Clearly, some work in MOS has sought to take non-humans into consideration in a more symmetrical way Organization, However, these interpretations of ANT can range from some very insightful developments to rather problematic applications. Moreover, the problems of ontology, especially when addressing issues of power and CMS thought, still remain. The aim of this paper so far has been to explore some of the assumptions that more or less underlie enactments of CMS thought.
This is not an attempt to undermine the critical desire to tackle complex issues of inequality, social justice, hierarchical divisions, exclusions and colonialism, to name but a few, intentions with which we are strongly sympathetic. However, a fight against invisible forces located behind the scenes that have existence in a partly occupied social world could be seen as high price to pay. It is also important to note that this paper does not address the questions posed by a CMS theorist who wishes to find practical ways of tackling issues of domination, power and control in a direct and instantaneous way.
To study this issue of politics and domination which are always complex and heterogeneous requires a more sophisticated understanding of ontology and methodology which avoids a quick fix and provides a detailed analysis of issues without short circuiting and too quickly resorting to explaining aspects away. Quick fix explanations in a number of cases lead to the silence of complexity and heterogeneity, with assumptions of reality and existence in a simplified form, and certain entities and relations being disregarded. As discussed above, it is clearly problematic to assume existence as being out there whether it is in an essential, natural or socially constructed form.
Equally so is the process of deconstructing everything until we have nothing. However, how can we understand existence that avoids a reliance on some form of solid entity, or abstract notion of social construction or deconstruction? Let us first see how ANT has sought to overcome certain problematic assumptions explored so far within this paper. Through it s "ruthless application of semiotics" Law, b, p. In so doing, this perspective avoids the commonsense assumption that people, tools or machines are natural categories.
Reality has neither a stable nor a definitive status: it is neither out there nor in here , and is formed by associations of heterogeneous materials composed by humans and nonhumans alike bound together. For Latour, "Nothing becomes real to the point of not needing a network in which to upkeep its existence" , p. Certain chains of associations can be more real and enacted as more stable than others Law, However, how do these associations come to exist and in what form? Within this remaining part of this section we will attempt to explore these issues in relation to the ideas of construction and performance.
Generally, to say that something is constructed means that it is "socially constructed", made of "social" stuff - "a kind of fabric to account for the fabrication of facts" Latour, , p. Furthermore, to be constructed is viewed as not real as construction is perceived in opposition to reality Latour, , , This notion of reality is clearly problematic and we need to reconsider our versions of constructed and real in order to make more sense of this process.
For instance, construction can involve many different ingredients, subtle co-ordinations and mobilisations, and continuous associations involving both humans and nonhumans , and what is considered "real" is enacted through such mediations Latour, An advantage of engaging in the research in such a way is that it is possible to focus on the great deal of work and mediation e.
Moreover, according to Latour certain principles often underlie such an analysis. First, the idea that the realities to which humans are attached depend on a series of mediations, and that both mediators and realities are made of heterogeneous mediators that have their own stories.
For instance, how many process, interactions, discussions, elements, etc. Second, the amount of heterogeneous mediators and the number of mediators necessary to sustain realities are a credit to their reality. Often, the more mediated it is, the more real it becomes. Third, our realities are open to differing interpretations that must be considered with caution. Fourth, if a reality extends in space and time, this relies on the extension of its complex life-support systems. Finally, realities require careful maintenance and repair - and some may fail Latour, Those points are related to the idea that the process of construction is never over.
For instance, to exist , a building has to be under a continuous process of being made and remade, done, redone and undone. The same is true of a vaccine. For example, it works through reproducing the laboratory conditions Latour, and engaging alterity. In both examples it is possible to realise the amount of work and activities that have to be carried out in order for assemblages to exist Latour, , as to exist in whatsoever form, assemblages have to be constantly made and remade.
As a consequence, associations are always performed as - "the object of a performative definition vanishes when it is no longer performed" Latour, , p. For many it comes as no surprise that to exist relies on this continual performance and remaking. For example, capitalism is preformed in every corner; to exist it requires a great deal of work, actions and processes to be carried out at every moment, and performing order and control relies on complex systems.
To be constantly performed, deployed, and redone involves a great deal of work and circulations. ANT has therefore sought to highlight the importance of studying how connections are established, how associations are made and unmade, relations between entities, and how assemblages and facts emerge as outcome of such process.
To say that a fact is constructed "means that we account for the solid objective reality by mobilising various entities whose assemblage could fail" Latour, , p. The danger here is to assume that once entities are constructed they can appear as existing out there. Instead of entities existing in an a priori form out there or in here , they need to be viewed as constantly achieved through a complex and constant process of construction. This involves not assuming which kinds of entities are allowed in accounts and the form they take while also taking into account issues of homogeneity and heterogeneity.
For example, what may account for control may be enacted differently through alternative chains of associations. Thus, it is always a matter of empirical investigation to understand events, and each account relies on a detailed examination of certain circumstances in specific settings. By exploring this process of construction and enactment it is possible to examine such aspects without paying the price of fighting against some hidden social forces.
This entails addressing issues of durability, continuity, etc. For example, Law uses the epidemic of foot and mouth disease in the UK to address how exclusions and boundaries are fabricated. In relation to the issues of contamination, strong barriers between affected and non-affected regions were constantly enacted e. Each of them relies on many assemblages bound together that enact such boundaries between those different places , and while animals from disease zones are excluded from disease free places with huge economic consequences to the former, it is important to understand this in relation to these complex chains of associations.
In fact, foot and mouth disease is not the only illness that affects foreign commerce from third world countries. The same happens to soy, oranges and chickens, to name but a few, and many questions are raised concerning the enactment of such boundaries e. There is a need to focus on the controversies relating to groupings, not in a search for some unique truth, but rather to account for the different associations and explanations underlying the production of accounts that help to sustain realities.
Moreover, it is important to highlight the impossibility of having a total view of associations from one place. Moreover, when groups are made to talk , anti-groups are mapped Latour , and his may involve spokespersons e. The production of such accounts feed from group formation disputes and other controversies around what a group is, what it should be, how it must operate, etc.
As a result, scholars, rather than being located above everything else understanding what actors cannot, are located alongside actors in the creation and performance of groups. In this sense, there are always actors at work, justifying the existence of a group and trying to draw its boundaries. However, most of time and in the majority of cases, enactments differ and variations occur even though something may remain which we refer to within such enactments. For instance, the arguments surrounding what is to be critical what is not in MOS, the different positions on the LBT debate, and the discussions concerning post-structuralism and modernists provide examples of controversies around group formation.
There is not a correct account of what is critical in MOS and any definition is open to be question Hassard et al. However, it would be interesting to study the various enactments surrounding CMS. Thus groups are produced and performed by a great deal of work and mediations. This relates to ideas of repetition and differences e.
To examine such a process requires much in-depth empirical investigation e. Thus, achieving stability is something which is both costly and demanding Latour, and relates to many instances of multiplication and difference. For groups, like all things, are performed and have to be done, redone, and undone. This performative stance has the consequence of making the case that groups are performed in many ways to exist, but are never totally done.
- Council Post: 11 Project Management Tips To Keep Your Employees On Track;
- Making Projects Critical.
- Enlightenment is not the Tooth Fairy: Put your ego under your pillow and Wake Up!?
- Work, Organisation and Management (WOM);
In other words, exclusion and boundaries are performed in so many different ways by different and juxtaposed assemblages that overlap one another, constructing certain differences between what is inside and what is outside. Those assemblages are kept, maintained, fabricated, controlled, and negotiated by the continuous performance of process and practices Law, ; Latour, It is clearly problematic to accept that this complex process can be explained by simple standardised notions, or by some hidden social force, which is both the cause and consequence at the same time.
As a result, they cannot be explained by simple cause-effect models that assume dark forces as the main actor in generating exclusions. However, if these forces are not the explanation, who or what is acting? How do we understand these issues of responsibility, accountability and agency?
Rather than relying on the human actor as fully in command, construction within ANT implies that agency is distributed among a plethora of actants over which there is no single control or mastery Latour, Thus, ANT does not regard action as an exclusive feature of humans.
It argues that nonhumans also act in very practical circumstances Latour, For instance, differences exist between zapping TV channels with or without a remote control, travelling with or without a car, producing an academic paper with a PC or a typewriter. To be able to calculate and make choices, Latour argues that we take advantage of measurement instruments and equipment e. Action should therefore be seen as shifted and delegated to different types of actors that have the capacity of transporting it farther, and this transportation involves the presence of humans and non-humans in the same collective.
In other words, action is only possible in collectives. This does not mean that non-humans determine cause or impose actions. Quite the contrary, "things might authorize, allow, afford, encourage, permit, suggest, influence, block, render possible, forbid, and so on" Latour, , p. To neglect the role played by nonhumans in the process of maintaining inequalities, exclusions, domination, etc. Rather than being the source of action, an actor is therefore "the moving target of a vast array of entities swarming towards it" Latour, , p.
The key idea underlining this notion is that one actor is never alone while acting and "action is borrowed, distributed, suggested, influenced, dominated, betrayed, translated" Latour, , p. Action could be seen as overtaken or other-taken …. Furthermore, while agency requires some form of movement, change or transformation, different figurations may be created to account for it, different theories of action used to explain the effects of agencies, and through this process, some may attempt to problematise or disqualify certain agencies.
The question shifts to how to follow the traces and consider these agencies not as matters of fact, but as matters of concern, in order to examine the various modes of fabrication and stabilising mechanisms. The assembling of these many other local interactions which are distributed elsewhere via timings, spacings and actings occurs via diverse sets of relays and chains of associations. For Latour , these localities are not given in the order of things as they rely on articulators or localizers who engage in this continual process of assembling and redistribution.
While localizing enables such dislocated actions to act through indirect associations and circulations, this also produces instances of multiplying in the sense of creating more openings and closings. Accounting for this fabrication process relies on alterative ways of conceptualising such orderings. In particular this relates to an avoidance of centring and an excessive desire for coherence in which stability and multiplicity cannot easily co-exist or overlap. Key to our understanding of such issues relates to our view of interactions, circulations, absences, and entities such as localizers.
For instance, as Latour notes, interactions should not be viewed as isotropic or isochronic, as time and space are always folded, even if they may produce effects of isotropy or isochrony. Secondly comes the issue of visibility and tracing, as few participants may be visible in a course of action at the same time. In other words, interactions are not synoptic, and by viewing everything from one place fails to account for the issue of multiplicity and shifting agencies i. Thus, interactions are not homogeneous and participants may exert different kinds and quantities of pressures i.
Understanding issues of quality, quantity and effects are important aspects to consider. When reflecting on issues of durability and difference it is necessary to avoid relying on a view of space and time as given in the order of things, as spaces and times are also fabricated through this process Jones et al. Latour , p. By gaining an insight into the various interactions and connections including their strength and fragility we can focus on this continual process of fabrication. For instance, Latour describes how, " scale does not depend on absolute size, but on the number and qualities of dispatchers and articulators " Latour, , p.
In other words, we should not assume that one place is bigger than another, and in contrast we should focus on how some are seen as benefiting from safer connections with more places than others Latour, , p. For instance, how does the number and character of the many connections relating to something like Wall Street make it both constructed and real, and more important than other localities Latour, How do we analyse all the work and mediations involved in achieving stability and multiplicity without explaining it away via hidden forces existing behind the scenes or relying on some solid form existing out-there.
The establishment of size, presences and visibility through the traces that the construction work leaves behind plays an active role in creating presences and absences e. However, connections, conduits, tubes that perform size and visibility, that keep things existing through difference and repetition, are not always fully visible. As discussed previously, what is visible in one account may be invisible in others, and accounts can never be total or universal e. Clearly, we need to address this issue of what explains and what has to be explained, the directional forces of social action, how certain practices and entities are seen to travel and extend in space and time while others appear to diminish and fade, and that rather than focusing on homogeneity and durability, we should understand stability and change in terms of difference and otherness.
Through doing this it might be possible to understand better the political aspects that interest CMS scholars e. In this context, the traditional notion of politics may be of little help and may underestimate the difficulty related to doing politics by insisting that the social consists of a few participants, and a rather restrictive a priori list of welcomed members making up the social world. To modify a state of affairs, it is necessary to take into account that forces are made of different ties and it is necessary to render politics important again by tackling the question of assembling with these participants that they have put aside Latour, For any political project, it is necessary to readdress this balance and this involves exploring the different ties associated with the assembling the Collective or the Body Politic Latour, , p.
For Latour, a key target is to analyse the stabilizing mechanisms that prematurely transforms matters of concern into matters of fact, and this includes those that make the deployment of actors visible, and secondly, the procedures that make the unification of the collective into a common world acceptable by those who are unified. This relates to the idea of the shift back from intermediaries to mediators, and a need to focus on the various regimes of enunciation within specific fields of study e. Therefore, in order to retrieve the dynamics and specificity of politics particularly the role in the making of collectives with regards to the fragile and temporary construction of social aggregates , part of the solution for Latour lies in studying regimes of enunciations Latour, This includes the unfolding of mediations peculiar to particular fields of study, such as what is at play when one talks to someone about something in a political way?
While acknowledging that politics, law, art and religion, to name but a few, simultaneously belong to all enunciation regimes, for Latour, it is necessary to suspend this thought in order to focus on particular regimes of talk and manners of speech. In the case of politics, while talking political may be viewed positively, it is often associated with negative connotations, something which slows things down, evades direct action, produces extra factors to consider and labour over, and involves deviations from faithful information and representation Latour, There is a need to abandon the assumption of the guaranteed existence of groups and rather focus on how they are continually formed through re-grasping them, enveloping them in the curve of political talk.
The role of enunciations is key to this process and by separating them we no longer see the point of political talk Latour, , p. For instance, uttered talk does not belong to those who say it, and the identification of origins in terms of which other agents are involved in the process of talk is clearly a political issue. The continuous presence and absence of these others, in the form of the irreducible multiple or their indispensable unification , partly accounts for the slowness and curvature of political talk, but also the ways in which issues of authorship and authority are consubstantial to political ways of talking especially in terms of identifying in the name of whom we are talking Latour, , p.
Consequently, within this paper we have sought to highlight the problems with assuming existence to be out there whether it is in an essential, natural or in socially constructed form , but we also wish to avoid a process of deconstructing everything until we have nothing. When engaging in studies of political aspects, how can we understand existence that does not rely on some form of solid entity, or abstract notion of social construction or deconstruction? The definition of organization provides a good example of highlighting the problem of focusing on outcomes of homogeneity and order.
It is clearly problematic to define an organization in terms of what it is, but how do we understand it in terms of what it is not, and what it can potentially become Jones et al.
Workshops and conferences
Clearly we wish to avoid the exclusion of diversity in terms of what does not become organized, but we also wish to focus on the specific features of such achievements, through a further understanding of issues of repetition and alterity. Is it possible to reconceive these apparently irreconcilable dichotomies within an alternative heuristic. This includes rethinking the object as emerging from a process of attracting diversity, which paradoxically enables it to exist through difference and repetition, and not as a fixed, independent and immutable entity, or one constructed or known merely through multiple interpretations.
Ackroyd, S. Less bourgeois than thou? A critical review of studying management critically. Adler, P. Critical in the name of whom and what?
- Lesson Plans Enchanted April!
- Services on Demand.
- Damian Hodgson | The University of Manchester - uvinigyz.tk.
- Customers who bought this item also bought.
- A Casta (Spanish Edition);
- The Processes of Organization and Management!
Organization, 9 3 , Alvesson, M. Critical management studies. London: Sage. On the idea of emancipation in management and organization studies. Academy of Management Review, 17 3 , Making sense of management. Armstrong, P. Styles of illusion. The Sociological Review, 49 2 , Bijker, W. London: MIT Press. Boje, D. Radicalising organisation studies and the meaning of critique.
Ephemera, 1 3 , Callon, M. Some elements of a sociology of translation - domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of st-brieuc bay. Sociological Review Monograph, 4 2 , Introduction: absence - presence, circulation, and encountering in complex space. Environment and planning d- space and society, 22 1 , Collinson, D. Response - Shop floor. Organization, 9 1 , Czarniawska, B. Gabriel tarde and big city management. Distinktion, 9 , De Laet, M. The zimbabwe bush pump: machines of a fluid technology. Social Studies of Science, 30 2 , Fournier, V.
At the critical moment: conditions and prospects for critical management studies. Human Relations, 53 1 , Gormat, E. A sociology of attachment: music amateurs, drug users. Hassard Coords. Actor Network Theory and After. Oxford: Blackwell. Gramsci, A. Selections from the prison notebooks. New York: International. Grey, C. Critical management studies: towards a more mature politics. International Critical Management Studies Conference.
Cambridge, 4. Hardt, M. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Hassard, J. From labour process to critical management studies. Hetherington, K. The videos are used to provide a dramatic and impactful chaotic, emotive and political illustration of change management, support the playful and creative yet challenging approach to the subject exemplified in the interactive lectures, and provide both a source of entertainment after a long day and a material case study for analysis that takes the students away from their everyday taken-for-granted business experiences.
The Learning Diary is a report by the students on their thoughts, feelings and action-reflections that occurred during the course delivery. The aim of the Learning Diary is to provide them with an active learning process that encourages reflection on the overall lessons of the course, individual learnings and their overall learning-journey. While the internet simulation, dramatic re-enactments and Jamie Oliver case study take the students away from their everyday work experiences, the action project applies the learning back within their immediate work and sometimes personal environment.
The students are strongly encouraged to write up their Learning Diaries, particularly their overall reflection on the course, as well as their Group Reflections as a creative piece of work. They are encouraged to submit their overall interpretations and key themes in the form of images, narratives, music, sculptures, dramatised performances, artwork and games. This has three main purposes: firstly, to provide them with the opportunity to exercise the kind of artistry and creativity necessary to ensure resonant and effective leadership and change performances Alexander, ; Grint, ; secondly, to represent, in the evaluation process, the focus on the below the waterline issues of identity, culture, emotion and politics that the course affirms are central components of organisational change and its management; and, thirdly, to assist students in getting out of their heads , and respond in an emotive, bodily and situated way to the learnings they have obtained and how they might employ them.
In an important sense, the above is a view of the framework and its delivery from the viewpoint of the author and the actor, not the audience. While course evaluations average 4. While it is not possible to separate the effects of the framework from its specific delivery, and the impact of the lecturer, an analysis of the learning diaries does provide an insight into the span of interpretations - ranging from a traditional thin view of rationality and weak view of drama and performance, to thick views of rationality and a strong view of performance. What follows are perceptions and interpretations drawn from a random selection of 47 learning diaries 20 female, 27 male from two deliveries of the MBA course in a 12 month period.
These were mostly middle-managers with work experience, many with an engineering or information technology degree. They are provided here in order to capture the ways in which the framework, and its meaning, were understood and variably interpreted by different members of the class. On the one hand, these comments provide a practical lay interpretation and insight into the meaning of the framework.
On the other hand, they reveal how such a framework may be variably interpreted by different groups, as they are more or less surprised by and open to the more radical thick rationality and strong performance dimensions of the framework. An illustration of such interpretations is provided in the summary of extracted quotes from the learning diaries in Table 2.
Source:Darief, T. Verfremdung in management education: initiating critical reflection Doctoral dissertation. Nearly all of the students expressed some degree of shock and criticism of the open and flexible format of the course, and the lack of focus on the provision of methods and tools for managing change. As one student remarked "I have found it easy and natural to be logical and rational", with many reflecting after the course that, as one other student observed, "There is an emotional journey in managing change, that implies reflection and even some discomfort".
For those more strongly focused on the acquisition of tools and techniques, a key focus was on the acquisition of mapping techniques and an acquired knowledge of the importance of impression management techniques, such as the need for "adapting to a communication style appreciated by the audience rather than displaying the emotions". For many, there was a recognition from thee performances they were required to give, that there is "a lot of work in the group around the content, structuring, props and so on", observing that it became "clear how different body language, tone, confidence, pausing, and expression can impact a discussion.
For many, such insights were more a reinforcement of what they, at least tacitly already know, making comments such as "It confirmed In this sense, the framework achieved resonance less through disruption and shock, and more with confirming and elaborating prior expectations and understandings, while moving students into a thicker view of rationality and a greater recognition of performativity, even though often in a weak form. For others, however, the effect was seen to be more disruptive. As one student remarked "I have to unfreeze my way of thinking and learn to appreciate this new way of learning".
Students adopting either perspectives commented on the importance of moving beyond the view of having a "template to memorise and apply in every single situation", and "to look deeper into the situation and ensure that I have considered as many elements as I can identify". Many affirmed that "the process and the emotions you go through are the same", as you have to mobilize energy, resources and people for a recognisably unpredictable change journey.
The tools of mapping journeys were understood not as a rigid project plan but as a looser set of means for guiding and reflecting on change; i. Further these maps will allow for reflection and a chance to discuss whether there should be a change in direction in the near future". Wearing masks was considered "vitally important" for the delivery of an effective change performance, and the effective use of mirrors regarded as a key to improving that performance, observing that "Taking a good hard look at myself, I can see that I have certain habits that I need to navigate away from or change".
Within the 47 students whose learning diaries were surveyed, the smallest group 10 showed partial progress mainly from a thin to a thick view of rationality and change; the second largest group 13 showed a significant degree of movement from a thin to a thick view, as well as incorporating elements of the weak understanding of change as drama and performance; while the largest group 24 showed evidence of having progressed from thin to thick views of rationality and change, as well as elements of both weak and strong views of change as drama and performance.
These responses to the course cannot be attributed solely to the framework. They do, however, indicate a degree of cultural resonance with the 5M framework amongst experienced mature middle managers. This is revealed in the amount of recognition given to complex and critical views of knowledge and rationality, and the performative nature of organisational life. As captured in Amanda Sinclair's description of Teaching Leadership Critically to MBAs: Experiences from Heaven and Hell, there are substantial risks in trying to teach leadership and change critically to experienced managers.
Initial experiences of anxiety, strangeness and political suspicion can lead to responses ranging from grudging resentment to active resistance and opposition. The 5M framework seeks to address this situation by unfreezing managerialist biases through an appeal to experiences of the pragmatic irrationalities and challenges of managerial life, as well as the implicit, and often explicit, recognition of the centrality of impression management, storytelling and stagecraft. Rather than focusing on authoritatively educating students on the controversial ethics of leadership, or the objective workings of power, it initiates a dialogue on the personal meaning of organisational life and career in the face of experiences of organisational irrationality and theatricality.
The positive response of the students, accompanied by their varying levels of effective translation of the framework, indicates that the 5M approach has the capacity to engage managers in a process that both encourages reflection and provides them with pragmatic assistance in managing change. A realist form of critical management may question whether such an approach gives sufficient recognition to the centrality of domination and control in managerial life.
In narrower terms, however, the 5M framework incorporates issues of power and domination through the focus on the Mobilisation of energy, the Mapping of political forces of change, and the deployment of Masks that can only be made to appear authentic and achieve resonance if they are not perceived as tools of power. This is achieved through affirmation, care, pragmatism, engagement with potentialities, and a normative orientation". The 5M framework is offered as a practical working example of such an intervention. Further research might follow up on a number of key themes, issues and questions raised by this study.
Firstly, it would be desirable to capture and assess the impact of other frameworks deployed to communicate a non-traditional view of change management to practicing managers. It is hoped that this study will stimulate others to undertake a similar kind of assessment. Secondly, further research is required on the reason for different student responses to such rhetorical frameworks.
In this study, no differences were found in the age, gender or demographic character of the different groups, but further exploration of individual personality and professional and institutional location would be highly advantageous. Thirdly, and finally, the framework has employed general criteria of thin and thick rationality, and weak and strong views of drama and performance in organisations, to describe the framework and assess the responses.
Further development and operationalisation of these criteria, and the use of these to further refine the rhetorical framework as well as guide a more structured exploration of its impact, would be extremely valuable. Alexander, J. Cultural pragmatics: social performance between ritual and strategy. Sociological Theory, 22 4 : doi: The strong program in cultural sociology: elements of a structural hermeneutics.
Alexander Ed. New York: Oxford University Press. Argyris, C. Organizational traps: leadership, culture, organizational design. Ariely, D. Predictably irrational: the hidden forces that shape our destiny. New York: HarperCollins. Badham, R. Performing change: a dramaturgical approach to the practice of managing change.
Boje, B. Hassard Eds. London and New York: Routledge.
Critical management studies: some reflections
Beckhard, R. Organization development: strategies and models. Bennis, W. Organization development: its nature, origins and prospects. Boal, A. Theater of the oppressed. New York: Theatre Communications Group.
Brock, B. Dramatism as ontology or epistemology: a symposium. Communication Quarterly, 33 1 : doi: Bruch, H. Fully charged: how great leaders boost their organizations energy and ignite high performance. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Buchanan, D. The expertise of the change agent: public performance and backstage activity. New York: Prentice Hall. Power, politics and organizational change: winning the turf game.
London: Sage. Burke, K. A grammar of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press. Attitudes toward history. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Clark, T. From dramaturgy to theatre as technology: the case of corporate theatre. Journal of Management Studies, 41 1 : doi: Collins, D. Organizational change: sociological perspectives.
London: Routledge. Czarniawska-Joerges, B. Narrating the organization: dramas of institutional identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Darief, T. Dawson, P. Understanding organisational change. Edgley, C.
The dramaturgical genre. Herman-Skinney Eds. Foss, N. From thin to thick bounded rationality in the economics of organization: an explorative discussion [WP ]. Freire, P. Pedagogia do oprimido 17th ed. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra. Fuda, P. Fire, snowball, mask, movie: how leaders spark and sustain change. Harvard Business Review, 89 11 : Geertz, C.
The interpretation of cultures: selected essays. New York: Basic Books. Goffman, E. The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor Books. Grint, K. The arts of leadership. Harre, R. The explanation of social behaviour. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield. Hendry, C.
- IT Essentials: PC Hardware and Software Companion Guide.
- Vagabond Swords.
- Der Aufstieg des Faschismus und autoritärer Regime in Europa in der Zwischenkriegszeit (German Edition).
- Special offers and product promotions;
Understanding and creating whole organizational change through learning theory. Human Relations, 49 5 : doi: Heracleous, L. Organizational change as discourse: communicative actions and deep structures in the context of information technology implementation. The Academy of Management Journal, 44 4 :, doi: Jabri, M.
Managing organizational change: process, construction and dialogue. Kanter, R. Strategy as improvisational theater. The scripted organization: dramaturgy from Burke to Baudrillard. Linstead Eds. Kotzee, B. Introduction: a thicker epistemology?. Philosophical Papers, 37 3 : doi: Langer, E.
Cambridge: Da Capo Press. Lanham, R. The electronic word. Long, M. Derrida and a theory of irony: parabasis and parataxis Doctoral dissertation. Durham University, United Kingdom. Mangham, I. A Dramatism and the theatrical metaphor. Morgan Ed. Beverly Hills: Sage. Organization as theatre: a social psychology of dramatic appearances. The doing of managing. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
March, J. Footnotes to organizational change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26 4 : doi: A primer on decision making: how decisions happen. New York: Free Press. Organizing political life: what administrative reorganization tells us about government. American Political Science Review, 77 2 : McCloskey, D. Knowledge and persuasion in economics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Meyer, J.