Title of Dissertation:
Exploring boundary conditions of aspirational CSR communication through a business ethics lens – evidence from the garment industry

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Andreas Suchanek
University: HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management
Scholarship: KSG Scholarship
Cohort: 5. Cohort, 2018-2021

• Short Abstract

  Companies are increasingly confronted with the demand to respond to an increased level of stakeholder sensitivity to ethical, social, and environmental issues. Consequently, corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication serves as a strategic means to counter negative public outcry, build reputation, as well as to attain legitimacy (Palazzo & Scherer, 2006). However, in a context of public suspicion and distrust, discrepancies between CSR talk and action are being perceived as sources of hypocrisy or greenwashing and potential threats to organizational authenticity, the call for consistency seems to be appropriate (Christensen et al., 2013). A recent example is H&M’s “Conscious collection” which is part of the company’s ambitious plan to only use organic or recycled materials by 2040. The company claimed on their website, that every piece in the collection is made from sustainable sourced material, such as 100 percent organic cotton, Tencel or recycled polyester. However, some products of the collection were made of only 5 percent recycled materials, and 95 per cent non-recycled polyester, misleading consumers (Alexandra Mondalek, 2020). In the shadows of green washing accusations, H&M’s public commitments to sustainability, seemingly fail to respond to the public’s expectations of consistency in walking the CSR talk. Yet, such requests ignore the performative nature of communication and the prospect of aspirational corporate messages to stimulate further exploration and developments in the CSR arena, leading to social change (Christensen et al., 2013). Therefore, the aim of this research is to answer the following research question: under which conditions can aspirational CSR talk unfold its the performative potential?

  Answering the call for more theoretical exploration as well as empirical research on the performative nature of CSR communication (Christensen et al., 2013; Schoeneborn et al., 2020), the thesis will combine both approaches.

  First of all, the concept of self-commitment, relevant inconsistencies as well as the concept of the double syllogism (Suchanek, 2015) will serve as a conceptual foundation for a systematic analysis of boundary conditions of aspirational talk as signals. The concept of self-commitment will serve as a starting point to analyze the moral implications of aspirational talk as well as under which conditions it can be successful.

  The ethical of concept of self-commitment has been chosen, due to its ability to make sense of the space between talk and action. This space might hold some insights about the effectives of aspirational talk, since it presents time to navigate certain (re)actions. Due to a remaining lack of regulatory framework concerning corporate responsibility, organizations commit themselves (voluntary) to be guided by certain aims and values under restrictions such as competition and scarce resources. The concept of self-commitment refers to a reflected behavior, aiming to reach ones goals and values, by increasing the cost of opposing courses of actions (Suchanek, 2015).

  Due to the relative scarcity of empirical research on aspirational CSR communication, and more specifically of research into its boundary conditions, grounded theory methods are employed in this study in a second step. To explore and describe under which conditions aspirational talk turns from being motivational to being perceived as hypocrisy, a case study approach is suitable (Eisenhardt, 1989). Therefore, perspectives of different stakeholders will be gathered in order to gain insights into their daily experiences with aspirational talk, to identify certain incidents and learn more about the practice and potential boundary conditions of aspirational CSR communication.

  Data collection will be built on several in-depth qualitative interviews with experts working in the apparel industry. The focus of this research is the apparel industry, where significant challenges need to be addressed to ensure sustainable production of garments within complex and global supply chains. The interviews will be approached in a semi-structured way, with the overall aim of discovering how organizational members are making sense and experiencing the process of communicating CSR goals and intentions. The concept of self-commitment will be used as a structure for the interview guide.

  Until this point, the case selection in terms of geographical scope and organizational size is not clear yet. Further the hierarchical level of the interviewed organizational team member has not been defined yet. Potentially, extreme cases, so-called polar types will be chosen for analysis.

  Identifying boundary conditions, under which aspirational talk can unfold its full potential could lead to valuable strategic implications for CSR management. Especially, by gathering practical insights from CSR managers about how they experience challenges in the process of aspirational talk, could lead to best or worst practices derivations.

  From a theoretical perspective, this research answers the demand for more conceptual and empirical research on aspirational CSR communication (Christensen et al., 2013; Schoeneborn et al., 2020). Applying a business ethics frame, using the concepts of self-commitment, relevant inconsistencies and the double syllogism, adds a normative perspective to the discussion and broadens the view on aspirational talk.

  Literature:

  Alexandra Mondalek. (2020, Mai 18). How to Avoid the Greenwashing Trap. Business of Fashion. https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/professional/greenwashing-fashion-sustainability-marketing

  Christensen, L. T., Morsing, M., & Thyssen, O. (2013). CSR as aspirational talk. Organization, 20(3), 372–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508413478310

  Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532. https://doi.org/10.2307/258557

  Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. G. (2006). Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 71–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9044-2

  Schoeneborn, D., Morsing, M., & Crane, A. (2020). Formative Perspectives on the Relation Between CSR Communication and CSR Practices: Pathways for Walking, Talking, and T(w)alking. Business & Society, 59(1), 5–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650319845091

  Suchanek, A. (2015). Unternehmensethik: In Vertrauen investieren. Mohr Siebeck.

• PhD RelatedPublications

  N/A

Here you will find information about the application to the doctoral program and current calls for applications.

If you want to apply for admission to the doctoral program and for a scholarship, we will inform you about the application modalities below. We publically tender all open positions in the doctoral program as well as available scholarships.

• Current Call for Applications

  • No open CfA at the moment

• Conditions of Entry and Selection Criteria of the Doctoral Program

  In order to be eligible for the doctoral program, applicants must meet the following conditions:

  • Their dissertation project must fit to the thematic focus of the doctoral program.
  • One of the professors cooperating with the doctoral program must agree to supervise the applicants´ dissertation project.
  • Applicants must have received a master’s, magister or diploma degree in a subject area that is relevant to their dissertation project. Applicants must have graduated from their master’s, magister or diploma program with an above-average degree (for example, with honours, at least grade “good” (2.0) or an equivalent degree).
  • Applicants must be fluent in written and spoken English. Good German language skills are preferred, but are not required.

  In addition, it is advantageous if applicants have already gained the following experiences:

  • Experienced professional work, also through internships and working student positions.
  • Have been committed to social or political projects.

  Have gained international experience through studies abroad programs, professional stays abroad, or international volunteer work.
  

• Eligibility Conditions and Award Criteria of a Scholarship

  In order to be eligible for a scholarship, applicants must meet the following conditions:

  • Applicants must fulfil the doctoral program’s conditions of entry and have been accepted into the doctoral program.
  • Applicants must not already receive funding for the same project from a public or private institution, or a scholarship from a foundation.
  • Their secondary earnings are within the permitted thematic, time-constricted, and financial conditions that have been clearly specified above.

• Application Documents

  
  Unless otherwise specified in the call for applications, an application for the doctoral program comprises of the following documents:

  • Letter of motivation (in English, max. 1000 words).
  • Personal data sheet/CV (in German or English).
  • Academic reference letter (German form template / English form template)
  • Exposé of research idea (in German or English; max. 5000 words), which contains the following information:
    
    • Working Title
    • Abstract (max. 500 words)
    • Research question / presentation of problem / working hypothesis (“What is the problem?”)
    • State of research & own preparatory work (if applicable)
    • Methodology / provisional structure
    • Working plan
    • Bibliography
  • Unofficial copies of master’s, magister and/or diploma certificates (or a provisional certificate) with all individual grades that are relevant for the examination and final grade.
  • Unofficial copy of bachelor´s certificate with all individual grades which are relevant for the examination and final grade.
  • Internship and employment certificates (if applicable).
  • Certification / Proof of voluntary work (if applicable).

  Use our application portal to submit all application documents. We only consider documents which are submitted via the application portal. Additional documents sent via email will not be reviewed.
  

• Application Procedure

  In the pre-selection round, the coordination office of the doctoral program checks whether the application documents have been completed, and how well, if at all, the candidate fulfils the program’s criteria of entry. Candidates who make it to the next round will have two interviews, first with their preferred supervisor, and second with the academic head of the doctoral program and a member of the managing board of the WCGE.

  Candidates proposed for a scholarship of the Stiftung der Deutschen Wirtschaft (SDW) have to succeed also in the selection interviews of the SDW.

• FAQ

  • I do not have German citizenship. Can I apply for the doctoral program?

  Yes, the citizenship of the applicants does not matter. International candidates who are admitted into the doctoral program will be required to apply for a visa on their own, if necessary.

  • I have not yet finished my master program. Can I apply for the doctoral program?

  Provided that candidates will have finished their master program by the start date of the doctoral program, they are eligible to apply. In this case, applicants should send an overview of all individual grades that are relevant for the examination, and an informal provisional certificate from their university confirming the pending graduation completion date.

  • I received my last academic degree several years ago. Can I apply to the doctoral program?

  Yes, there is no time restriction regarding the last academic degree. To the contrary, we welcome applicants with professional experience to the doctoral program.

  • Are there any age restrictions for applicants?

  No, the doctoral program welcomes applicants of all ages. Applicants should, however, explain in their motivation letter why they have chosen this point in their life to earn a doctorate degree.

  • Who should write the academic reference letter?

  A professor, an assistant professor, or a habilitated university lecturer should write the applicant’s academic reference letter. The applicant must have attended seminars or lectures of this academic referee, or the referee must have supervised the applicant´s final thesis.

  • I have received my bachelor´s, master´s, magister and/or diploma certificate from non-German and non-English speaking universities. Do I have to provide official translations of my certificates?

  Yes, please send us copies of your original certificates in addition to translations of these in either the German or English language.

  • I have already applied for the doctoral program in past and my application was rejected. Can I reapply?

  Yes, but it is advisable to carefully revise your previous application.

  • Can or should I contact the professor who is my preferred supervising professor?

  No, please refrain from contacting the professors in advance. If you have concrete questions, contact the academic head. He/she will consult with the professor, if necessary.

  • Do I already have to name one of the professors as my supervising professors in my application?

  Yes, you should name one of the professors as your preferred supervisor in the application. If we feel that another professor may be a more suitable supervisor for you, we will contact you to discuss this with you.

  • How long does it take from the application deadline for a decision to me made about acceptance to the doctoral program?

  We review all applications very carefully and this, of course, takes time. It can take up to four months after the application deadline to reach a decision. We ask you to refrain from inquiries, and kindly ask for your patience and understanding.

  • If my application is not successful, will I get a detailed explanation for my rejection?

  We send all candidates whose applications were not successful letters of refusal. Due to time constraints, we unfortunately do not offer detailed explanations of the refusals, and ask that unsuccessful applicants refrain from inquiring about details of their rejection.

  • The application deadline has already passed. Can I still send an application?

  On an individual basis, applications after the deadline may be taken into consideration. However, late applicants are asked to please first contact the academic head and ask whether applications are still being accepted. Unsolicited submissions of applications after the deadline will not be taken into consideration.

  If you have not found an answer to your question here, please contact the academic head.
  

• Past Calls for Applications

  • Call for applications 2022

  • Call for applications 2021
  • Call for applications 2020
  • Call for applications from 2019
  • Call for applications from 2018
  • WEIT call for applications from 2017
  • Call for applications from 2017

Title of Dissertation:
Exploring the roots of historical bias amplified by artificial intelligence: the programmer’s role

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Laura Marie Edinger-Schons
University: University of Mannheim
Scholarship: KAS Scholarship (Konrad Adenauer Stiftung)
Cohort: 7th Cohort, since 2020
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

• Short Abstract

  Businesses and governments increasingly employ automated decision making through artificial intelligence (AI) in areas that threaten fundamental human rights. Machine learning (ML), a branch of AI that learns from historical data, reflects continuous unfair discrimination due to historical bias. In response to these ethical issues, most previous research focuses on technological and statistical fixes. Therefore, I argue against technological solutionism to fix cultural problems, given that historical bias reflects society's prejudices, values, and the world as it is or as it was. These issues are an opportunity to question structural inequalities and the values implicitly encoded in technology. Furthermore, understanding bias in AI aids to avoid harm to vulnerable populations, business scandals, and discrimination lawsuits. In the most ambitious classification experiment of our times, classifiers as race, gender, disability, amongst others, must be understood to avoid further harm and the repetition of historical injustices through AI. There is a lack of research about the mechanisms of bias transfer from programmers to the AI, especially susceptible in the initial problem formulation stage, framed by the stakeholders in control of the AI process. Programmers are political actors because they also encode bias when choosing a fairness metric that decides to preserve biased decisions of the past. It depends on whether they assume the status quo is neutral or not.

  Computer ethicists identify three categories of bias: pre-existing social bias, technical bias related to data and technology limitations, and emergent bias, which results from the interaction of society and technology. This paper focuses on the pre-existing social bias reflected in the problem formulation stage, where a problem is identified and hypothesized as solvable by technology. The lived experiences of the programmers inform their causal inferences and impacts the entire AI pipeline. Bias goes so deep that it is entrenched in our language and word embeddings which serve as foundations for more complex algorithms. Hence, this paper explores historical bias and prejudices from the programmers through an online survey experiment. It also explores programmers' perception of fairness in AI, modern racism scale (MSR), psychological ownership, agency, legitimizing justifications for system inequality, and social orientation dominance theory to predict endorsement of actions to level the playing field or correct system inequalities. Moreover, Ethics Position Theory on relativism and idealism and Machiaveniallism will be explored, which predict unethical behaviour in IT systems (Winter et al. 2004) and bridge understanding about the global AI ethics debate between different cultures.

  The experiment has different stages. One of them involves asking for feedback from programmers on an AI chatbot represented as a white male and measure if any of them suggest diversity; the treatment group will watch a video on intersectional theory and bias. The treatment group will also assess the impression or negative affect from the speaker: one speaker is a black transexual woman, and another is a white male. The next step consists of evaluating their endorsement for affirmative action regarding the diversity of representation in an algorithm designed to admit students in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering. Moreover, their conceptual understanding and preference for fairness metrics to assess algorithmic bias will be evaluated. To subsidize blindspots and include multiple perspectives, I propose an intersectionality framework to map unintended consequences in AI. There are implications for stakeholder consultation, endorsement of affirmative action to the target group of black trans women and fairness notions in AI, and gender and racial bias in programmers at the problem formulation stage. Additionally, theoretical contributions to social dominance orientation and its new subdimension of egalitarianism that refer to group based orientation, to be complimented by intersectionality theory which considers subgroups and the overlapping of multiple systems of oppression. Filling in the gap regarding programmers’ agency on AI bias and their role to reduce it.

• Research Interests

  • Gender Equality
  • Poverty and Social Inequality
  • Intersectional and Decolonizing Theories
  • Artificial Intelligence and Fourth Industrial Revolution Technologies

• Education

  • 2018, Master of Science in Public Policy, University of Bristol, England
  • 2016, Bachelor of Law, Universidad Iberoamericana, Dominican Republic

• Professional and Academic Career

  • 2020, Human Rights Advisor on Artificial Intelligence and Inclusion, GENIA Latina, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.
  • 2019, Independent Gender Consultant, Woman Up, Mate Consultancy, Bristol, England.
  • 2018, Director of Gender and Inclusion, Ministry of Women, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
  • 2018, President, Volunteering in Global Shapers Santo Domingo, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.
  • 2016, Research and Innovation Director, United Nations Programme for Development and the Office of the Vice-President of the Dominican Republic joint program
  • 2016, Research Intern, Run for America Political Consultancy, New York, United States.
  • 2013, Research Fellow, Vice-president of the Dominican Republic, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic

• Publications

  • Roman, Arlette. How Should an Understanding of Gender Inequalities Inform the Design and Delivery of Policies to Tackle Global Poverty. Rome, Italy: BC Publishing House, 2019. Review of Socio-Economic Perspectives (RSEP), University of Washington Rome Centre. ISBN: 978-605-80676-9-1

• Conference Contributions: Talks

  • 2021, Business and Society Conference, University of Namur, "Exploring the roots of historical bias amplified by artificial intelligence: an interdisciplinary approach", Belgium.
  • 2020, Cumbre Internacional de Jóvenes Líderes, “Artificial Intelligence and Inclusion for Latin America”, Puerto Rico.
  • 2020, UNIDAS Dialogue on COVID-19 from a Gender Perspective, “COVID-19 and Digitalization: Evaluating Impact through an Intersectional Lens”, German Foreign Ministry, Germany.
  • 2019, 15^th RSEP International Conference on Economic, Finance and Social Sciences, “How an understanding of gender inequalities informs policies to tackle global poverty?”, University of Washington in Rome, Italy.

• Conference Contributions: Posters

  • N/A

• Memberships

  • Member, Executive Board in the Global Artificial Intelligence Ethics Institute (GAIEI) by Prof. Dr. Emmanuel Goffi.
  • Member, Global Shapers Community, World Economic Forum (WEF).
  • Member, “UNIDAS” Initiative by the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the Cooperation with Latin America.
  • Founder, International Law Students Association Chapter Universidad Iberoamericana (UNIBE), Dominican Republic.
  • Member, United Nations Association in Dominican Republic (UNA-DR).
  • Director of International Relations, Faculty of Law Alumni Association, Universidad Iberoamericana (UNIBE).
  • Member, ATLAS Women Lawyers in Human Rights Berlin

Title of Dissertation:
Debating Due Diligence and Responsibility: from Law to Impact Valuation

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Laura Marie Edinger-Schons
University: University of Mannheim
Scholarship: tba
Cohort: 7th Cohort, since 2020
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

• Short Abstract

  Governments and businesses alike are increasingly interested in accounting for the social and environmental impacts of businesses’ endeavors. On the one hand, a growing number of governments are seeking to define human rights due diligence responsibilities through national legislation. On the other hand, groups of companies are developing ways to measure their positive and negative externalities by creating new impact valuation methodologies. These differing approaches represent just two ways to account for corporate moral responsibility in an interconnected world.

  This dissertation asks the following questions: how is moral responsibility conceptualized in these debates, and how are ethical unintended consequences addressed? The first paper examines the debates surrounding the German Human Rights Due Diligence Law (also known as the supply chain law). The following papers examine the ethics of Impact Valuation—the process of putting a monetary value on businesses’ positive and negative social and environmental impacts—as it relates to risk, business ethics, non-financial reporting, and unintended consequences.

   

• Research Interests

  • Normative Discourse
  • Business and Human Rights
  • Social Responsibility and Business
  • Intersectionality
  • Radical Individualism / Common Good Divide
  • Impact Valuation

• Education

  • 2018, Master of Theological Studies in Religion, Ethics, Politics, Harvard Divinity School, United States of America
  • 2015, Bachelor of Arts in Religion and Peace and Justice Studies, Wellesley College, United States of America
  • 2014, Semester Abroad, Kings College London, United Kingdom

• Professional and Academic Career

  • New Editor Literary Services (2020)
  • Arvato Financial Solutions (2020)
  • House of One Berlin – House of Prayer and Learning (2019)
  • The Jiyan Foundation for Human Rights (2017 - 2018)
  • Andover-Harvard Theological Library (2016-2018)
  • Zentrum Überleben (2015-2016)
  • Wellesley Centers for Women (2011-2015)

• Publications

  • N/A

• Conference Contributions: Talks

  • Business and Society Research Seminar, University of Namur, Belgium 17 -16 June 2021

  • Business and Human Rights Young Researchers Summit, Geneva, Switzerland 16 -17 September 2021

• Conference Contributions: Posters

  • N/A

• Memberships

  • N/A

Title of Dissertation:  Essays on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as Risk Management Strategy

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Laura Marie Edinger-Schons
University: University of Mannheim
Scholarship: KSG Scholarship
Cohort: 7th Cohort, since 2020
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

• Short Abstract

  This research examines the social and cultural issues in corporate digital responsibility (CDR). Based on data to be collected from staff of telecommunications companies in both Nigeria and Germany, this research investigates the influence of firms’ business models on their practice of corporate digital responsibility, how firms’ internal incentive structures impede or promote the implementation of sound corporate digital responsibility, the social and cultural barriers that impede the implementation of sound corporate digital responsibility, the roles played by data protection and regulatory agencies, and how do these influence firms’ approach to CDR. This research also investigates consumers’ evaluation of CDR, as well as the extent to which socio-demographic variables influence consumers’ attitudes to CDR. Primary data to be collected   from   respondents   (telecoms   employees   and   consumers),   and   secondary   data   from   annual reports, ethics statements, news articles, and regulatory records will facilitate answers to the research questions, making it possible to also identify cross-country differences in approaches to CDR.

• Research Interests

  • Corporate Social Responsibility
  • Corporate Digital Responsibility
  • Responsibility for new technologies
  • Shaping ethical workplaces

• Education

  • 2019, Master of Science Management, Technical University of Munich, Germany
  • 2014, Bachelor of Technology Computer Science, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Nigeria

• Professional and Academic Career

  • 2019 – 2020, Consultant, Allianz Technology, Munich, Germany
  • 2018 – 2019, Working student, Allianz, Munich, Germany
  • 2017 – 2018, Intern – Product development, Infineon Technology, Munich, Germany
  • 2017 – 2018, Graduate Research Assistant, Technical University of Munich, Germany

• Publications

  • N/A

• Conference Contributions: Talks

  • N/A

• Conference Contributions: Posters

  • N/A

• Memberships

  • N/A

Title of Dissertation:
Systematic study of coaching ethics: economic approach

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Andreas Suchanek 
University: HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management 
Scholarship: KSG Scholarship
Cohort: 7th Cohort, since 2020
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

• Short Abstract

  According to a global study by ICF (2020), the largest coaching association in the world, there were an estimated 71,000 coaches in 2019, which is 33 % more than in 2015. The number of managers using coaching methods has increased by 46 %. At the same time, coaching community is confronted with increasingly complex ethical dilemmas. What understandable and manageable ethical guidance can coaching ethics offer coaches and coaching associations in this situation?

  Since there is no binding (legal) coaching regulation (Ebermann, 2018) and no "coaching assessment "pope"" (Geissler, 2016, p. 52) that define coaching and determine its rules, coaching community is confronted with ethical pluralism (Iordanou & Williams, 2016, p.2). Coaching is thus both an expression and a reflection of modern society (Aristu, 2016, p.115). This dissertation project therefore aims to investigate how, despite competing coaching approaches and the pluralistic spectrum of individual, cultural and professional values, an integrative core (Suchanek, 1994) of coaching ethics can be defined that allows understandable and manageable, yet differentiated ethical orientations to be derived for coaches and coaching associations.

  The integrative core is defined as do no illegitimate harm (Suchanek, 2017) and represents, within the framework of economic theory, a kind of systematic - in the sense of: theoretically integrated – side constraint (Suchanek, 1994, p.103) of an ethical coaching practice. This side constraint can be understood at the same time as a free-standing point of view (Rawls, 1998) claiming universal applicability independent of pluralism of partly competing purposes (Kirchgeorg et. al., 2019) of various coaching stakeholders. To define the integrative core of coaching ethics, the concept of pragmatic reduction is used, which allows the introduction of a schema "...as a very general, systematic, unifying structure for the manageable overcoming ("calculation") of problems..." (Suchanek, 1994, p.53). A (purely) market perspective on coaching, as an exclusively instrumental action process (e.g., Hannafey & Vitulano, 2013) with rather positivist view on coaching ethics (e.g., Oellerich, 2016; Schermuly & Graßmann, 2019) (Thesis) and its (purely) philosophical-normative viewpoints (e.g., Geissler, 2004; Schmidt-Lellek, 2015) (Antithesis) are integrated (Synthesis) with the help of the economic approach (Suchanek, 1994). The concept of legitimacy (Suchanek, 2019) provides another theoretical foundation.

  For exemplary differentiated applications of the integrative core of coaching ethics, the concept of the Ethical Compass (Suchanek, 2019) is applied. The choice of the Ethical Compass as a heuristic can be justified on the basis of the practical syllogism (Suchanek, 2015, p.42 - 45).

  Literatur

  Aristu, J. (2016). Gott schuf den Menschen, und der formt sich selbst. In: Wegener, R., Loebbert, M., Fritze, A. (eds) Coaching und Gesellschaft. Springer, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-09636-6_7

  Geißler, H. (2004). Braucht Coaching eine philosophisch begründete Ethik? Zur Begründung eines systemischwertrationalen Imperativs für Coaching. Organisationsberatung – Supervision – Coaching, (2), 173–186.

  Geißler, H. (2016). Die Bewertung von Coaching-Prozessen als ethische Herausforderung. In: Wegener, R., Loebbert, M., Fritze, A. (eds) Coaching und Gesellschaft. Springer, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-09636-6_4

  Hannafey, F.T., Vitulano, L.A. Ethics and Executive Coaching: An Agency Theory Approach. J Bus Ethics 115, 599–603 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1442-z

  International Coach Federation (2020, January). 2020 ICF Global Coaching Study: Executive Summary. Abgerufen am 23, Februar 2022, von https://coachingfederation.org/app/uploads/2020/09/FINAL_ICF_GCS2020_ExecutiveSummary.pdf

  Iordanou, I., Hawley, R. & Iordanou, C. (2016). Values and Ethics in Coaching (1. Aufl.). SAGE Publications Ltd.

  Kirchgeorg, M., Meynhardt, T., Pinkwart, A., Suchanek, A., & Zülch, H. (2019). Das Leipziger Führungsmodell (3. Aufl.). Leipzig, Deutschland: HHL Academic Press.

  Oellerich, K. (2016). Negative Effekte von Coaching und ihre Ursachen aus der Perspektive der Organisation: Eine Mixed Methods-Studie. Universität Kassel. doi:10.19211/KUP978373760303

  Rawls, J., & Hinsch, W. (1998). Politischer Liberalismus (1. Aufl.). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

  Schermuly, C. C., & Graßmann, C. (2019). A literature review on negative effects of coaching – what we know and what we need to know. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 12(1), 39–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2018.1528621

  Schmidt-Lellek C. (2015) Ethik und ethische Kompetenz im Coaching. In: Greif S., Möller H., Scholl W. (eds) Handbuch Schlüsselkonzepte im Coaching. Springer Reference Psychologie. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  Suchanek, A. (1994). Ökonomischer Ansatz und theoretische Integration. Tübingen.

  Suchanek, A. (2015). Unternehmensethik. UTB.

• Research Interests

  • Ethical Leadership
  • Responsible Business Coaching and Training
  • Self-Leadership and Purpose
  • Competency Diagnostics
  • Competency Management

• Education

  • 2016, MBA, HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management, Germany
  • 2011, M.A. Philology, Pushkin State Russian Language Institute, Russia
  • 2009, B.A. Philology, Pushkin State Russian Language Institute, Russia

• Professional and Academic Career

  • 2019-2020, Regional Consultant, LAMSA e. V., Halle (Saale), Germany
  • 2015-2018, Project Manager, Kontor Lighting & Living GmbH, Leipzig, Germany
  • 2012-2014, Project Manager, Sochi 2014 Organizing Committee, Moscow-Sochi, Russia

• Publications

  • N/A

• Conference Contributions: Talks

  • N/A

• Conference Contributions: Posters

  • N/A

• Memberships

  • Forum Gemeinwohl e.V.