Stewart Clegg

This research investigates how the social and material features of project deliverables influence the way sustainability is carried out. It highlights how the processes through which actors implement sustainability are mediated by the specific type of project deliverable and specifically by the sociomaterial dimensions of the deliverable in question. The argument is made that sustainability is not a predefined design attribute but an emergent sociomaterial accomplishment. The empirical case leading to these results is an in‐depth ethnographic case of a construction project. Project settings are ideal places to investigate these issues as they provide a structured and systematic approach to the implementation of complex and multidimensional endeavours. The main contribution of this research lies in the exploration of how the pursuit of sustainability is strongly shaped by the evolving forms of sociomateriality throughout the project lifecycle. We make two main contributions. First, we show how the interrelation between social dynamics and material artefacts—plans, tools, technologies and the building itself—channels actors into specific forms of engagement and decision‐making. Second, by doing this, we demonstrate the dynamic nature of sustainability implementation by exploring the set of negotiations unfolding in sustainability implementation.

This special issue is dedicated to EURAM by its College of Fellows to commemorate EURAM's 25th birthday. It focuses on the future of the management educational and research (MERE) context and the role of institutions within it. As a professional academy, EURAM is one of those institutions that helps shape both organisations and individuals within it. A brief history of its ambition and contribution follows, and this is accompanied by an explanation of the evolution of this project. Primarily, it is designed to examine the world in which EURAM operates, shaped and controlled as it is by institutional pressures that can restrict strategic flexibility and reinforce a particular way of doing business. Faced with a portfolio of powerful external pressures, the future of the MERE is likely to change rapidly, and adaptability by business and management schools will be an important strategic weapon. Hence, the issue looks to explain the emergence of the shape of the present MERE domain through its moulding by institutional norms and the ‘rules of the game’ that they consciously or unconsciously reinforce. Then, the main papers in this collection are presented in an outside–in manner. They begin with the future imaginings of what the MERE might look like by examining the drivers of change that impact upon it. Then, through a series of articles that examine the types of business schools that might emerge into this new world, their responses to past and present institutional pressures, especially through accreditation, to new agendas in both sustainability and employability. The common themes are identified, as is the danger of ignoring impactful, localised responses in favour of uniform conformity and a prevalence for the status quo .

Traditional perspectives on strategic planning are often grounded in relatively static, overly detailed assumptions and frameworks about futures. Strategic organisational improvising is a critical process for organisations charting a way through complex, rapidly changing environments. We propose that organisations can achieve greater flexibility without sacrificing coherence by deliberately incorporating incompleteness into strategic design. Deliberate incompleteness combines stable strategic anchors with selectively under‐specified elements, creating space for action to unfold through real‐time interaction aligned with organisational visions. Strategic organisational improvising is sustained through short‐ and long‐term learning spirals that support real‐time adaptation and the consolidation of strategic knowledge over time in an approach that inscribes adaptability within the strategic process, rather than treating it as a response to exogenous environmental events.

Empathy is widely celebrated as a leadership skill and moral virtue. We agree that empathy is central to social connection, but argue that it is not inherently virtuous. To understand its impacts on organizations, we must move beyond individual-centric views of empathy and instead see it as a relational phenomenon embedded in power relations. Drawing on psychology, feminist theory, political science, and anthropology, we identify four often repressed dark sides of empathy. Distress from somatic empathy exposes the embodied costs of engaging with others’ suffering. Disparity persists through the empathy tax, as the burden of emotional labour falls disproportionately on women. Division persists through preferential empathy, privileging those we identify with while excluding others. Deception arises from tactical empathy, using emotional insight manipulatively. Together, these dark sides expose empathy as an organizing force marked by uneven distributions, contested purposes, and ambivalent consequences. We bring attention to these fundamental tensions in empathy, yet resist campaigns to discredit it. Instead, we propose relational empathy as a way of understanding its complex, power-laden nature.

This article explores the methodological challenges that face scholars conducting project management research in empirical contexts characterized by apparent institutional voids in which conventional methodological approaches are inadequate. Drawing from our collaborative fieldwork conducted for the Medina Airport public–private partnership in Saudi Arabia, we make three contributions to the project management literature. First, we conceptualize field access in terms of a research strategy entailing processes of bricolaging available resources. Second, we develop strategies to operationalize theoretical concepts in contexts in which there is limited prior research. Third, we propose guidelines for conducting rigorous qualitative research in institutional environments lacking mature and established research cultures. This article provides important methodological and practical insights for project management researchers conducting empirical work in such contexts for generating robust data and knowledge that advance project management research and practice.