This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent

Subjectivity and power are important concepts for understanding corporate culture engineering in critical organization studies. Although recent research indicates that many workers do identify with the organization as a result of these management strategies, they have also shown that some workers resist through dis-identification, in particular cynicism. Managerialist literature views cynicism as a psychological defect that needs to be `corrected', while a radical humanist approach constructs cynicism as a defence mechanism, a way of blocking the colonization of a pre-given self. We highlight a third and increasingly dominant perspective that suggests cynicism is a process through which employees dis-identify with cultural prescriptions, yet often still perform them. Cynical employees have the impression that they are autonomous, but they still practice the corporate rituals nonetheless. We label this the `ideology' interpretation because in dis-identifying with power, it is inadvertently reproduced at the same time. We argue that this approach to cynicism raises significant implications for key concepts in organization studies: those of power, subjectivity and resistance. The implications we pursue are that cultural power may work through dis-identification (rather than just identification), subjectivity may be radically `external' (rather than something `within') and thus what counts as disruptive resistance must be re-evaluated.

This paper presents an integrated framework for studying organizational spaces. It suggests that existing research can be classed into three categories: studies of space as distance; studies of space as the materialization of power relations; and studies of space as experience. These approaches are drawn together using Henri Lefebvre's theory of spatial production to argue that an adequate understanding of organizational spaces would investigate how they are practised, planned and imagined. Moreover, an adequate theory of space would account for multiple spatial levels, or scales. To illustrate the potential of the synthetic framework, a reading of three exemplary studies of multiple organizational spaces, from social anthropology and economic geography, is presented. The paper concludes by presenting a research agenda that indicates how data collection and analysis in established fields such as employee relations and international business might become more 'space sensitive' by integrating such theorized cross-scale analysis.

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link:

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link