Conference theme

As we all prepare to gather in Toronto, we thought it was important to acknowledge the land upon which we will gather. The land we are meeting on is the traditional territory of many nations including the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat peoples and is now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. We also acknowledge that Toronto is covered by Treaty 13 with the Mississaugas of the Credit.

Toronto is a word that is derived from the Mohawk term “Tkaronto,” meaning “the place in the water where the trees are standing.” This is thought to refer to the wooden stakes that were used as fishing weirs in the narrows of local river systems by the Haudenosaunee and Huron-Wendat.

Today, Toronto is in the ‘Dish With One Spoon Territory’, a treaty between the Anishinaabe, Mississaugas and Haudenosaunee that bound them to share the territory and protect the land. We are hoping that our conference theme — Can we find our way / Kaapkaanaa naa waane zhaayin — and program contribute to this spirt. We encourage you to take advantage of and promote this programming to help share this message.

And for this to be possible we need to say chi miigwech (a big “THANK YOU”) to Henry Pitawanakwat, a language keeper from the Three Fires Confederacy, Wiikwemkoong Unceded Territory on Manitoulin Island, who provided us with the translation of the theme, written in full below.

We also want to thank Nishina Loft (Ken:teke) who provided us with the visual representation of the theme and Michael Mihalicz an Indigenous Advisor at the Ted Rogers School of Management whose guidance was especially helpful.

Kaapkaanaa naa waane zhaayin

Wiipkaaming gwek waaniszhang, miimaandaa waa njinmiing, ezhaa ginoowaamdaamiing waaneshzhaaying ezhibeshoon. Niibnaa gegoo mkwenjigaade ezhibeshoong.  Ezhi naanaagdewenming wiiwaamdaaming gaabezhewebsiiyin minwaa ginoowaamdaaman genizhowebezhiyin. Miizhe gaabe zikaamigaag waazhe kinoomaageng ezhi beshoong minwaa ezhi wenpaanaak. Aabiish giibe nishnowak wiipkaamowak oosme enjishing, wiimnaabdek, noondash zhenegaak, wiikenoomoondwaad.

Ginoowaamjigaadek zhaazhe gaabezhoowebesing, miizhe endnaaming waazhe kinoomowendwaa waazhe wenpaanzhiiwad niigaan wiizhaa aad.  Piinesh gwa nongwa, kaawiin gwa kina gegoo kiinowaamdaasiinaa ezhibiigaadek Mzhinigan (Ford Foundation’s Gordon Howell report – 1959), ezhi kinoomaading waazhe miwzhing Chimookmaankiing, jibwaa kinoowaamjigaadek Niibnaa gegoo ge ginoowaamjigadegba, Miigaa pkenaagemgaak. Gichi piitendaagwa Wiigenoowaamjigade enoondesek gekinomaadiinbaa, miish maanda waagenoowaamdamiing maampii.  Aapje giiminidaapnegaadenong eshnagwa Kinomaadwegaamgong, kaawiin giipwezhiinaa, bepkaan bemaadezhijig, estowaad, bebkaan enjibaajig, Kweok maage ninook, bebkaan gewe bemaadezhijig enendemowad.  Oshme gaasnaagak, kawiin megdezhenjin (pkaadeyaasaan) giidaapnaasiiaan.  Aanwegwa nsaadwenaachgaadek zhaazhe Gaabedinaakiijig, Kaawiin debaachigaadesno, aanegwa waamjigaadek gaameshaa’aad beshigoong nongwa bemeshaa’aad, Aabdek gwiibesindwanaanek gaanje wenaamjigadek, minwaa niibnaa debaagmewenaan endegwok gaabe aankechigaadek niibnaa nchingoowak shisaaboon, wiikendiming gegoo.

Miinaandaan aabdek waagnowaamjigaadegan, miizhe endnaaming waakenming, wiinsaastaaming kina gegoo.  Miizhe endnaaming wenjishing, gaanje zhidgewak, gaanje wenaamdwamwad waamesha’aad, minwaa kinoomaadwenang gaabe aanke aadchigaadek zhe naakegmek. Kinaa gegoo genowaamjigadek, daawenpaanaad wiipkaming Toronto,  zhawenong nekeyaa, wiipkaaming memaanjinishing niigaan wiishaang.

Translation: Can we find our way?*

The theme of this conference is inspired by wayfinding, the idea regarding how we navigate space (Vermillion, 2021).  Wayfinding is interesting as both a process we engage in and as metaphor for how we figure out how we get to a destination (Tversky, 1993; Tversky, 2000; Kitchener and Delbridge, 2020). As a process, wayfinding is complex, and research in this domain captures tensions that are apparent in many of our disciplines (Tversky and Hard, 2009).  Traditionally this approach privileged a pure conception of cognition, an approach that frequently creates supports that seem incompatible with our spontaneous and more embodied approach to wayfinding (Schering et al., 2017).  Metaphorically, wayfinding is important as it has been used to explore how a business school may contribute to the public good (Kitchener and Delbridge, 2020).  Within a context where we can still ask whether business schools have lost their way, there is much to be gained by discussing how we might navigate issues of sustainability (Hart, 1998; Polman and Wilson, 2021), rigour and relevance (Bartunek and Rynes, 2014), conflict (Kemmerling, Schetter and Wirkus, 2022) , inequity (Nash, 2019; Amis, Mair and Munir, 2020), and access (Smith Transparency Project, 2021), to name but of few of the challenges that are impacting our communities.

Possible directions can be found in how examinations of our past suggest that there are many ways to provide management education (McClaren et al., 2021).    To date, we have tended to limit ourselves to a narrow reading of the Ford Foundation’s Gordon-Howell report (1959) on business education in the United States.  This report is viewed as contributing to the emphasis placed on formal scientific knowledge at the expense of other ways of knowing (McClaren, 2019). Notwithstanding the broad concern about business schools and the American influence upon education, it is also important to acknowledge our own deficits in this domain, as the location of this year’s conference once housed the Normal School (TMU, 2021).  This school was established as part of the Common School Act (1846) to ensure standards of curriculum, principles of school administration and building design would ensure a quality education for everyone.  In retrospect, everyone was something of an overstatement as the educational spaces that were constructed did not welcome diversity and were not particularly inclusive of women, different religious perspectives, and Francophones. More problematically they frequently accepted the exclusion of Black Canadians, while the original inhabitants of Turtle Island were offered an education that sought to destroy their cultures and communities (TMU, 2021).  Despite progress on many fronts, and our acknowledgments of traditional territory, our campuses do not always fully display the spirit of reconciliation and we require greater emphasis on place making. Currently the descendants from these territories are underrepresented and it is rare to hear their stories and the knowledge embodied within them, be it of the remarkably complex organizing of buffalo jumps over hundreds of generations (Brink, 2008) or the trade routes that retain connections to our current transportation networks and hubs of economic activity (Carter, 1999;Hele, 2013; Baker and Beer, 2016; IEJ Project, 2020).  

As these examples demonstrate the idea of wayfinding need not simply encourage reflection on the negative aspects of our history.   As a theme it offers tremendous potential for us to gather and share perspectives on the challenges and issues we face, especially as wayfinding has also been helpful in conceptualizing an approach to organizational learning (Chia, 2017).  For our broader academic community this may involve how we deliver education that maximizes what technology can offer, while also ensuring that we do not lose what makes learning in the presence of others so valuable.   The idea also has currency within discussions of our experience of digital space (Dziuban et al., 2016) and is relevant to travel and tourism (Xia et al., 2008).  All of this to say it should not be too difficult to find your way to Toronto, though it may be challenging to figure out the best way forward. 

Of course, given we present this conference in Canada’s two official languages and wayfinding is something of an anglicism, a word with no direct equivalent in French, we hope the theme does not get lost in translation.