No abstract

The paper introduces the current debate in the human sciences between the opposing conceptual positions of 'modernism' and 'postmodernism' and discusses its implications for organizational analysis. The debate focusses on the nature of 'discourse' (information, knowledge, communication) and its role in social systems. The discourse of modernism rests on transcendent yet anthropocentric criteria such as 'progress' and 'reason' which are varyingly exemplified in the work of Bell, Luhmann and Habermas. In contrast, postmodern discourse (represented here mainly by the work of Lyotard, Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze and Guattari) analyzes social life in terms of paradox and indeterminacy, thus rejecting the human agent as the centre of rational control and understanding. The paper then considers two contrasting views of the organizing process which follow from these opposing approaches to discourse. In the modernist model, organization is viewed as a social tool and an extension of human rationality. In the postmodern view, organization is less the expression of planned thought and calculative action and a more defensive reaction to forces intrinsic to the social body which constantly threaten the stability of organized life. The implications of the latter view for orthodox organizational analysis are discussed in some detail.

The focus of the paper is on the process of organizational desexualization which has taken place over a long historical period and upon the resistance which this process has engendered amongst organizational subordinates. The eradication of the high level of sexual activity which took place in pre-industrial organizations was sought by those in positions of authority and the paper considers the variety of mechanisms which were developed to attain this expulsion. These mechanisms are well entrenched in contemporary organizations, yet have met with considerable resistance from lower-order organizational members. The paper considers certain forms of resistance in this light in an attempt to suggest a dialectical approach to sexuality. It is concluded that the issue of sex is one which organizational analysis has avoided for too long.

This paper, the second in a series on the relevance of the modernist-postmodernist debate to organizational analysis, looks at the work of the late Michel Foucault. Whilst his work is seen as producing a whole series of problems for those brought up in an Anglo-American tradition of intellectual endeavour, it is maintained that his work is suggestive of alternative ways of approaching problems and ordering material. A three fold periodization of his work is suggested beginning with the 'archeaological' period, then attention is paid to the 'genealogical' period and finally, though less fixed and discernible, his concern for ethics is noted. Ideas and concepts drawn from all but the very last of his writings are then utilized in ways which might allow for a significant reordering in the theory of organizations, particularly in the debate concerning organizational heterogeneity versus homogeneity, the importance of 'total institutions', organizational control of sexuality and the role of new technologies in organizational control systems.