Call for papers
Revue Internationale de Psychosociologie et de Gestion des Comportements Organisationnels (RIPCO)
Le classement FNEGE 2022 des revues de gestion, a classé RIPCO au Rang 3. RIPCO lance un nouveau numéro spécial : L'organisation inclusive. En savoir plus SOUMETTRE
Call for papers
Positive Organizational Scholarship: Between Tradition and Innovation

From the pioneering work by Martin Seligman (1999) and Cameron et al. (2003), work devoted to positive organizational behavior scholarship (Caza, 2015) within organizations rapidly spread across the world. These works explore the factors unlocking the potential of individuals by stressing their strengths. Sense needs to be created, positive emotions and qualitative workplace relations have to be cultivated in order to harvest all of individuals’ psychological resources and guarantee the organization’s proper functioning (Spreitzer & Cameron, 2012). The studied areas have three irreducible characteristics: they can be potentially developed, evaluated, and linked to performance at work. The levels of analysis can draw on experiences, subjective positive states or even on ‘virtuous’ (Fineman, 2006) institutions and organizations.

Within a POS perspective, care and treatment of negative phenomena, such as stress, work-related illnesses, and degraded relationships do not necessarily induce the emergence of positive scholarship (Carson & Barling, 2009, p. 680). Mitigating work dissatisfaction is not enough to insure well-being at work. More generally, the cohabitation and interaction between positive and negative behavior could even explain the building of new skills (Fredrickson & Losada, 2005). The general ambition of this research field is to initiate an ascending spiral by developing positive scholarship rather than simply trying to stop the negative dynamics.

Many concepts fall within this scope. Some are already familiar in the field: satisfaction, commitment, creativity, trust, justice and organizational citizenship, support, cooperation, etc. Others seem more innovative in the field of management science: it is the case for well-being at work, psychological boundaries, that is to say resilience (an all-the-rage concept in the COVID-19 pandemic context), but also for optimism, self-efficiency, forgiveness and hope, and vitality (Wohlers, Hartner & Hertel, 2017), emotional intelligence (Kotsou et al, 2018), collective bravery (Quinn & Worline, 2008), positive deviance (Leigh & Melwani, 2019), endogenous resourcefulness (Feldman, 2004), of compassion (Lilius et al., 2012), organizational virtue (Meyer, 2018), etc. These new propositions may overlap with traditional concepts. If it is not the case, each of these notions should have its own way of showing that the individual, the group, and the organization might find new growth levers in wisdom, enthusiasm, positive energy, generosity, gratitude, empowerment, empathy, joy, pleasure, perseverance, tolerance and compassion. These propositions have already been at the heart of many debates within the most-renowned academic journals such as the Academy of Management Review. Special issues like the Journal of Organizational Behavior and academic lectures were devoted to these different themes in America. The francophone world is rather absent from these discussions. Is it due to a strong cultural imprint: the positive organizational behavior scholarship field would only make sense across one side of the Atlantic? The development of these positive states however, have both an economic and social consequences potentially able to unlock the potential of individuals with organizations.

Some suggested research questions (non-exhaustive list)

In this respect, they are of interest to management sciences.

  1. What are the boundaries of the « positive » organizational behavior scholarship?
  2. What are the existing differences and overlap between OB’s traditional concepts and those who appear more innovative?
  3. How should we measure novel concepts such as positive deviance, organizational energy, sustainable value, etc.?
  4. What are universally positive phenomena? Which phenomena are independent from cultural and organizational contexts?
  5. How could a positive state emerge from negative phenomena? More generally, what are the antecedents and mechanisms during which positive states develop?
  6. What are the respective roles of personality and individual traits and the organization in the development of positive phenomena?
  7. What are the personal and organizational consequences of positive states?
  8. What role(s) can staff representative bodies in general and trade unionism in particular play in developing and sustaining positive attitudes and behaviors?
  9. Which HRM approach is best suited for achieving which positive state(s)?
  10. Which training practices transform individuals’ attitudes and influence positive behaviors?
  11. How to transform the innovative concepts of this field into management and consulting practices?
How to submit
Submitting articles to the RIPCO is done via the RIPCO manuscript manager website at :
Review process

The guest editor(s) of special issues directs the review process, selects reviewers preferably from among the members of the journal's scientific committee and database, and makes recommendations about publication in the manuscripts. One of the associate editors must work in conjunction with the guest editors of the special issue and checks the quality of the evaluations on the platform. The evaluation process for special issue manuscripts is the same as for regular issues and the editor-in-chief makes the final decision based on the recommendations of the reviewers and guest editor. If the guest editor is the author or co-author of a manuscript for his or her special issue, the editor-in-chief designates an associate editor to manage the review process for that manuscript.

All articles submitted to the journal are evaluated following the principle of the at least double-blind review, through the Manuscript Manager platform. The platform allows the guest editors to manage all the processes and actions related to the blind review of articles and the communication with authors and reviewers.

The journal applies three levels of review: an editorial coordinator to handle incoming manuscripts and two levels of editors, the guest editor(s) assisting the editor-in-chief. The evaluation process is broadly structured in the following steps and procedures:

  • Automatic notification to the editor and editorial coordinator of a manuscript submission
  • Anti-plagiarism control.
  • Assurances that submissions were not currently under review at another journal are required from the author(s)
  • Verification by the editor-in-chief of compliance with the editorial line and editorial instructions. Desk rejects or assigns to an associate editor within three days
  • Substantive analysis of the article proposal by the associate editor. Desk rejects or selection and invitation to at least two blind reviews for evaluation
  • Entry within four weeks by the reviewers of their first evaluation on the platform (entry page by headings: structure of the paper, quality of the literature review, methodology, contributions, etc., comments to the authors, specific comments to the associate editor). When the deadline has passed, reminders are sent automatically
  • Synthesis by the associate editor, personal evaluation of the proposal, drafting of the evaluation report and proposal for decision.
  • Decision by the editor (regarding acceptance for publication, request for minor changes, request for major changes, rejection with proposal for resubmission after complete reworking, final rejection)
  • Notification of the decision to the authors. The reviewers are also informed of the final decision and can take note of the arguments of the other reviewers, associate editors and the editor-in-chief.

An author receives a final decision four or five months after submitting his/her manuscript, on average. Exceptions may exist, depending on the topic of the article and the scarcity of experts who can be called upon; depending on the time taken by the reviewers despite the platform's relaunch system and the follow-up of the associated editors and finally according to more structural causes such as pandemics that affect all journals.

Authors have an indicative period of three months to submit a revised version of their paper. The editorial team tries not to exceed two successive requests for major changes so as not to prolong excessively the time needed to make a final decision. Submissions that may require additional editorial and blind reviews are evaluated on a case-by-case basis, but are discouraged by the editorial team.

All resubmitted manuscripts go through the same review process again, and previously called upon reviewers give an assessment based on considering the changes suggested in the first round of review.


Bright, D., S. & Exline, J.,J. (2012). Forgiveness at four levels: interpersonal, relational, organizational, and collective-group. In K.S., Cameron and G.M., Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 244–259), New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Caza, B., B. (2015). An introduction to positive organizational scholarship. In A.J.G. Sison (Ed.), Handbook of virtues ethics in business and management (pp. 1-14). Dordrecht: Springer Ed.

Cameron, K.,S., Dutton, J.,E., & Quinn, R.,E. (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inch.

Carson, J., & Barling, J. (2009). Work and well-being. In S.R. Clegg and C.L. Cooper (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational behavior. California: Thousand Oaks.

Feldman, M.,S. (2004). Resources in emerging structures and processes of change. Organization Science, 15(3), 295-309.

Fineman, S. (2006). On being positive: Concerns and counterpoints. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 270-291.

Fredrickson, B., & Losada, L. (2005). Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing. American Psychologist, 60(7), 678-686.

Leigh, A. & Melwani, S. (2019). Black employees matter: Mega-threats, identity fusion, and enacting positive deviance in organizations. Academy of management review, 44(3), 564-591.

Lilius, J., M., Kanov, J., M., Dutton, J,.E., et al. (2012). Compassion revealed: What we know about compassion and work (and where we need to know more) In K.S., Cameron & G.M. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship, (pp. 273– 287). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Meyer, M. (2018). The evolution and challenges of the concept of organizational virtuousness in positive organizational scholarship. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(1), 245-264.

Quinn, R. W., & Worline, M. C. (2008). Enabling courageous collective action: Conversations from United Airlines flight 93. Organization Science, 19(4), 497-516.

Kotsou, I., Mikolajczak, M., Heeren, A., Grégoire, J., & Leys, C. (2019). Improving emotional intelligence: A systematic review of existing work and future challenges. Emotion Review, 11(2), 151-165.

Seligman, M. E. (1999). The president’s address. American psychologist, 54(8), 559-562.

Spreitzer, G., & Cameron, K. (2012). Applying a POS lens to bring out the best in organizations. Organizational Dynamic, 2(41), 85–88.

Wohlers, C., Hartner, M., & Hertel, G. (2017). The Relation between activity-based work environments and office workers’ job attitudes and vitality. Environment and Behavior, 51(2), 167-198

Guest editors
This special issue is coordinated by the RIPCO editorial team
Calls for contributions
Special Issue: Vol.XXVIII, Num. CFP_SI_OBS ( 2022)
Positive Organizational Scholarship: Between Tradition and Innovation
Guest editors: Equipe éditoriale Ripco
This special issue is devoted to positive organizational behavior scholarship (POS). The proposed papers can be situated at the different traditional levels of analysis of the field of organizational behavior: individuals, groups, organizations, as well as in the links within and between these different levels. The submission of theoretical and empirical papers is acceptable. Given the diverse nature of OB research, both quantitative and qualitative work is welcomed. In this respect, the following research questions are of interest to management sciences: What are the boundaries of the « positive » organizational behavior scholarship? What are the existing differences and overlap between OB’s traditional concepts and those who appear more innovative? How should we measure novel concepts su ...
Special Issue: Vol.XVIII, Num. CFP_SI_SPACEOB ( 2022)
Spaces and Organisation Behaviour: new organisations, new theorisations
Guest editors: Olivier, Germain ; Judith, Igelsböck ; Daniel, Melo Ribeiro ; Jean-Luc, Moriceau
Studies on the relationships between spaces and organisational behaviour have recently become richer, considering, for example, materiality, identity, aesthetics, control, reciprocal constitution – up to what is called a turn towards spatiality. However, today, on the one hand, spaces, places and borders are being drastically redefined (e.g. with flex-office, aesthetisation, third places, migrations, multiple reterritorialisations) and on the other hand, the theorisations of organisational space are convening new authors and new concepts (e.g. spacing, throwntogetherness, dispositif, geophilosophy...). In this special issue we propose to follow Beyes & Holt's (2020) invitation to take space seriously and to think spatially: to recognise that all organisations and actors are emplaced or des ...
Special Issue: Vol.XXVIII, Num. CFP_SI_TELETRAVAIL ( 2022)
From telework to hybridity: a new way of thinking about our organizations?
Guest editors: Emmanuel, Abord de Chatillon ; Denis, Chênevert ; Nathalie, Delobbe ; David, Giauque ; Emilie, Vayre
All around the world, the Covid-19 health crisis has forced companies to reorganize work abruptly, quickly and deeply, and telework has become a systematic work modality for many employees in a few days. This increase in telework is likely to continue. Indeed, if telework is a suitable answer to confinement and crisis situations, it also answers other demands of our society, such as the will to reduce real estate costs for companies, the ecological and economical wish to reduce travels, or the expectations of employees in terms of life balance and autonomy. This evolution is underway, but it is not without profoundly changing the way we work, both individually and collectively. This special issue aims at answering the different empirical and theoretical questions that arise around the capa ...
Special Issue: Vol.XXIX, Num. CPF_SI_INCLUSION ( 2022)
The inclusive Organization
Guest editors: Elise, Bonneveux ; Séverine, Ventolini
Inclusion has become a central issue for organizations in terms of CSR, employer image and management (Kele et al., 2022). In this special issue, we will value all types of theoretical or empirical contributions, quantitative, qualitative or both. Several levels of analysis, micro-, meso- and macro-organizational (Adamson et al, 2021) can be proposed, the goal being to have a global but also fine understanding of the inclusive organization. First of all, contributions around the conditions that foster a sense of inclusion are expected. A second type of contribution is expected in a comparison of the concept of inclusion and organizational behaviors as well as the social performance of organizations. The contributions can also, to some extent, be articulated around the power dynamics at pla ...
Lecteurs   Rédacteurs invités   Auteurs   Relecteurs   Liens utiles  

Les plus cités
Les plus récents
Vient de paraître
A paraitre bientôt
Numéros en cours


Rédacteurs invités précédents
Conditions d'éligibilité
Guides de présentation
Procédure de soumission
Procédure d'évaluation


Soumettre un manuscrit
Instructions aux auteurs
Appels à contributions
Chercher un article
Droits et permissions
Auteurs les plus cités
Auteurs les plus productifs


Accéder aux manuscrits


Editions ESKA

CAIRN Int Résumés
CAIRN Int Full-Texts
Google Scholar

  Editeur : Editions ESKA, 12 rue du quatre Septembre, 75002 Paris •  Directeur de la publication : Serge Kebabtchieff, email:, tél. : +33142865566 •  Rédacteur en Chef : Silvester IVANAJ, ICN Business School – Campus Artem, 86 rue du Sergent Blandan, CS 70148, 54003 Nancy Cedex, email :, tél. : +33354502552 / +336 1123 8037 •  Secrétaire de Rédaction : Nathalie Tomachevsky  •  Marketing et Communication : Audrey Bisserier, email : • Responsable de la Fabrication : Marise Urbano, email :, tél. : +33142865565 • Périodicité : 3 numéros par an • ISSN : 2262-8401 / e-ISSN : 2430-3275 •  Le Copyright est la propriété des Editions ESKA  
  © 2019 • Editions ESKA  • Tous droits réservés