Scientist in Profile: Elke Schüßler – “Changing the Rules of the Market”

Wherever people move, footpaths appear. In parks, on campuses, in public squares: depending on the weather, they show up as lighter or darker brown streaks in the grass, illustrating the gap between planners’ intentions and what actually happens. You could ask those who use these paths directly: “Do you value green spaces?”—and most will say yes. Or: “Do you agree that by using this shortcut, you save no more than four or five seconds at best?” Again, most would affirm. And yet, the same individuals will repeatedly choose the shortcut. There is a persistence here that cannot be explained by lack of information or insufficient will to change.

To some degree, this same pattern applies to sustainability challenges. On the one hand, individual rationality is always constrained by social structures—we usually do not take the shortcut because we have calculated the time saved, but because everyone else is walking there too. Conversely, individually rational decisions, at the collective level, often only lead to suboptimal outcomes or unintended side effects. The more complex and uncertain the environment, the more individuals and organizations rely on well-worn mechanisms. “So-called paths, or path dependencies, which create persistence and lock-in effects that make change difficult, have occupied me since my dissertation,” says Schüßler. “At the same time, given the many social and ecological crises of our time, change is imperative. My research operates precisely within this tension.”

“How Often Will You Wear This T-Shirt?”

The Supply Chain Act, which came into force in January 2024 to ensure global supply chains are humane and socially just, demonstrates just how hard it is to leave entrenched paths. “The debate around this goes back decades,” explains Schüßler. “The first scandals about Nike and child labor emerged in the 1990s. Much has happened since, but most global supply chains remain unsustainable because their fundamental structure has not changed.” In a major international research project under her leadership, Schüßler investigated the causes and consequences of the catastrophic collapse of the Rana Plaza building in Bangladesh in 2013, in which 1,135 workers lost their lives and more than 2,000 were injured.

The lesson is close at hand: the next time you open your wardrobe, look at the labels. Most of the clothes worn in Germany come from Bangladesh—shirts, but also boxers and socks. Schüßler’s research team studied leading fashion brands from various countries, as well as Bangladeshi manufacturers and garment workers, to understand what could prevent another disaster of this scale. The conclusion: everyone in the industry knows the problems, but in the end no one wants to take responsibility.

“They keep passing the buck,” Schüßler says. “Retailers argue it’s the consumers’ fault: if they stopped buying cheap clothing, wages could rise. Others say the problem is the retailers themselves, especially giants like Zara and H&M, who created the fast fashion model in the first place. Retailers, in turn, blame greedy manufacturers and the Bangladeshi political system. There, unions are suppressed, and the government is dominated by textile lobbyists, doing too little for workplace safety. But is it fair to pin the blame solely on them? Not really, because all actors are embedded in a system shaped by specific incentives.” Thus, the key question is not who is to blame but what must change in a system that produces ever more clothes at ever cheaper prices—garments that, ultimately, no one truly needs. On this point, at least, there is consensus: something in this system is deeply broken.

For years, attempts were made to improve supply chains and production methods through isolated initiatives. But such efforts are insufficient in a hyper-competitive market where profit margins are razor-thin. Schüßler challenges the common notion of treating “the market” as an autonomous actor. “It’s not enough to say, ‘That’s just the market.’ Where, then, does the market come from? Who created it? The market is not a divine given—it emerges from specific incentive structures ultimately set by politics.” 

The Emergence of the New

So how can such systems be changed? Collective action is required to alter the very rules of the market. Legislation such as the Supply Chain Act can serve as an effective mechanism. “Yet policymakers themselves are part of a social system; laws are not a deus ex machina.” This is where Schüßler situates her current research, including her work within the Volkswagen Foundation–funded research program Sustainability Governance of Global Value Chains. Here, she shows how new legislative initiatives, like the Supply Chain Act, are embedded in existing organizational fields, conflict lines, and practices throughout their development and implementation. Again, the possibilities and limits of entrepreneurial agency play a central role, as private, civil society, legal, and political actors contest the law’s meaning while inevitably starting from existing paths.

Counterbalancing her focus on path dependency and entrenched systems, Schüßler also studies organized creativity. As part of a German-Austrian research group funded by the DFG and the FWF, she examines, using examples from music production and pharmaceutical research, the Emergence of the New. This involves looking not only at creative practices in studios and laboratories but also at the institutional norms and rules that frame them. Even here, however, societal crises loom large. For example, antibiotic research is locked into established paths; alternatives rarely gain traction—not only because of poor economic incentives but also because of dominant scientific paradigms. “Understanding these mechanisms,” Schüßler explains her epistemological interest, “can help break existing paths.”

Confronting Escalating Crises

Antibiotic resistance, a so-called “slow-burning crisis,” is just one of several phenomena to which Schüßler intends to devote greater attention in the future. Within Leuphana University’s Embracing Transformation Initiative, she and Prof. Matthias Wenzel co-lead the thematic field “Organizing in Times of Crisis”. Their work asks: How should we rethink organization in a world increasingly defined by disruption? Which organizational forms are particularly crisis-prone? Conversely, which mechanisms can reliably generate the flexibility needed to cope with recurring crises? Schüßler has already pioneered new forms of organizing with a collaborative teaching platform on the same theme—recognized by the Aspen Institute—that she and colleagues launched during the COVID-19 pandemic.

After studying psychology and industrial relations at the University of Sussex and the London School of Economics, Elke Schüßler worked for a Berlin consulting firm before earning her doctorate at Freie Universität Berlin. In 2012, she was appointed Junior Professor of Organization Theory at FU Berlin. From 2016 to 2023, she was Professor of Business Administration and Director of the Institute of Organization at Johannes Kepler University Linz. In 2024, the Miltenberg native joined Leuphana University of Lüneburg, where she now holds the chair in Business Administration, with a focus on Entrepreneurship and Organization, at the Institute of Management and Organization. Her research projects—such as the “Global Garment Supply Chain Governance” Project and the “Organized Creativity” research group—are funded by the Volkswagen Foundation, the DFG, and the Austrian Science Fund (FWF).

Schüßler’s extensive record of publications has earned her numerous awards, including the Academy of Management Journal Best Reviewer Award (2023), the International Labour and Employment Relations Association Best International/Comparative IR Paper Award (2021), the Aspen Institute Ideas Worth Teaching Award (2020), the Academy of Management Journal Best Article Award (2015), and the VHB Best Paper Award (2014).