Publications

Journal articles

1. Mergen, A. The Algorithmic Leviathan or the Digital Agora? Mechanisms of Enclosure and Pathways to Rights-Based Governance of Digital Commons. Business & Society. In press
   Abstract

   Technology corporations increasingly deploy commons language while maintaining extractive ownership structures. We develop the charity-rights framework to explain how enclosure becomes normalized under progressive rhetoric. Drawing on moral economy perspectives, commons theory, and corporate social responsibility critique, the framework distinguishes charity logic (benefits as discretionary corporate benevolence) from rights-based governance (enforceable entitlements grounded in democratic participation). We present a process model specifying antecedent conditions, the central mechanism of charity logic, outcomes of durable enclosure, and boundary conditions under which rights-based governance emerges. Using contrast case design, we examine OpenAI and Worldcoin as instances of charity-based governance and the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend, the MIDATA cooperative, and Indigenous data sovereignty frameworks as rights-based alternatives. The cases, drawn from varied regulatory contexts including North American, European, African, and Asia-Pacific settings, illuminate how constitutional protection, collective ownership, and community authority counteract charity logic. We derive institutional design principles adapting Ostrom’s commons framework to digital governance.

2. Albayraktaroğlu, A., Mergen, A., & Güven, Ç. (2026). Generative AI Models as Wicked Resources: A Dynamic Perspective on Resource Governance. Journal of Management. doi.org/10.1177/01492063261434193
   Abstract

   The proliferation of generative AI models fundamentally alters organizational capabilities, enabling novel value creation while challenging incumbent governance frameworks. Employing a phenomenon-driven approach, this study integrates and extends property rights theory (PRT) and stakeholder resource-based theory (SRBT) to address governance challenges posed by generative AI. By leveraging system dynamics modeling, we conceptualize the dynamic interplay among stakeholder claims, institutional arrangements, and value appropriation outcomes, highlighting how feedback loops, delays, and accumulations shape these interactions. Our analysis reveals two insights: First, stable equilibrium states in stakeholder claims and property rights arrangements may not invariably lead to equitable outcomes, due to stakeholder power disparities and attribution ambiguity associated with generative AI. Second, framing the evolution of generative AI models as organizational resources from the complementary perspectives of PRT and SRBT reveals distinct resource features largely unexamined in the strategy literature. Hence, we introduce the concept of ‘wicked resources,’ characterizing generative AI models by their inherent attribution ambiguity and emergent unpredictability. Building on prior research on resource complexity and uncertainty in the strategy literature, wicked resources are marked by the difficulty firms face in delineating and enforcing control within shifting socio-political contexts. This paper makes three key contributions: addressing the dynamic, multi-stakeholder nature of generative AI governance; introducing wicked resources as a novel resource category in strategy and management literatures; and identifying theoretical gaps, advocating for a dynamic, systemic approach to property rights and stakeholder bargaining.

3. Mergen, A., Özbilgin, M., & Tekeste, M. (2026). Normalization of Toxicity in Organizations: A Multilevel Process Framework of Toxicity Normalization Cascade. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 99(2), e70108. doi.org/10.1111/joop.70108
   Abstract

   Workplace toxicity imposes enormous costs on employees, organizations, and society, yet scholarship lacks an integrated explanation of how harmful practices become routine and why they endure. This article develops the toxicity normalization cascade (TNC), a multilevel process framework addressing two interrelated questions: how does workplace toxicity become normalized, and why does it persist through leadership changes, regulatory interventions, and sincere reform efforts? Drawing on foundational theories of normalization of deviance and corruption, moral disengagement theory, and structuration theory, TNC traces how four dimensions of organizational context generate systemic pressures that activate psychological mechanisms of normalization. These mechanisms co-evolve through social interaction and crystallize into normalized toxic culture. The framework’s central contribution is the reproduction mechanism: the process through which normalized culture feeds back to reconstitute the systemic pressures that enabled its emergence, creating self-perpetuating cascades. Six testable propositions specify the framework’s architecture. We present an illustrative application, demonstrate generalizability across organizational contexts, propose a research agenda, and derive practical implications for systemic intervention.

4. Mergen, A., Özbilgin, M. F., Güven, Ç., Erbil, C., & Greenhalgh, T. (2026). Toxic Experts in Longevity Business: A Multilevel Relational Framing of Emergence. Organization. doi.org/10.1177/13505084251379172
   Abstract

   In this paper, we introduce and theorize the concept of toxic experts as individuals who, by virtue of their perceived or actual expertise, systematically engage in behaviors characterized by professional and intellectual vices. Despite maintaining an appearance of legitimacy, toxic experts exploit public trust by disseminating unsubstantiated, misleading, or harmful claims for personal and commercial gain. Drawing on a multidisciplinary framework, we integrate diverse insights to explain how toxic expertise emerges and persists. Specifically, we combine ethical and epistemic perspectives that distinguish genuine expertise from opportunistic misrepresentation. We analyze how social and institutional recognition shapes expert authority. Then we examine how structural transformations of work erode professional integrity and identify cognitive mechanisms that sustain trust in unverified claims. Using the case of the longevity biotechnology business, we develop a multilevel relational theoretical framework that identifies: (i) the historical and socio-cultural preconditions that enable toxic experts to emerge, (ii) the social and cognitive processes through which they gain and maintain legitimacy, and (iii) prevention strategies centered on cascaded accountability reforms. Our contextualized perspective challenges the depiction of toxic experts as isolated deviant individuals, revealing them instead as products of broader social, institutional, and ideological conditions. We argue that mitigating their influence requires cascaded regulatory interventions at societal and institutional levels to restore public trust and prevent toxic outcomes.

5. Erbil, C., Özbilgin, M. F., & Mergen, A. (2025). Red Pill Leadership Behaviours and Discourse Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics. doi.org/10.1007/s10551-025-06194-4
   Abstract

   Red Pill ideology, an online ecosystem that frames men as victims of feminist progress, has moved well beyond fringe forums to shape leadership norms in corporate and political arenas. Scholars have charted its spread across the manosphere, yet we know little about how these narratives crystallise into day-to-day leadership behaviours that undermine workplace ethics and equity. This study conceptualises Red Pill leadership behaviours as a distinctive, discourse-driven form of toxic leadership and examines how they distort organisational decision-making. Grounded in Habermasian discourse ethics and extended with Fraser’s critique of power asymmetries, we investigate how Red Pill leaders subvert open deliberation and justify exclusion. Employing critical netnography and thematic analysis, we analyse a multi-source dataset comprising 66 keynote speeches and high-profile interviews, 227 social media artefacts posted by 34 executives, 23 corporate case files, 20 investigative media articles, and 13 podcast episodes, produced between 2018 and 2024. Our findings identify three interlocking behaviour clusters: (1) exploitative influence and manipulation; (2) control, supremacy, and suppression of dissent; and (3) dehumanisation with harmful outcomes that normalise male supremacist grievance, delegitimise diversity initiatives, and marginalise opposing voices. By theorising these behaviours and mapping their communicative tactics, we show how Red Pill leadership manufactures legitimacy, monetises grievance, and embeds misogyny in workplace culture. We conclude by outlining multilevel policy and organisational interventions that promote ethical deliberation, critical reflexivity, and inclusive governance.

6. Mergen, A., & Özbilgin, M. F. (2021). Understanding the Followers of Toxic Leaders: Toxic Illusio and Personal Uncertainty. International Journal of Management Reviews, 23(1), 45–63. doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12240
   Abstract

   Toxic leaders are one of the main threats to the wellbeing of people in the workplace and in society in general, and followers play a critical role in constructing and maintaining toxic leaders. In this narrative review, we draw on Bourdieu’s concept of illusio and incorporate it with the social and cognitive psychology approaches in an attempt to frame the dynamic system that sustains toxic leadership through continued support of the followers. More specifically, as we introduce the illusio perspective in a process-relational context to the toxic leadership discussion, we (i) address the allure of toxic leaders as an incentive for followers to join the toxic illusio as a way to cope with their high personal uncertainty and (ii) illustrate the mechanisms and processes that motivate followers of toxic leaders to remain in the toxic illusio once they join. In this context, we also briefly discuss and differentiate between the ethical and moral dimensions of toxic leadership.