

       

            Dear MED Colleagues,

            

            I know that a number of us have been concerned by the response of the AOM to issues surrounding the ability of colleagues to travel to the US for the AOM conference in August. Some have also expressed concern that more immediately this order impacts upon members ability to travel to the US for the purposes of collaborative research, teaching and the freedom to think, question and share ideas with colleagues, students and others in the US.

            

            The AOM headquarters have issued a detailed response, which does not address these more immediate concerns, but does offer an assurance that if a member from any country is unable to attend the conference due to an immigration order that they can present their paper remotely. We will be asking the AOM to consider in these cases that the conference fee be significantly reduced, or waived. We are also asking that if a presentation must occur remotely, that all MED members attending the conference physically make every effort to attend such presentations to show solidarity for our colleagues. AOM note that we are a non-political organisation and as such framed the response in an operational way around the annual meeting.

            

            As a committee we come from North America, Latin America, Europe and Eurasia. In our day to day teaching and research lives we work with students, businesses and researchers from a diverse range of countries. Managing diversity, sharing, listening and acting on ideas and evidence is both a challenge and opportunity in our professional lives. It can be difficult to work with others. To understand or accept their different perspectives. It can be a joy to work with others. It can be at the heart of successful business and innovation to combine the different skills, ideas and resources of others. For us, therefore, we see the debate around this immigration order, as an opportunity to reflect on the power of diversity and the need to listen to the voices of others, to protect the freedom of educators to think freely, to share their ideas and to question the ideas of others as this is at the heart of what it means to be an educator and researcher.

            

            In the recent letter of the President of the AOM, she notes that we do have a core value that we believe is about the protection of academic freedom and voice ("The AOM fervently values all its members. We are committed to inclusion, supportive communities, and social and academic freedom as fundamental and undeniable tenets of scholarly association." AOM letter re the US Executive Order on Immigration, 31/1/2017). We therefore would like to take some immediate practical steps to support this diversity value and encourage members to share other positive ideas with each other. Here is what we are doing and encourage others to think about.

            

             

            1.       Promote and actively engage in the Scholars at Risk movement https://www.scholarsatrisk.org

            

            Scholars from within the seven countries impacted by this immigration order face real challenges in undertaking their research and education activities. They face risk to their liberty and threats to their person as a consequence of sharing their research ideas, questioning the ideas of others and being active academic citizens. For example 27 academics from these countries are currently seeking an emergency academic home due to immediate and active threats to their life or person. Eight of the scholars at risk seeking immediate help are from management, economics or finance backgrounds. 446 member universities inside the USA, Europe and Africa are actively working to protect these scholars through the Scholars at Risk organisation. Seven network organisations, with hundreds of members support this initiative (though at present AOM is not one of these). We are committed to working inside our networks to supporting this work and hope that others might consider this a practical action to support the free exchange of ideas and leveraging of diversity that is at the heart of business success.

            

            At its core the Scholars at Risk organization is about "protecting scholars and the freedom to think, question and share ideas". As academics and members of AOM is this not something that we can all agree on as an important value? Can we not seek to become members of SAR as an institution (AOM) and encourage our universities to do the same?

            

            2.       MED Newsletter series: Global Voices - the Global World of Management education

            76% of all AOM members are from either North America or Europe, yet these regions represent only 14.6% of the world's population (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/#region). These are the voices that we hear from most readily at the AOM conference. We hear little, therefore from representatives of the vast majority of the world's population. Lets learn more about what are the approaches to management education and research in these areas. To this end we plan to invite some management educators from these regions to write a page on what the approach to management education in their region is; what are the challenges they face; what are the opportunities they leverage and how; what kinds of research are they doing and need? Some may not be able to travel to the conference for many reasons to share their ideas in person, but through a global voices program we can learn a little about their management education world.

            

            3.       MED Ambassadors

            The membership committee are currently working on reviving the MED Ambassadors program. The application process will be going live in the near future and will be announced in future MED newsletters. MED ambassadors can be a source of voice for their region, letting us know about their region, to let us be an advocacy voice for their issues in AOM, to encourage MED membership in their region (be our advocates), and to be a source that MED members can call upon (a friendly informed voice) if they are looking to connect into the region of the ambassador. Through friendly MED diplomacy we can share ideas, challenge ideas, and learn to be more effective management educators and development mentors.

            

            We wish to stand in solidarity with the full diversity of our members (be that nationality, creed, sexuality, political perspectives, disability and a wealth of other features that contribute to diversity of the human experience) in our common goal of advancing management education through the development and sharing of our research and skills development as educators.

            

            Sincerely,

            

             

            MED Committee members, including

            Peter Mc Namara, Chairperson

            Barbara Ritter, Past Chairperson

            Miguel Olivas-Lujan, Chairperson Elect

            Paul Hibbert, Program Chairperson

            Kim Gower, PDW Chairperson

            Olga Ryazanova, Secretary

    ................................................................................................        

            

    From: "Finney, Mary" <finneym@ohio.edu>

    Date: Friday, February 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM

    To: "Management, Spirituality & Religion" <MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>

    Cc: "Finney, Mary" <finneym@ohio.edu>

    Subject: Re: Giving Voice to the Humanitarian Values

     

    Dear MSR Listserv Members,

    Many AOM divisions and interest group listservs have been full of email exchanges over the last 5 days with discussions are about their deep concerns and search for what they need to do about the executive order by Trump related to travel ban for people from 7 countries. 

     

    I am a member of several AOM divisions  and anyone ( member or not) can be subscribe to the AOM open listservs for all the AOM divisions and interest groups.  I get their emails  and have valued learning a lot from these vital email exchanges coming from many perspectives.  Related to this, I am trying to learn what actions I can take, what actions we can take, what action steps other individuals and groups are taking and what my own university and business school is doing each day since this ban has been declared.  AOM members are also members of other major academic associations.  I believe there is so much to learn from the actions and discussions taking place – beyond AOM ----  in other academic associations and institutions.    See example below:  

     

    Mary Finney

    Ohio University

     

    Step just taken by the The Labor and Employment Relations Association

     

    Statement Regarding Executive Order Issued by President Donald Trump on

    1-27-2017

    The Labor and Employment Relations Association encourages research and promotes full discussion and the exchange of ideas among all its constituencies on matters of employment practice and policy while assuming no partisan position. Our bylaws state that LERA "affirms its support for fundamental worker and human rights in the workplace." For decades, LERA members have studied and will continue to study the impact of immigration on employment and the labor force. We are greatly enriched by the presence of persons from around the world who come to study, to teach and to work in the United States. Immigrants have added tremendous value to our country.

       

    We are deeply concerned by the Executive Order issued by President Donald Trump that restricts the ability of individuals who lawfully have the right to come to the United States from being able to enter, re-enter or remain in our country. This Executive Order is inconsistent with our nation's  tradition of welcoming individuals from all countries.  We urge the Trump administration to withdraw this Executive Order or to revise it so that it is consistent with our traditions and with basic principles of law.

        

        By Janice Bellace, LERA President, February 1, 2017

        Emily Smith

        Executive Director

        Labor and Employment Relations Association

        504 E. Armory Avenue, Room 121, MC-504, Champaign, IL 61820

     

    ............................................................

     

            From: "Management, Spirituality & Religion" <MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> on behalf of Lee Robbins <leerobbins@SONIC.NET>

    Reply-To: "Management, Spirituality & Religion" <MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>

    Date: Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:02 PM

    To: "MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG" <MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>

    Subject: Re: Giving Voice to the Humanitarian Values

     

    I think Stacie's conclusions are exactly right.

    On the one hand, we need to be critical about Trump's actions –– but we also need to be understanding and empathic about the fears and dismay of his middle American working class heartland base who, unlike most of us and our professional educated peers, have found both their economic condition and their place in the societal pecking order decline for themselves, their families and their communities. These shifts  are the outcome of changing technology, trade and education; such changes bring winners and losers. These have occurred relatively rapidly across the developed world. --and the losers unsurprisingly want the "good old days" back.  Hence the rise of "populism".

     

    No easy solutions are at hand but simply accusing  "them" of stupid "wrong views" and bigotry will only escalate anger rather than move towards dissolving the conflicts. The need is to seek solutions --difficult but not impossible -- and to take care about our political correctness,  which seems correct to us but to them seems arrogant and derogatory.  

     

    AND we need to find ways to prevent those Trumpites who will try to overturn the democratic order before their base realizes that the promised "good old days" aren't returning but may try to seize military, electoral and social power (E. g. Venezuela today and much of the Middle East such as Egypt). 

     

    Sent from my iPhone 415-713-1341

    .............................................................................

     

    On Feb 2, 2017, at 4:40 PM, Stacie Chappell <stacie.chappell@WNE.EDU> wrote:

    Hello MSR Colleagues - For the past few days, I have been part of a number of conversations regarding how to respond to President Trump's EO blocking entry of refugees and travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries - individually (as a Canadian/Australian immigrant working in the USA on a NAFTA visa) and collectively (as a member of AOM and MSR).

    I will speak personally here as I know the MSR Executive is preparing a communication to the MSR IG. 

     

    My view on the EO and the AOM response to it:

    •          I think the EO is evidence of President Trump doing exactly what Candidate Trump said he would. As such, the people who voted for him will see these actions as justified, if not executed well.

    •          I believe the EO is a shock event that is intended to distract and divide people - we need to stay vigilant for what is coming down the pipeline:

    o          I think how we respond individually and collectively should unapologetically assert our values (multiculturalism, humanitarianism, religious freedom) AND ALSO provide a compelling alternative narrative to people who voted/supported Trump.  Scapegoating them (i.e. calling them all racists or stupid) or responding with language that is intended to sensationalize (an already incredible situation) or dehumanize, will encourage escalation of commitment and confirmation bias.

    o          For example, I would recommend using the words 'travel ban' and not 'muslim ban'  – While I do believe the latter is the underlying motivation behind the EO,  I think it detracts from the real issues (unconstitutional, an ineffective strategy for ensuring USA safety, and not aligned with humanitarian values).

    •          I am pleased that AOM's response included a shift in process to allow attendees who can not travel to participate - although I think this could be expanded to make more of the conference 'virtual' and enable even broader participation.

    •          I was disappointed in AOM's response as the predominant professional body for management educators - we have not solicited input from members in order to add our voice to the petition or letter to President Trump.

    Stacie

     

    Dr. Stacie Chappell

    Assistant Professor of Management

    College of Business

    Western New England University

    1215 Wilbraham Road, Springfield MA

    stacie.chappell@wne.edu

     

     

       



  • 3.  MED Response to US Executive Order on Immigration and International Management Educators - creating voice and support

    Posted 02-06-2017 04:29

    Colleagues, in response to this and other messages – there is also considerable activity happening in this area in the Critical Management Studies [CMS] division, including a member survey due to be distributed today, all based around the division's purpose of presenting alternatives to technocratic or instrumental imperatives and challenging structural discrimination on any basis. Perhaps the MSR group could also look to the division's domain statement for inspiration, both intellectual and practical? Best wishes, scott

     

    Scott Taylor (Dr) – Director of Undergraduate Programmes

    Reader in Leadership & Organization Studies, Birmingham Business School, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK

    s.taylor@bham.ac.uk (+44) 0121 414 6703

     

    Associate Editor, Organization: The Critical Journal of Organization, Theory & Society

    Carroll, B., Ford, J. & Taylor, S. (eds) (2015) Leadership: Contemporary critical perspectives. London: Sage.

    Recent articles in The Conversation

     

    From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Finney, Mary
    Sent: 04 February 2017 05:49
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: MED Response to US Executive Order on Immigration and International Management Educators - creating voice and support

     

    Dear MSR Listserv Members,

     

    Thanks for your posts below Stacie, Lee and Judi, -  all inspiring and helps me to learn more, be encouraged by others and stay open.   

     

    Today , Friday – Feb. 3, 2017 --- my thoughts and actions are focused on Athens, Ohio – my place, where I live and work.  Today I joined a march organized by the Ohio University medical school faculty, medical students, medical professionals and other OU faculty, students and community members.  We chanted – "NO HATE, NO FEAR, IMMIGRANTS ARE WELCOME HERE!" over and over again – as we marched down the streets, onto campus – through the Baker Student Union, and down the main street of town and around the town and heard speeches in a rally at the end. 

     

    Two days earlier there was another march that started on Ohio University Athens campus – with international and domestic faculty, students and community members.  There was a rally in front of the Court House with many speakers.    The marched ended and hundreds of university students continued by engaging in a sit -in protest in the OU Baker Center after their march.   In was a peaceful, non-violent demonstration.  They requested the university leaders to hear them out related to wanting to have OU to be a sanctuary campus. They wanted the leaders of the university to speak up very strongly against the Trump executive order to ban travel from 7 mainly Muslim countries.  After a couple of hours – 70 students were arrested.   This is very serious for the domestic students and especially for the international students who were arrested in the peaceful demonstration.  

     

    Students are hoping to be successful in encouraging heir faculty and campus leaders to show courage and to stand up for their deepest values and ethics -  as they stand together against the ban.

     

    What can we learn from how we & our students, faculty and university leaders are working on this – with courage, wisdom and hope?    What are the BEST practices of our own & their engagement as we/they strive to make a difference for the sake of high quality relationships with international students, faculty and community members – working for diversity and inclusion at all levels?    Are we/ they seeing our campus leaders or organizational leaders standing up strong now for human rights for all?   How do we change ourselves and our own institutions as we work in collaboration with others on these issues?       Mary

     

    Read about it here-----

     

    Story about the arrest of the 70 student at Ohio University this week:

    http://inthesetimes.com/article/19864

     

      

    In These Times With liberty and justice for all...

     

     

    Shortly after the arrests, administrators released a statement condemning the action for disrupting university operations. (Photo credit: Tess Hickey)

    Web Only / Features » February 3, 2017

     

    70 Arrested as Students at Ohio University Take a Stand by Sitting Down

    As Trump's frightful campaign promises become law, students at Ohio University demand their school become a "sanctuary campus."

    BY Carlos Ballesteros

     

    'We need the university to take a strong position against fascism and racism-that means becoming a sanctuary campus.'

     

    Days after President Donald Trump's order banning refugees and immigrants from several Muslim countries effectively stranded more than 17,000 students who hail from the seven blacklisted nations, some 70 protesters were arrested at Ohio University for holding a sit-in to demand their school declare itself a "sanctuary campus." Like a "sanctuary city," sanctuary campus does not have a legal definition but is used to describe a school that aims to protect its undocumented and immigrant students from deportation and persecution.

     

    The sit-in happened Wednesday night after hundreds of people marched to Baker University Center, a popular campus hub. Upon arrival, protestors took over the fourth and fifth floors of the building and announced they would not leave until Ohio University met their demands that the university commit to not share students' immigration status with law enforcement, not allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers on campus, protect undocumented students from deportation and provide "distance learning options for deported students." In total, more than 70 people were arrested for refusing to disperse and charged with criminal trespassing.

     

    Shortly after the arrests, administrators released a statement condemning the action for disrupting university operations. Meanwhile, the Ohio University student senate passed a bill asking that the university be designated a sanctuary campus.

     

    The demonstration occurred just days after outgoing Ohio University president Roderick J. McDavis issued a statement on Trump's ban, saying that he shares "the increasing concerns from many members of the Ohio University community" over the executive order. He wrote that the university is "committed to admitting students and recruiting faculty in a manner consistent with the tenets we hold true, and we are committed to fostering an environment that prepares them for success as global citizens."

     

    But for many students, including Bobby Walker, a senior at Ohio University and one of the organizers of Wednesday's protest, McDavis' statement wasn't nearly forceful enough.

    "He isn't even brave enough to say that the executive order is not in line with the university's ideals," she says. "We need the university to take a strong position against fascism and racism-that means becoming a sanctuary campus."

     

    The movement for sanctuary campuses exploded after the election. Administrators at Pomona College, in Claremont, California, published a statement in support of DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) students in November, saying that it is a "both a moral imperative and a national necessity" to provide "the opportunity for all our students to pursue their learning and life goals." As of Friday, more than 600 college and university presidents, including McDavis, have co-signed that statement.

     

    However, as reported in the New York Times, schools "have had differing ideas about what [providing sanctuary] would mean in practice." Some predominantly liberal institutions have offered free legal services for their undocumented and immigrant students, prohibited immigration agents from stepping on campus without a warrant and stated that they will not voluntarily assist any efforts by federal authorities to deport students. In contrast, other more conservative-leaning institutions, like the University System of Georgia, have rejected the idea of sanctuary campuses on the basis of that it encourages institutions and employees to break the law.

     

    Ohio University's position is unclear. Its public statements indicate that it is, at the very least, concerned about Trump's new immigration protocols. Yet, as reported by the Athens News, Ohio University has not taken a clear stance on whether or not the university and its police department "will decline to work with federal immigration officials unless they are forced to by law." For Walker, that ambiguity is unacceptable.

     

    "We want our university administrators to stand firmly against racism and Islamophobia," she said. "There are people here prepared to fight until that happens."

    .......................................

     

     

    Never has independent journalism mattered more. Help hold power to account: Subscribe to In These Times magazine, or make a tax-deductible donation to fund this reporting.

    Carlos Ballesteros

     

    Carlos Ballesteros is a freelance writer based in Chicago. He was born and raised in the South Side and recently graduated from Claremont McKenna College with a B.A. in History.

     

     

    •••••

    Ohio University No Ban No Wall Protest – Wednesday – Feb 1,  2017  ----  YOU TUBE

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKANW-GcLAc    click to see the March

     

     

    •••••

    From the ATHENS NEWS

     

    http://www.athensnews.com/news/campus/more-than-protesters-arrested-after-sit-in-at-baker-center/article_be075b34-e8d4-11e6-97bd-37b4d959c9af.html

     

    More than 70 protesters arrested after sit-in at Baker Center

     

    ................................................................................................................

     

    On 2/3/17, 4:24 PM, "Management, Spirituality & Religion on behalf of Judith Neal" <MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG on behalf of judi@EDGEWALKERS.ORG> wrote:

     

        Mary Finney has encouraged us to become aware of what other Interest Groups and Divisions are doing, so I thought I would forward this message from MED.  I did not know about the Scholars at Risk program described below, and that seems an important organization to explore.

       

        Judi Neal

       

        

        

        On 2/3/17, 1:28 PM, "Peter Mc Namara, MED Chairperson" <peter.mcnamara@nuim.ie> wrote:

       

            Dear MED Colleagues,

            

            I know that a number of us have been concerned by the response of the AOM to issues surrounding the ability of colleagues to travel to the US for the AOM conference in August. Some have also expressed concern that more immediately this order impacts upon members ability to travel to the US for the purposes of collaborative research, teaching and the freedom to think, question and share ideas with colleagues, students and others in the US.

            

            The AOM headquarters have issued a detailed response, which does not address these more immediate concerns, but does offer an assurance that if a member from any country is unable to attend the conference due to an immigration order that they can present their paper remotely. We will be asking the AOM to consider in these cases that the conference fee be significantly reduced, or waived. We are also asking that if a presentation must occur remotely, that all MED members attending the conference physically make every effort to attend such presentations to show solidarity for our colleagues. AOM note that we are a non-political organisation and as such framed the response in an operational way around the annual meeting.

            

            As a committee we come from North America, Latin America, Europe and Eurasia. In our day to day teaching and research lives we work with students, businesses and researchers from a diverse range of countries. Managing diversity, sharing, listening and acting on ideas and evidence is both a challenge and opportunity in our professional lives. It can be difficult to work with others. To understand or accept their different perspectives. It can be a joy to work with others. It can be at the heart of successful business and innovation to combine the different skills, ideas and resources of others. For us, therefore, we see the debate around this immigration order, as an opportunity to reflect on the power of diversity and the need to listen to the voices of others, to protect the freedom of educators to think freely, to share their ideas and to question the ideas of others as this is at the heart of what it means to be an educator and researcher.

            

            In the recent letter of the President of the AOM, she notes that we do have a core value that we believe is about the protection of academic freedom and voice ("The AOM fervently values all its members. We are committed to inclusion, supportive communities, and social and academic freedom as fundamental and undeniable tenets of scholarly association." AOM letter re the US Executive Order on Immigration, 31/1/2017). We therefore would like to take some immediate practical steps to support this diversity value and encourage members to share other positive ideas with each other. Here is what we are doing and encourage others to think about.

            

             

            1.       Promote and actively engage in the Scholars at Risk movement https://www.scholarsatrisk.org

            

            Scholars from within the seven countries impacted by this immigration order face real challenges in undertaking their research and education activities. They face risk to their liberty and threats to their person as a consequence of sharing their research ideas, questioning the ideas of others and being active academic citizens. For example 27 academics from these countries are currently seeking an emergency academic home due to immediate and active threats to their life or person. Eight of the scholars at risk seeking immediate help are from management, economics or finance backgrounds. 446 member universities inside the USA, Europe and Africa are actively working to protect these scholars through the Scholars at Risk organisation. Seven network organisations, with hundreds of members support this initiative (though at present AOM is not one of these). We are committed to working inside our networks to supporting this work and hope that others might consider this a practical action to support the free exchange of ideas and leveraging of diversity that is at the heart of business success.

            

            At its core the Scholars at Risk organization is about "protecting scholars and the freedom to think, question and share ideas". As academics and members of AOM is this not something that we can all agree on as an important value? Can we not seek to become members of SAR as an institution (AOM) and encourage our universities to do the same?

            

            2.       MED Newsletter series: Global Voices - the Global World of Management education

            76% of all AOM members are from either North America or Europe, yet these regions represent only 14.6% of the world's population (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/#region). These are the voices that we hear from most readily at the AOM conference. We hear little, therefore from representatives of the vast majority of the world's population. Lets learn more about what are the approaches to management education and research in these areas. To this end we plan to invite some management educators from these regions to write a page on what the approach to management education in their region is; what are the challenges they face; what are the opportunities they leverage and how; what kinds of research are they doing and need? Some may not be able to travel to the conference for many reasons to share their ideas in person, but through a global voices program we can learn a little about their management education world.

            

            3.       MED Ambassadors

            The membership committee are currently working on reviving the MED Ambassadors program. The application process will be going live in the near future and will be announced in future MED newsletters. MED ambassadors can be a source of voice for their region, letting us know about their region, to let us be an advocacy voice for their issues in AOM, to encourage MED membership in their region (be our advocates), and to be a source that MED members can call upon (a friendly informed voice) if they are looking to connect into the region of the ambassador. Through friendly MED diplomacy we can share ideas, challenge ideas, and learn to be more effective management educators and development mentors.

            

            We wish to stand in solidarity with the full diversity of our members (be that nationality, creed, sexuality, political perspectives, disability and a wealth of other features that contribute to diversity of the human experience) in our common goal of advancing management education through the development and sharing of our research and skills development as educators.

            

            Sincerely,

            

             

            MED Committee members, including

            Peter Mc Namara, Chairperson

            Barbara Ritter, Past Chairperson

            Miguel Olivas-Lujan, Chairperson Elect

            Paul Hibbert, Program Chairperson

            Kim Gower, PDW Chairperson

            Olga Ryazanova, Secretary

    ................................................................................................        

            

    From: "Finney, Mary" <finneym@ohio.edu>

    Date: Friday, February 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM

    To: "Management, Spirituality & Religion" <MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>

    Cc: "Finney, Mary" <finneym@ohio.edu>

    Subject: Re: Giving Voice to the Humanitarian Values

     

    Dear MSR Listserv Members,

     

    Many AOM divisions and interest group listservs have been full of email exchanges over the last 5 days with discussions are about their deep concerns and search for what they need to do about the executive order by Trump related to travel ban for people from 7 countries. 

     

    I am a member of several AOM divisions  and anyone ( member or not) can be subscribe to the AOM open listservs for all the AOM divisions and interest groups.  I get their emails  and have valued learning a lot from these vital email exchanges coming from many perspectives.  Related to this, I am trying to learn what actions I can take, what actions we can take, what action steps other individuals and groups are taking and what my own university and business school is doing each day since this ban has been declared.  AOM members are also members of other major academic associations.  I believe there is so much to learn from the actions and discussions taking place – beyond AOM ----  in other academic associations and institutions.    See example below:  

     

    Mary Finney

    Ohio University

     

    Step just taken by the The Labor and Employment Relations Association

     

    Statement Regarding Executive Order Issued by President Donald Trump on

    1-27-2017

    The Labor and Employment Relations Association encourages research and promotes full discussion and the exchange of ideas among all its constituencies on matters of employment practice and policy while assuming no partisan position. Our bylaws state that LERA "affirms its support for fundamental worker and human rights in the workplace." For decades, LERA members have studied and will continue to study the impact of immigration on employment and the labor force. We are greatly enriched by the presence of persons from around the world who come to study, to teach and to work in the United States. Immigrants have added tremendous value to our country.

       

    We are deeply concerned by the Executive Order issued by President Donald Trump that restricts the ability of individuals who lawfully have the right to come to the United States from being able to enter, re-enter or remain in our country. This Executive Order is inconsistent with our nation's  tradition of welcoming individuals from all countries.  We urge the Trump administration to withdraw this Executive Order or to revise it so that it is consistent with our traditions and with basic principles of law.

        

        By Janice Bellace, LERA President, February 1, 2017

        Emily Smith

        Executive Director

        Labor and Employment Relations Association

        504 E. Armory Avenue, Room 121, MC-504, Champaign, IL 61820

     

    ............................................................

     

            From: "Management, Spirituality & Religion" <MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> on behalf of Lee Robbins <leerobbins@SONIC.NET>

    Reply-To: "Management, Spirituality & Religion" <MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>

    Date: Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:02 PM

    To: "MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG" <MSR@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG>

    Subject: Re: Giving Voice to the Humanitarian Values

     

    I think Stacie's conclusions are exactly right.

    On the one hand, we need to be critical about Trump's actions –– but we also need to be understanding and empathic about the fears and dismay of his middle American working class heartland base who, unlike most of us and our professional educated peers, have found both their economic condition and their place in the societal pecking order decline for themselves, their families and their communities. These shifts  are the outcome of changing technology, trade and education; such changes bring winners and losers. These have occurred relatively rapidly across the developed world. --and the losers unsurprisingly want the "good old days" back.  Hence the rise of "populism".

     

    No easy solutions are at hand but simply accusing  "them" of stupid "wrong views" and bigotry will only escalate anger rather than move towards dissolving the conflicts. The need is to seek solutions --difficult but not impossible -- and to take care about our political correctness,  which seems correct to us but to them seems arrogant and derogatory.  

     

    AND we need to find ways to prevent those Trumpites who will try to overturn the democratic order before their base realizes that the promised "good old days" aren't returning but may try to seize military, electoral and social power (E. g. Venezuela today and much of the Middle East such as Egypt). 

     

    Sent from my iPhone 415-713-1341

    .............................................................................

     

    On Feb 2, 2017, at 4:40 PM, Stacie Chappell <stacie.chappell@WNE.EDU> wrote:

    Hello MSR Colleagues - For the past few days, I have been part of a number of conversations regarding how to respond to President Trump's EO blocking entry of refugees and travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries - individually (as a Canadian/Australian immigrant working in the USA on a NAFTA visa) and collectively (as a member of AOM and MSR).

    I will speak personally here as I know the MSR Executive is preparing a communication to the MSR IG. 

     

    My view on the EO and the AOM response to it:

    •          I think the EO is evidence of President Trump doing exactly what Candidate Trump said he would. As such, the people who voted for him will see these actions as justified, if not executed well.

    •          I believe the EO is a shock event that is intended to distract and divide people - we need to stay vigilant for what is coming down the pipeline:

    o          I think how we respond individually and collectively should unapologetically assert our values (multiculturalism, humanitarianism, religious freedom) AND ALSO provide a compelling alternative narrative to people who voted/supported Trump.  Scapegoating them (i.e. calling them all racists or stupid) or responding with language that is intended to sensationalize (an already incredible situation) or dehumanize, will encourage escalation of commitment and confirmation bias.

    o          For example, I would recommend using the words 'travel ban' and not 'muslim ban'  – While I do believe the latter is the underlying motivation behind the EO,  I think it detracts from the real issues (unconstitutional, an ineffective strategy for ensuring USA safety, and not aligned with humanitarian values).

    •          I am pleased that AOM's response included a shift in process to allow attendees who can not travel to participate - although I think this could be expanded to make more of the conference 'virtual' and enable even broader participation.

    •          I was disappointed in AOM's response as the predominant professional body for management educators - we have not solicited input from members in order to add our voice to the petition or letter to President Trump.

    Stacie

     

    Dr. Stacie Chappell

    Assistant Professor of Management

    College of Business

    Western New England University

    1215 Wilbraham Road, Springfield MA

    stacie.chappell@wne.edu

     

     

       



  • 4.  MED Response to US Executive Order on Immigration and International Management Educators - creating voice and support

    Posted 02-10-2017 01:07
    Dear MSR listserv members:

    Here is the decision, on appeal, from the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth District:


    We do well to have a good look at the actual decision ourselves and not only rely on how others may interpret the court - include the thoughts of this writer :-) . So my primary purpose in posting is to provide a link to the court's decision itself. 

    That said, I've also read it and offer a few thoughts in the spirit of our member listserv provided by the Academy.  The word "religion" is found six times in 29 pages. Essentially, the court withheld on religious discrimination under the First Amendment, noting that the States "raise serious questions and present significant constitutional questions" (p. 26). The reason for this was sensitivity of that question and urgency due to  - "our conclusion that the Government has not met its burden of showing likelihood of success on appeal on its arguments with respect to the due process claim (Ibid.)." 

    So, as we do seem to have been discussing, this EO case is of MSR interest primarily as a matter social justice in its assault on due process concerning discrimination against individuals due to citizenship, national origins, and acts of executive authority not grounded in empirical evidence. The issue of religion was bracketed, if for no other reason than other, clearer issues predominated for exercise of the stay decision. 

    This is noted in the conclusion:  "Finally, in evaluating the need for a stay, we must consider the public interest generally.  See Nken, 556 U.S. at 434. Aspects of the public interest favor both sides, as evidenced by the massive attention this case has garnered at even the most preliminary stages.  On the one hand, the public has a powerful interest in national security and in the ability of an elected president to enact policies.  And on the other, the public also has an interest in free flow of travel, in avoiding separation of families, and in freedom from discrimination.  We need not characterize the public interest more definitely than this; when considered alongside the hardships discussed above, these competing public interests do not justify a stay."

    - my two cents. 
    Best,
    Charlie  



    On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 10:24 PM, Judith Neal <judi@edgewalkers.org> wrote:
    Mary Finney has encouraged us to become aware of what other Interest Groups and Divisions are doing, so I thought I would forward this message from MED.  I did not know about the Scholars at Risk program described below, and that seems an important organization to explore.

    Judi Neal



    On 2/3/17, 1:28 PM, "Peter Mc Namara, MED Chairperson" <peter.mcnamara@nuim.ie> wrote:

        Dear MED Colleagues,

        I know that a number of us have been concerned by the response of the AOM to issues surrounding the ability of colleagues to travel to the US for the AOM conference in August. Some have also expressed concern that more immediately this order impacts upon members ability to travel to the US for the purposes of collaborative research, teaching and the freedom to think, question and share ideas with colleagues, students and others in the US.

        The AOM headquarters have issued a detailed response, which does not address these more immediate concerns, but does offer an assurance that if a member from any country is unable to attend the conference due to an immigration order that they can present their paper remotely. We will be asking the AOM to consider in these cases that the conference fee be significantly reduced, or waived. We are also asking that if a presentation must occur remotely, that all MED members attending the conference physically make every effort to attend such presentations to show solidarity for our colleagues. AOM note that we are a non-political organisation and as such framed the response in an operational way around the annual meeting.

        As a committee we come from North America, Latin America, Europe and Eurasia. In our day to day teaching and research lives we work with students, businesses and researchers from a diverse range of countries. Managing diversity, sharing, listening and acting on ideas and evidence is both a challenge and opportunity in our professional lives. It can be difficult to work with others. To understand or accept their different perspectives. It can be a joy to work with others. It can be at the heart of successful business and innovation to combine the different skills, ideas and resources of others. For us, therefore, we see the debate around this immigration order, as an opportunity to reflect on the power of diversity and the need to listen to the voices of others, to protect the freedom of educators to think freely, to share their ideas and to question the ideas of others as this is at the heart of what it means to be an educator and researcher.

        In the recent letter of the President of the AOM, she notes that we do have a core value that we believe is about the protection of academic freedom and voice ("The AOM fervently values all its members. We are committed to inclusion, supportive communities, and social and academic freedom as fundamental and undeniable tenets of scholarly association." AOM letter re the US Executive Order on Immigration, 31/1/2017). We therefore would like to take some immediate practical steps to support this diversity value and encourage members to share other positive ideas with each other. Here is what we are doing and encourage others to think about.


        1.       Promote and actively engage in the Scholars at Risk movement https://www.scholarsatrisk.org

        Scholars from within the seven countries impacted by this immigration order face real challenges in undertaking their research and education activities. They face risk to their liberty and threats to their person as a consequence of sharing their research ideas, questioning the ideas of others and being active academic citizens. For example 27 academics from these countries are currently seeking an emergency academic home due to immediate and active threats to their life or person. Eight of the scholars at risk seeking immediate help are from management, economics or finance backgrounds. 446 member universities inside the USA, Europe and Africa are actively working to protect these scholars through the Scholars at Risk organisation. Seven network organisations, with hundreds of members support this initiative (though at present AOM is not one of these). We are committed to working inside our networks to supporting this work and hope that others might consider this a practical action to support the free exchange of ideas and leveraging of diversity that is at the heart of business success.

        At its core the Scholars at Risk organization is about "protecting scholars and the freedom to think, question and share ideas". As academics and members of AOM is this not something that we can all agree on as an important value? Can we not seek to become members of SAR as an institution (AOM) and encourage our universities to do the same?

        2.       MED Newsletter series: Global Voices - the Global World of Management education
        76% of all AOM members are from either North America or Europe, yet these regions represent only 14.6% of the world's population (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/#region). These are the voices that we hear from most readily at the AOM conference. We hear little, therefore from representatives of the vast majority of the world's population. Lets learn more about what are the approaches to management education and research in these areas. To this end we plan to invite some management educators from these regions to write a page on what the approach to management education in their region is; what are the challenges they face; what are the opportunities they leverage and how; what kinds of research are they doing and need? Some may not be able to travel to the conference for many reasons to share their ideas in person, but through a global voices program we can learn a little about their management education world.

        3.       MED Ambassadors
        The membership committee are currently working on reviving the MED Ambassadors program. The application process will be going live in the near future and will be announced in future MED newsletters. MED ambassadors can be a source of voice for their region, letting us know about their region, to let us be an advocacy voice for their issues in AOM, to encourage MED membership in their region (be our advocates), and to be a source that MED members can call upon (a friendly informed voice) if they are looking to connect into the region of the ambassador. Through friendly MED diplomacy we can share ideas, challenge ideas, and learn to be more effective management educators and development mentors.

        We wish to stand in solidarity with the full diversity of our members (be that nationality, creed, sexuality, political perspectives, disability and a wealth of other features that contribute to diversity of the human experience) in our common goal of advancing management education through the development and sharing of our research and skills development as educators.

        Sincerely,


        MED Committee members, including
        Peter Mc Namara, Chairperson
        Barbara Ritter, Past Chairperson
        Miguel Olivas-Lujan, Chairperson Elect
        Paul Hibbert, Program Chairperson
        Kim Gower, PDW Chairperson
        Olga Ryazanova, Secretary






  • 5.  MED Response to US Executive Order on Immigration and International Management Educators - creating voice and support

    Posted 02-10-2017 18:50
    Thanks, Charles.  I read it from cover to cover and thought it highly reasonable, appropriate and consistent with the constitution, laws and customs of our country; I was also relieved and pleased  to find that the reports from such as the NYTimes seemed complete and accurate.  

    I wonder if it is more than coincidental that President Bannon (AKA Trump) has chosen an action which causes immediate harm to the established educational system which provides a central source of critique to the arbitrary exercise of governmental power.  Interesting indeed that it is a at least nominal Republicans that are demonstrating the excesses of central government power against which they have long inveighed.   And disturbing that most other Republicans seems to be going along like sheep (or German Jews in the 40's) to the slaughter.
    Lee Robbins
    • NOTE: LeeRobbins@post.Harvard.edu is my PERMANENT email address 
    • please use this in your address book as I may change ISPs and their email addresses from time to time; note auto-reply goes to LeeRobbins@Sonic.net (my current ISP) which is OK but may be changed sometime.
    Cell: 415-713-1341





    On Feb 9, 2017, at 10:06 PM, Charles Tackney <cttack@GMAIL.COM> wrote:

    Dear MSR listserv members:

    Here is the decision, on appeal, from the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth District:


    We do well to have a good look at the actual decision ourselves and not only rely on how others may interpret the court - include the thoughts of this writer :-) . So my primary purpose in posting is to provide a link to the court's decision itself. 

    That said, I've also read it and offer a few thoughts in the spirit of our member listserv provided by the Academy.  The word "religion" is found six times in 29 pages. Essentially, the court withheld on religious discrimination under the First Amendment, noting that the States "raise serious questions and present significant constitutional questions" (p. 26). The reason for this was sensitivity of that question and urgency due to  - "our conclusion that the Government has not met its burden of showing likelihood of success on appeal on its arguments with respect to the due process claim (Ibid.)." 

    So, as we do seem to have been discussing, this EO case is of MSR interest primarily as a matter social justice in its assault on due process concerning discrimination against individuals due to citizenship, national origins, and acts of executive authority not grounded in empirical evidence. The issue of religion was bracketed, if for no other reason than other, clearer issues predominated for exercise of the stay decision. 

    This is noted in the conclusion:  "Finally, in evaluating the need for a stay, we must consider the public interest generally.  See Nken, 556 U.S. at 434. Aspects of the public interest favor both sides, as evidenced by the massive attention this case has garnered at even the most preliminary stages.  On the one hand, the public has a powerful interest in national security and in the ability of an elected president to enact policies.  And on the other, the public also has an interest in free flow of travel, in avoiding separation of families, and in freedom from discrimination.  We need not characterize the public interest more definitely than this; when considered alongside the hardships discussed above, these competing public interests do not justify a stay."

    - my two cents. 
    Best,
    Charlie  



    On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 10:24 PM, Judith Neal <judi@edgewalkers.org> wrote:
    Mary Finney has encouraged us to become aware of what other Interest Groups and Divisions are doing, so I thought I would forward this message from MED.  I did not know about the Scholars at Risk program described below, and that seems an important organization to explore.

    Judi Neal



    On 2/3/17, 1:28 PM, "Peter Mc Namara, MED Chairperson" <peter.mcnamara@nuim.ie> wrote:

        Dear MED Colleagues,

        I know that a number of us have been concerned by the response of the AOM to issues surrounding the ability of colleagues to travel to the US for the AOM conference in August. Some have also expressed concern that more immediately this order impacts upon members ability to travel to the US for the purposes of collaborative research, teaching and the freedom to think, question and share ideas with colleagues, students and others in the US.

        The AOM headquarters have issued a detailed response, which does not address these more immediate concerns, but does offer an assurance that if a member from any country is unable to attend the conference due to an immigration order that they can present their paper remotely. We will be asking the AOM to consider in these cases that the conference fee be significantly reduced, or waived. We are also asking that if a presentation must occur remotely, that all MED members attending the conference physically make every effort to attend such presentations to show solidarity for our colleagues. AOM note that we are a non-political organisation and as such framed the response in an operational way around the annual meeting.

        As a committee we come from North America, Latin America, Europe and Eurasia. In our day to day teaching and research lives we work with students, businesses and researchers from a diverse range of countries. Managing diversity, sharing, listening and acting on ideas and evidence is both a challenge and opportunity in our professional lives. It can be difficult to work with others. To understand or accept their different perspectives. It can be a joy to work with others. It can be at the heart of successful business and innovation to combine the different skills, ideas and resources of others. For us, therefore, we see the debate around this immigration order, as an opportunity to reflect on the power of diversity and the need to listen to the voices of others, to protect the freedom of educators to think freely, to share their ideas and to question the ideas of others as this is at the heart of what it means to be an educator and researcher.

        In the recent letter of the President of the AOM, she notes that we do have a core value that we believe is about the protection of academic freedom and voice ("The AOM fervently values all its members. We are committed to inclusion, supportive communities, and social and academic freedom as fundamental and undeniable tenets of scholarly association." AOM letter re the US Executive Order on Immigration, 31/1/2017). We therefore would like to take some immediate practical steps to support this diversity value and encourage members to share other positive ideas with each other. Here is what we are doing and encourage others to think about.


        1.       Promote and actively engage in the Scholars at Risk movement https://www.scholarsatrisk.org

        Scholars from within the seven countries impacted by this immigration order face real challenges in undertaking their research and education activities. They face risk to their liberty and threats to their person as a consequence of sharing their research ideas, questioning the ideas of others and being active academic citizens. For example 27 academics from these countries are currently seeking an emergency academic home due to immediate and active threats to their life or person. Eight of the scholars at risk seeking immediate help are from management, economics or finance backgrounds. 446 member universities inside the USA, Europe and Africa are actively working to protect these scholars through the Scholars at Risk organisation. Seven network organisations, with hundreds of members support this initiative (though at present AOM is not one of these). We are committed to working inside our networks to supporting this work and hope that others might consider this a practical action to support the free exchange of ideas and leveraging of diversity that is at the heart of business success.

        At its core the Scholars at Risk organization is about "protecting scholars and the freedom to think, question and share ideas". As academics and members of AOM is this not something that we can all agree on as an important value? Can we not seek to become members of SAR as an institution (AOM) and encourage our universities to do the same?

        2.       MED Newsletter series: Global Voices - the Global World of Management education
        76% of all AOM members are from either North America or Europe, yet these regions represent only 14.6% of the world's population (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/#region). These are the voices that we hear from most readily at the AOM conference. We hear little, therefore from representatives of the vast majority of the world's population. Lets learn more about what are the approaches to management education and research in these areas. To this end we plan to invite some management educators from these regions to write a page on what the approach to management education in their region is; what are the challenges they face; what are the opportunities they leverage and how; what kinds of research are they doing and need? Some may not be able to travel to the conference for many reasons to share their ideas in person, but through a global voices program we can learn a little about their management education world.

        3.       MED Ambassadors
        The membership committee are currently working on reviving the MED Ambassadors program. The application process will be going live in the near future and will be announced in future MED newsletters. MED ambassadors can be a source of voice for their region, letting us know about their region, to let us be an advocacy voice for their issues in AOM, to encourage MED membership in their region (be our advocates), and to be a source that MED members can call upon (a friendly informed voice) if they are looking to connect into the region of the ambassador. Through friendly MED diplomacy we can share ideas, challenge ideas, and learn to be more effective management educators and development mentors.

        We wish to stand in solidarity with the full diversity of our members (be that nationality, creed, sexuality, political perspectives, disability and a wealth of other features that contribute to diversity of the human experience) in our common goal of advancing management education through the development and sharing of our research and skills development as educators.

        Sincerely,


        MED Committee members, including
        Peter Mc Namara, Chairperson
        Barbara Ritter, Past Chairperson
        Miguel Olivas-Lujan, Chairperson Elect
        Paul Hibbert, Program Chairperson
        Kim Gower, PDW Chairperson
        Olga Ryazanova, Secretary