Conference Agenda

Amid troubled times marked by conflicts, escalating climate changes, and social inequity, it becomes imperative to contemplate how acts of care—to oneself, specific others, strangers, the environment, and the world we share—can serve as valuable tools in navigating the uncertainty that currently envelops us.

The symposium positions care as a crucial theoretical and practical tool within the organizational education perspective. Presentations delve into the transformative power of care in organizational dynamics, especially in the post-pandemic context. The focus is on fostering democratic values and inclusive practices in organizational learning within, by, and between organizations (Göhlich et al., 2018).

The concept of care, once confined to dyadic relationships within the feminine and domestic sphere (Noddings, 1984; Tronto, 1993), has evolved into a multifaceted force extending across education, society (Noddings, 1992), politics (Tronto, 1993), and human-nonhuman interdependency (Puig de la Bellacasa, 2012). This interconnectedness, spanning intimate and planetary scales, necessitates immediate acknowledgment (Hooks, 2001). The symposium explores this expansive understanding of care, offering nuanced perspectives that challenge conventional norms and prompt a reimagining of organizational ways, structures, and practices.

The symposium presents three papers that, collectively, address the transformative potential of care in organizational settings.The first presentation positions care as an organizational principle, examining its transformative potential and democratic possibilities. By exploring care through the lens of feminist methodology and drawing from post-humanist perspectives, this paper invites us to consider how 'caring-with' can catalyze a quiet yet profound reimagining of democracy in practice, fostering an environment where shared resources and relationships are nurtured. The second paper discusses the infusion of care ethics in reshaping organizational structures in disability-led organizations, challenging neoliberal-capitalist narratives and weaves in Puar's (2017) critique of the ability/disability binary, revealing the nuanced interplay of debility, capacity, and care in post-pandemic organizing and advocating for democratic and 'care-full' inclusion. The third paper investigates the influence of care in guiding responses to uncertainty in organizational learning, integrating Dewey's insights on uncertainty and societal democratization (Dewey, 1916; 1949) with feminist care ethics perspectives that highlight its role in fostering inclusive and adaptive environments amid uncertainties. The fourth paper seeks to delve into and scrutinize the conceptual frameworks and underlying theories influencing the assessment of care work quality, with an emphasis on striving for better harmony with ever-evolving sociocultural dynamics inherent in these practices.

These papers collectively advocate for a care ethics framework that goes beyond traditional boundaries, promoting attentiveness, responsiveness, and response-ability. They urge a reconceptualization of care as a catalyst for fostering inclusive organizational learning, decision-making, and a commitment to the well-being of individuals and communities. By integrating care ethics into organizational culture, the papers propose a model encouraging open communication, collaboration, discussions on care management, and a willingness to learn from uncertainties. In doing so, they provide a comprehensive narrative emphasizing the significance of recognizing and integrating acts of care, both ephemeral and sustained, within organizational structures and educational practices.

This symposium encourages thoughtful engagement with its themes, guided by the following questions shaping its structure:

1. In what ways does the organization of care contribute to the emergence and growth of democratic processes during times of uncertainty?
2. How do disability-led and inclusive organizations redefine care ethics and practices in post-pandemic organizational structures, and what are the implications for broader organizational inclusion and equity?
3. How does the integration of John Dewey's philosophy of uncertainty with feminist care ethics enhance our understanding of care's role in organizational learning and decision-making processes?

4. How and to what extent does restructuring care work management theories and methodologies lead to reducing uncertainty in institutional care through an organizational education perspective?

Research Objective and Theoretical Framework Care, essential in our lives, is the focus of this study, embodying efforts to maintain, continue, and enhance our world for improved living, as argued by Fisher and Tronto (1990, p.40). The paper aims to refine the conceptualization of care in organizing, shedding light on its potential for collective transformation in understanding and interactions within the world. With a focus on organizational education, the study investigates the concept of care within the context of organizational learning and democratic transformation, addressing current challenges in times of uncertainty. Examining care's interplay through discussions around the cycle of care formulation (Fisher & Tronto, 1990; Tronto, 2013; 2017), encompassing (a) caring about, (b) taking care of, (c) caregiving, (d) care receiving, and, with a specific contribution from Tronto (2013, 2017), (e) caring with. The primary aim is to explore democratic transformation during uncertainty from an organizational education standpoint, guided by the research question, "To what extent does organizing care foster democracy-as-becoming in times of uncertainty?" Theoretical perspectives include analyses of feminist capitalist systems (Federici, 2019), feminist critiques on social reproduction crises (Winker, 2015; Habermann, 2009; 2016), post-anthropocentric considerations (Barad 2003, p. 810), and new ethical possibilities. Care is presented as a practical philosophy in post-humanist theory (Gravett, Taylor, & Fairchild, 2021), contributing uniquely to understanding care within democratic transformation. Method and Methodology This study employs integrated methodologies and insights from various perspectives, including feminist critiques, post-humanist considerations, and meta-feminist insights, to reevaluate the conventional cycles of care proposed by Tronto (2013; 2017). The method involves critical examination and synthesis of diverse approaches within feminist scholarship. Through a thorough literature review, this research aims to deconstruct prevailing notions of care and reconstruct a broader conceptualization. By doing so, the study provides a nuanced understanding of care in the context of democratic transformation. Conclusions and Expected Outcomes In this paper, the aim is to rethink and explore democratic possibilities for organizing care, with relevance to organizational learning within, by, and between organizations (Göhlich et al., 2018). Toward democracy, the goal is to cultivate contributions from emerging organizing potentials and foster transformations through 'quiet, gentle, slow-cook, everyday' practices in organizing, as well as 'caring for the relationships that exist around the production of shared resources' (Pottinger, 2017; Moore, 2018, p.16). This will open up more discussions and prompt further questions about the conceptualizing and theorizing of care.

Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter. Journal of Women in Culture and Society 28(3) Federici, S. (2019). Re-enchanting the world: feminism and the politics of the commons. PM Press. Fisher, B. & Tronto, J. (1990). Towards a Feminist Theory of Care. E. E. Abel, & M. Nelson (Eds.), Circles of Care. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press. Göhlich, M., Novotný, P., Revsbæk, L., Schröer, A., Weber, S. M., & Yi, B. J. (2018). Research Memorandum Organizational Education. Studia Paedagogica, 23(2), 205-215. Gravett, K. Taylor, C. A. & Fairchild, N. (2021) Pedagogies of mattering: reconceptualising relational pedagogies in higher education, Teaching in Higher Education. Habermann, F. (2009): Halbinseln gegen den Strom: Anders Leben und Wirtschaften im Alltag. Ulrike Helmer Verlag. Habermann, F. (2016): Ecommony. UmCARE zum Miteinander, Ulrike Helmer Verlag. Tronto, J. (2017). There is an alternative: homines curans and the limits of neoliberalism. International Journal of care and caring, 1(1), 27-43. Tronto, J. C. (2013). Caring democracy: Markets, equality, and justice. NVU Press. Winker, G. (2015): Care Revolution. Schritte in eine solidarische Gesellschaft.

Research Objective and Theoretical Framework This paper investigates the pivotal role of care-infused ethics and practices in redefining organizational structures in post-pandemic times, focusing on reciprocity and caring-with in disability-led and inclusive organizations. Challenging the reduction of organizational inclusion to governance technologies within neoliberal-capitalist market dynamics (Mitchel & Snyder, 2015; Ahmed, 2012), the paper critiques existing power imbalances and precarious forms of recognition (Dobusch, 2021). Utilizing Jasbir Puar's (2017) framework, it deconstructs the ability/disability binary, examining how intersections of capitalism, racialization, and care create complex assemblages of disability into a triangulation of debility and capacity. Additionally, it incorporates Tronto's (2013) perspective on the democracy and care deficit, arguing for the incompatibility of ideal inclusion with neoliberalism and highlighting the interconnection between democratic organizing and care-full inclusion. The paper underscores the value of disability-led organizations in transforming organizational practices. Methods The methodology involves a diffractive re-reading (Barad, 2014; Bozalek & Zembylas, 2017) of qualitative case-study material from two disability-led organizations, part of the broader care and advocacy sectors. This analysis stems from the 'Cov_Enable: Reimagining Vulnerability in Times of Crisis' project, funded by the Austrian Science Fund (Stand-Alone Project P 34641). The project employs a qualitative, longitudinal, participatory research design to explore evolving vulnerability perceptions during a global crisis, examining the shifts across macro, meso, and micro levels and their implications for inclusive education and supported living. Conclusions, Outcome, Results In re-reading the data and the varying responses to crisis-enactment by two disability-led organizations (Koenig & Barberi, 2023) the findings reveal two intra-related phenomena essential for understanding organizational inclusion. Firstly, it highlights how an ethos of caring practices and reciprocity (Tronto, 2017) not only facilitated a stable and effective organizational navigation through times of uncertainty and turbulence but also reinvigorated the ideological and political motivations of advocacy and service organizations, leading to tangible policy changes. Secondly, it explores a training and counseling organization formed to address structural violence in disability services. The pandemic provided a socio-temporal space free from meritocratic constraints, that facilitated the cultivation of essential skills within the unique temporal rhythms of disabled individuals—often referred to as crip time (Kafer, 2013)—and the fostering of sustained collective care-webs (Piepzna-Samarasinha, 2018) that extended to non-disabled colleagues. In conclusion, the paper calls for recognizing these often overlooked acts of affordance creation (Dokumaci, 2023) and suggests that incorporating care ethics can lead to more resilient, adaptable organizational models in uncertain times.

Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Duke University Press. Barad, K. (2014). Diffracting Diffraction: Cutting Together-Apart. Parallax 20 (3): 168–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/13534645.2014.927623. Bozalek, V., & Zembylas, M. (2017). Diffraction or Reflection? Sketching the Contours of Two Methodologies in Educational Research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 30(2): 111–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1201166. Dokumaci, A. (2023). Activist Affordances: How Disabled People Improvise More Habitable Worlds. Duke University Press. Dobusch, L. (2021). The inclusivity of inclusion approaches: A relational perspective on inclusion and exclusion in organizations. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(1), 379-396. Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, queer, crip. Indiana University Press. Koenig, O., & Barberi, A. (2023). Unterstützungssysteme für Menschen mit Behinderungen »Enacting crisis« zwischen Aktionsspielraum und Hierarchie im Rahmen der COVID-19-Pandemie. SWS-Rundschau 63(4), 329–346. Mitchell, D. T. & Snyder, S. L. (2015). The biopolitics of disability: Neoliberalism, ablenationalism, and peripheral embodiment. University of Michigan Press. Piepzna-Samarasinha, L. L. (2018). Care work: Dreaming disability justice. Arsenal pulp press. Tronto, J. (2017). There is an alternative: homines curans and the limits of neoliberalism. International Journal of care and caring, 1(1), 27-43.

Research objective and theoretical framework This presentation explores how care can guide responses to uncertainties in organizational settings, emphasizing its relevance in organizational learning amid uncertainty. Care is seen as foundational in human and nonhuman relational interdependency, urging a care ethical lens to address organizational learning complexities. The presentation establishes connections between John Dewey's pragmatic philosophy and feminist care ethicists (Nel Noddings, Joan Tronto, Maria Puig de la Bellacasa), enriching the understanding of care in organizational learning. Dewey's insights on doubt, uncertainty, transactional learning, and societal democratization (1916; 1949) align with care ethics principles rooted in relational interdependency; Noddings' moral obligations to the specific other (1984), Tronto's political embeddedness of care (1993), and Puig de la Bellacasa's posthuman perspective on interdependency (2012). Methods The study, rooted in Dewey's philosophy, employs shadowing (McDonald & Simpson, 2014) as an ethnographic method in a participatory doctoral study on elderly care work and education, immersing in the experiences of professionals in nursing homes and a vocational education school in Denmark. Analytic workshops involving stakeholders from diverse roles facilitated collaborative inquiry. Examining shared situations revealed the intricate link between uncertainty, learning, and care principles. The study’s analysis focused on a narrative representing uncertainty, learning, and caring, selected for its aesthetic qualities (Dewey, 1934; Møller, 2022). Integrating Nel Noddings' care ethics enriched the pragmatic framework, offering insights into interdependence, vulnerability, and power dynamics. The paper aims to expand the care ethic analysis by including Tronto and Puig de la Bellacasa's perspectives, constructing a theoretical framework that synthesizes Dewey's philosophy with feminist care ethics, emphasizing their relevance in organizational learning amid uncertainty. Conclusions, outcome, results Exploring the link between care and uncertainty identifies care as a catalyst for inclusive organizational learning, guiding decision-making amid uncertainty, and fostering an environment where diverse perspectives contribute to meaningful outcomes for our shared environments. Care ethics, emphasizing attentiveness, responsiveness, and responsibility, serve as constructs for understanding how organizations navigate uncertainty and foster learning. Reciprocity exists between learning and caring, where learning requires a sense of caring, and caring relies on continuous learning. Cultivation a sense of care requires learning about the diverse perspectives and specific situations of others. Genuine care motivates seeking knowledge, enhancing capabilities, and fostering commitment to well-being of individuals, organizations, and worlds we live in. A caring organizational culture encourages open communication, collaboration, and a willingness to experiment and learn from uncertainties.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), The middle works, 1899 - 1924, Volume: 9 (1980th ed.). Southern Illinois University Press. Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience (1980th ed.). The Berkeley Publishing Group. Dewey, J. & Bentley, A. F. (1949). Knowing and the known. Beacon Press. McDonald, S., & Simpson, B. (2014). Shadowing research in organizations: The methodological debates. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 9(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-02-2014-1204 Møller, B. (2022). Care practice as aesthetic co-creation: A somaesthetic perspective on care work. Journal of Somaesthetics, 8(1), 45–58. https://journals.aau.dk/index.php/JOS/article/view/7380/6274 Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. University of California Press Puig de la Bellacasa, M. (2012). ‘Nothing comes without its world’: thinking with care. The sociological review, 60(2), 197-216. Tronto, J. (1993). Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003070672

Research Objective and Theoretical Framework Social work organizations face uncertainties around available resources, intervention effectiveness, and the individual and social value of investing in care resources and work. In Germany, the "New Public Management" reforms over the last two decades aimed to cut welfare state costs by reducing resources for care work with uncertain outcomes. These reforms also forced organizations to reduce outcome uncertainty through quality management. However, expressing the individual and social value of care within a quantitative paradigm remains highly controversial. Method and Methodology As the problem complexity arises mainly from an economic theorization of care value, the objective of this paper is to propose a novel approach to quality logic in care work that is more closely aligned with the actual socio-cultural structure of care. The aim is to increase the justifiability of care investments before decision-makers who primarily focus on economic concerns. To achieve this, the study analyzes the gaps between the management rationality of the German adaptation of New Public Management and the field logic of care work, using literature from the sociology of economics, social management, and social work from the German discourse on social state economization. The study employs discourse analytical tools to demonstrate the dispositif, in which uncertainty poses a particular challenge for care work organization and justification. Conclusions and Expected Outcomes A field- and subject-related quality logic suggests a phenomenologically reflected social management that integrates the addressees' lifeworld (Lebenswelt), the (social) environment, and society at large as essential points of reference. By readjusting the theory and methodology of care work management, the unquantifiable or difficult-to-quantify value of care work can become part of its state organization and open up ways for organizational learning to reduce and appropriately deal with uncertainty in institutionalized care.

Literature Foucault, Michel (1995). Archäologie des Wissens. 7. Aufl. Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp. Fricker, Miranda (2023). Epistemische Ungerechtigkeit. Macht und die Ethik des Wissens. München, C.H. Beck. Keller, Reiner (2013). Wissenssoziologische Diskursforschung. Hg. von Ekkehard Felder. Augsburg/Berlin u.a., Universität Augsburg; de Gruyter. Knorr-Cetina, Karin (2009). Wissenskulturen. Ein Vergleich naturwissenschaftlicher Wissensformen. Konstanz, Bibliothek der Universität Konstanz. Laclau, Ernesto/Mouffe, Chantal (2000). Hegemonie und radikale Demokratie. Zur Dekonstruktion des Marxismus. Wien, Passagen Verlag. Merchel, Joachim (2017). Management ist nur dann gut, wenn es mit dem Gegenstand "Soziale Arbeit" verknüpft ist - Das Spezifische an Organisationen der Sozialen Arbeit und seine Bedeutung für das Management. In: Sozialmanagement - eine Zwischenbilanz. Wiesbaden, Springer VS, 2017. Schellberg, K. (2017). Ökonomisierung – was sonst?. In: Wöhrle, A., Fritze, A., Prinz, T., Schwarz, G. (eds) Sozialmanagement – Eine Zwischenbilanz. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. S. 263-277. Winker, G. (2015): Care Revolution. Schritte in eine solidarische Gesellschaft. P.l.: transcript Verlag (X-Texte zu Kultur und Gesellschaft). Winker, G. (2020). Aufbau einer solidarischen und nachhaltigen Care Ökonomie. Ein Plädoyer in Zeiten von Corona. In M. Volkmer & K. Werner (Eds.) Die CoronaGesellschaft, Analysen zur Lage und Perspektiven für die Zukunft. Bielefeld transcript Wöhrle, Armin et al. (Hrsg.) (2017). Sozialmanagement - Eine Zwischenbilanz. Springer.