From (please also see the attached PDF):
Sarah Jack | Distinguished Professor
Department of Entrepreneurship and Strategy
Lancaster University Management School
Call for Papers for a Special Issue – Academy of Management Perspectives (AMP)
ECHOES OF THE PAST: CAPTURING THE INFLUENCE OF LEGACY ON
INDIVIDUALS, FAMILIES AND ORGANIZATION
Submission deadline: August 30, 2023
BACKGROUND
This Special Issue aims to explore the notion of legacy and the various ways it has been
imagined through research on endowment, imprinting, reputation, morality, wisdom, identity,
and traditions.
We define legacy as a persistent, immaterial trace of the past that exerts enabling or
constraining effects in the present. We distinguish legacy from its artifacts (physical artifacts –
such as buildings, land; verbal – such as stories; visual – such as pictures, movies; or symbolic –
such as rituals, names). We hold that the primary components of legacy are psychological –
legacy being made of varying cognitions – knowledge, beliefs, values, and norms, which are
embedded in the receivers' long-term memory through a process of information-processing,
encoding/interpretation, and storage. Legacies are trans- (from the root word in Latin – across,
beyond, through) actional, involving both senders and receivers. Legacies are trans-ferred as
well as trans-formed, and therefore, we must account for those who attempt to build and send
legacy – individuals, families, firms, and those receiving it, who thereby (re)create and
(re)animate legacy over time. Because legacy fuels individual, family and organizational
identities, legacy might be strategically leveraged by organizations to attract and secure varying
resources. Does legacy help to scale stakeholders' engagement, and if so, through which
mechanisms?
Legacy is one of the most important yet least understood constructs of management
research and practice. It has been investigated through varying theoretical lenses such as
imprinting theory (Jaskiewicz, Combs, & Rau, 2015), organizational memory theory (Foroughi,
Coraiola, Rintamäki, Mena, & Foster, 2020), identity development theory (Erikson, 1963),
organizational identity theory (Suddaby, Schultz, & Israelsen, 2020), social learning theory
(Millová, Malatincová, & Blatný, 2021), career development theory (Achtenhagen, Haag,
Hulten, & Lundgren, 2022), and entrepreneurial motivation theory (Fox & Wade-Benzoni,
2017), to name a few. Legacy has been evidenced as a major asset of long-lasting organizations
such as family businesses (Barbera, Stamm, & DeWitt, 2018), fueling organizational continuity
(Suddaby & Jaskiewicz, 2020), innovation (De Massis, Frattini, Kotlar, Petruzzelli, & Wright,
2016; Erdogan, Rondi & De Massis, 2020), and ethical decision-making (Fox, Tost, & WadePage2
Benzoni, 2010). Mostly depicted as a positive organizational asset reflected in the organizations'
strategy (Harris & Ogbonna, 1999), brand (Lacroix & Jolibert, 2017) and market position
(Plattfaut & Koch, 2021), legacy catalyzes distinctive and enduring identities (Crosina &
Gartner, 2021), consolidates legitimacy (Mitchell, Agle, Chrisman, & Spence 2011), and
provides a higher sense of purpose and a deeper sense of meaning for people and organizations
(Hammond, Pearson, & Holt, 2016). Conversely to these positive contributions, legacy has been
also acknowledged as a source of constraint in the present (e.g., Dacin, Dacin, & Kent, 2019),
leading to organizational inertia (Hannan & Freeman, 1984; Rumelt, 1994).
Besides furthering ways to better understand how legacies provide beneficial paths
towards positive futures, we believe that research is needed to determine how organizations
break or modify legacies to succeed in dynamic markets and overcome damaging stakeholder
relations and toxic governance. Past routines, habits, and traditions may exert limiting and
coercing effects on new generations (Radu-Lefebvre, Lefebvre, Clarke, & Gartner, 2020),
affecting their ability to identify new opportunities and elaborate innovative solutions to address
unforeseen challenges (Suddaby, Coraiola, Harvey, & Foster, 2020). Such changes in relation to
the past might only be possible to achieve with the support of others, which suggests legacy as a
primarily relational construct calling for a deeper understanding of the role of stakeholder
engagement in past conservation and change.
In sum, despite decades of knowledge accumulation in this area, our understanding of the
enabling and constraining effects of legacy is still in its infancy. The literature on legacy brings
into focus varying conceptualizations, actors, and mechanisms without offering a systematic
identification and characterization of legacy motives, benefits, and constraints, which explains
why we still lack a consolidated understanding of "who sends legacy" (legacy senders), "who
receives legacy" (legacy receivers), "why legacy is sent", "with what effects", and in "what
contexts." As a result, insights into how the past influences the present remains a challenge for
advancing both theory and practice in organizational settings and beyond.
KEY TOPICS
The Special Issue seeks scholarly papers that engage with either theory, practice, or policy
implications on the topic of legacy. We encourage conceptual and empirical contributions
focused on, but not limited to, the following themes:
§ What kinds of legacies enable positive or negative impacts on individuals, organizations,
society and the environment, social and environmental growth?
§ Why is a legacy transmitted? Why are legacies accepted or rejected? What are the
motivations of legacy senders such as founders to create legacies? What does the role of
generativity play in triggering legacy intentions (Faßbender, Wiebe & Bates, 2019)? What is
the role of performativity (e.g., Austin, 1962; Barad, 2003) in shaping legacies? Why are
certain legacies accepted or rejected by individuals, families, businesses?
§ How is legacy transmitted and received? Is legacy always intentionally shared and what is the
degree of control that legacy senders can exert over the process of legacy transmission? What
are the mechanisms enabling the transfer of legacy (e.g., role modeling, persuasion, learning)?
§ Who sends and who receives legacy? Legacy always has a sender, an identified source. Who
is that source and what are their characteristics? Is it always intentional? Who are the legacy
receivers of that source? Does a legacy survive only if a legacy receiver is willing to accept it
(in some form) and to cultivate it over time?
§ What are the effects of sending and receiving legacy? Legacy can be a source of pride and
identity, but also restrain freedom of choice and behavior. Legacy can also be negative, a
brand that an individual or organization must carry. What are the enabling and the
constraining effects of legacy in succession? How does legacy contribute to organizational
continuity and change? What are the dark sides or unintended consequences of
legacy? Under what conditions will legacy help or harm people and organizations?
§ Where and when are legacies transmitted and received? What are the socio-material and
temporal micro-, meso- and macro-contexts explaining the circulation of legacy over time?
Are certain cultures more sensitive to preserving legacy? Are different places and
circumstances more conducive to long-lasting legacies? What are the circumstances that lead
to a legacy's collapse?
PAPER STYLE
1. Scholars are reminded that AMP seeks papers that advance either theory, practice, or
contribute to policy (broadly defined).
2. We welcome conceptual, quantitative, and/or qualitative (e.g., narratives, multiple cases,
experiments) papers, but note that AMP is neither a theory-testing nor a mathematical
modeling journal.
SPECIAL ISSUE EVENT
Post-submission: The guest editors will organize a hybrid special issue Paper Development
Workshop (PDW) at mid-March 2024 at Audencia Business School (Paris campus, France).
Authors who receive a "revise and resubmit" (R&R) decision on their manuscript will be invited
to attend this post-submission workshop. Participation in the workshop does not guarantee
acceptance of the paper in the Special Issue and attendance is not a prerequisite for publication.
SUBMISSION PROCESS
§ Submission deadline (full paper): August 30, 2023. The ScholarOne submission portal
will be open from August 15 to August 30, 2023 (https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/amp)
§ Authors should follow the AMP Manuscript Preparation Guidelines
(https://aom.org/research/publishing-with-aom/author-resources/submitting-to-perspectives)
§ Articles will be reviewed according to the AMP double-blind review process.
§ Paper Development Workshop at Audencia Business School, Paris, France: Mid-
March, 2024 (date TBC).
We welcome informal enquiries relating to the Special Issue, proposed topics, and potential
fit with the Special Issue objectives. Please direct any questions on the Special Issue to the
Guest Editors:
§ James Davis, Utah State University (USA), j.davis@usu.edu
§ Miruna Radu-Lefebvre, Audencia Business School (France), mradu@audencia.com
§ William B. Gartner, Babson College (USA), Linnaeus University (Sweden),
wgartner@babson.edu
§ Sarah Jack, Stockholm School of Economics (Sweden) and Lancaster University
Management School (UK), sarah.jack@hhs.se
§ Alfredo De Massis, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano (Italy), IMD Business School
(Switzerland) and Lancaster University Management School (UK),
Alfredo.DeMassis@unibz.it
§ AMP Editor: Gideon Markman, Colorado State University, gid.markman@gmail.com
REFERENCES
Achtenhagen, L., Haag, K., Hulten, K., & Lundgren, J. (2022). Torn between individual
aspirations and the family legacy – individual career development in family firms. Career
Development International, 27(2), 201-221.
Austin, John L. (1962). How to do things with words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes
to matter. Signs, 28(3), 801-831.
Barbera, F., Stamm, I., & DeWitt, R. L. (2018). The development of an entrepreneurial legacy:
Exploring the role of anticipated futures in transgenerational entrepreneurship. Family
Business Review, 31(3), 352-378.
Crosina, E., & Gartner, W. B. (2021). Managing Legacy, Achievement and Identity in
Entrepreneurial Families. In Family Entrepreneurship (pp. 35-47). Palgrave Macmillan,
Cham.
Dacin, M. T., Dacin, P. A., & Kent, D. (2019). Tradition in organizations: A custodianship
framework. Academy of management annals, 13(1), 342-373.
De Massis, A., Frattini, F., Kotlar, J., Messeni-Petruzzelli, A., & Wright, M. (2016). Innovation
through tradition: Lessons from innovative family businesses and directions for future
research. Academy of Management Perspectives, 30(1), 93-116.
Erdogan I., Rondi E., & De Massis A. (2020). Managing the tradition and innovation paradox in
family firms: A family imprinting perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 44(1),
20-54.
Erikson, E.H. (1963). Childhood and society. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
Faßbender, K., Wiebe, A., & Bates, T. C. (2019). Physical and cultural inheritance enhance
agency, but what are the origins of this concern to establish a legacy? A nationally
representative twin study of Erikson's concept of generativity. Behavior Genetics, 49(2),
244-257.
Page5
Foroughi, H., Coraiola, D. M., Rintamäki, J., Mena, S., & Foster, W. M. (2020). Organizational
memory studies. Organization Studies, 41(12), 1725-1748.
Fox, M., Tost, L. P., & Wade-Benzoni, K. A. (2010). The legacy motive: A catalyst for
sustainable decision making in organizations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(2), 153-185.
Fox, M. J., & Wade-Benzoni, K. A. (2017). The creation of opportunity is an opportunity to
create: Entrepreneurship and the legacy motive. In Academy of Management Proceedings,
(1, p. 17228). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.
Hammond, N. L., Pearson, A. W., & Holt, D. T. (2016). The quagmire of legacy in family firms:
Definition and implications of family and family firm legacy orientations. Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice, 40(6), 1209-1231.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American
sociological review, 149-164.
Harris, L. C., & Ogbonna, E. (1999). The strategic legacy of company founders. Long Range
Planning, 32(3), 333-343.
Jaskiewicz, P., Combs, J. G., & Rau, S. B. (2015). Entrepreneurial legacy: Toward a theory of
how some family firms nurture transgenerational entrepreneurship. Journal of business
venturing, 30(1), 29-49.
Lacroix, C., & Jolibert, A. (2017). Mediational role of perceived personal legacy value between
consumer agentic generativity and attitudes/buying intentions toward luxury brands. Journal
of Business Research, 77, 203-211.
Millová, K., Malatincová, T., & Blatný, M. (2021). Intergenerational transmission of generativity
and stagnation within families in a society after a macrosocial change: A two-generation
study. Current Psychology, 1-15.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B.R., Chrisman, J.J., & Spence, L.J. (2011). Toward a theory of
stakeholder salience in family firms. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21, 235-255.
Radu-Lefebvre, M., Lefebvre, V., Clarke, J, and Gartner, W. B. (2020). Entrepreneurial legacy:
How narratives of the past, present and future affect entrepreneurship in business families.
In A. Calabro, (Ed.) A Research Agenda for Family Business. Cheltenham, UK: Edward
Elgar Publishing, pp. 73-86.
Rumelt, R. P. (1994). Precis of inertia and transformation. INSEAD, Research Paper
(September).
Plattfaut, R., & Koch, J. (2021). Preserving the legacy–Why do professional soccer clubs (not)
adopt innovative process technologies? A grounded theory study. Journal of Business
Research, 136, 237-250.
Suddaby, R., Schultz, M., & Israelsen, T. (2020). Autobiographical Memory and Organizational
Identity: The Role of Temporal Fluidity. In The Oxford Handbook of Identities in
Organizations (pp. 375-390). Oxford University Press.
Suddaby, R., Coraiola, D., Harvey, C., & Foster, W. (2020). History and the micro‐foundations
of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 41(3), 530-556.
Suddaby, R., & Jaskiewicz, P. (2020). Managing traditions: A critical capability for family
business success. Family Business Review, 33(3), 234-243.
------------------------------
Shipeng Yan
Assistant Professor
The University of Hong Kong
Hong Kong
------------------------------