Wir leben in einer Welt von Organisationen, von unserer Geburt in Krankenhäusern bis zu unserer Beerdigung durch Bestattungsunternehmen. Dazwischen werden wir von Organisationen erzogen, beschäftigt, unterhalten und verärgert. Nach wie vor besteht sowohl in der Praxis als auch in der Lehre das Bedürfnis nach einem umfassenderen Verständnis von Organisationen, die so wesentlich für fast alles sind, was wir tun. Zu glauben, dass es nur einen Weg gibt, um Organisationen zu strukturieren, ist der schlechteste Weg, dies zu tun. Ein besserer Ansatzpunkt ist, verschiedene Arten von Organisationen zu erkennen. Mintzberg identifiziert sieben verschiedene Formen von Organisationen. Er erforscht diese Formen und die Kräfte, die sie über ihre Lebenszyklen hinweg antreiben. Seit einem halben Jahrhundert beobachtet Henry Mintzberg Organisationen, berät sie, beschäftigt sich mit ihnen. Das Buch ist eine meisterhafte Aktualisierung und Überarbeitung seines Klassikers »Structure in Fives« von 1983.

Organizations dominate our lives, yet how well do we really understand them, and their differences? To get past the one-size-fits-all notion of organization design, this article presents four forms of organizations-the personal enterprise, the programmed machine, the professional assembly, and the project pioneer-each with its own way of managing and crafting strategy. Many organizations come remarkably close to one of these forms, while others can be understood as hybrids of them. Nevertheless, since organizations are made up of people, every one of us different, every single organization structure must be customized through a process of design doing.

If power tends to corrupt, then imagine what superpower can do. Three superpowers, each imbalanced in its own way—toward state communism (China), private capitalism (United States), and national populism (Russia)—vie with each other for global supremacy, all with a substantial arsenal of nuclear weapons under the control of a single individual. Whether malevolent or mistaken, any one can provoke World War III. We shall, therefore, have to think outside the superpower box, for example, by favoring grounded communityship over centralized leadership, and global governance beyond antagonistic superpower.

Both the Covid-19 crisis and the emergence of innovative business models offer a powerful signal that the foundational assumptions of capitalism are increasingly in doubt. Business schools, however, appear to be followers rather than leaders in this historical moment of social change. While citizens, consumers and businesses are experimenting with new models of capitalism premised on balancing profits with social purpose and the private, public, and plural sectors (Mintzberg, 2015; Sachs, 1999; Sachs et al. 2021), business schools have been slow to change and appear to be struggling with their identity and purpose. But, What might be the foundational values of a post-pandemic market system? What might be the purpose of business organizations in a post-pandemic scenario? What would a post- pandemic business school look like? The aim of this Symposium is to explore the answer to these questions and their practical application in a conversation with three former Editors of the Academy of Management journals (Suddaby, Phan, Hollensbe) and two thought thinkers and innovators of management (Mintzberg), capitalism and sustainable development (Sachs, pre-recorded interview).