Governmentality Matters: Designing an Alliance Culture of Inter-Organizational Collaboration for Managing Projects

Clegg, Stewart; Pitsis, Tyrone S.; Rura‐Polley, Thekla; Marosszeky, Marton

doi:10.1177/0170840602233001

Cited by 286 publications

(213 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

208

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…She suggests that employees who feel precarious are more likely to feel the need to internalize this discourse in order to appear favorable to superiors. Similar results have been noted in relation to the way management accounting systems (Ezzamel and Willmott, 1998), project management (Hodgson, 2002;Clegg et al 2002), diversity (Zanoni and Janssens ( 2004), strategy (Knights and Morgan, 1991;Laine and Vaara, 2007) and billable hours (Brown and Lewis, 2010) can exert a discursive pressures that subjectify subordinates in this manner.…”

Section: Subjectification 'In' Organizationssupporting

confidence: 60%

Power in Management and Organization Science

Fleming

Spicer

2014

ANNALS

285

258

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent AbstractThis paper reviews and evaluates the concept of power in management and organization science. In order to organize the extant literature on this topic, we develop a framework that identifies four faces of power (i.e., coercion, manipulation, domination and subjectification) and four sites of power (i.e., power enacted 'in', 'through', 'over' and 'against' organizations). This allows us to evaluate assumptions both shared and contested in the field. Building on the review, the paper then points to potentially novel areas of research that may extend our understandings of organizational power in management and organization science.

show abstract

Section: Subjectification 'In' Organizationssupporting

confidence: 60%

Power in Management and Organization Science

Fleming

Spicer

2014

ANNALS

285

258

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Power also may be less explicitly articulated through the role of surveillance (Lukes, 2005;Clegg et al, 2002). The breakdown of relationships and the build-up of distrust is indentified in the cases, often in relation to competition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Innovation

2012

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is much rhetoric concerning the need for collaboration and partnership both from policy makers and those within the sector who see the social enterprise model as being more collaborative than the private sector. However, there is limited understanding of the processes by which trust is built up and maintained in these contexts. The chapter examines the relationships between commissioners and providers, users/beneficiaries/ customers (vertical relationships) and relationships between providers (horizontal relationships). The chapter will go beyond assumptions concerning how organisations are expected to behave, and will examine the economic and social institutional contexts in which their actions are embedded. In particular attention will be given to how organisations build relationships in 'quasi markets' and in an environment of emerging competition for the delivery of public services. These issues are explored by looking at the case of self employment support provision in the UK.

show abstract

“…Indeed, there is strong evidence from 'traditional' private sector organizations that the achievement of a practical collective consciousness has been seen as problematic; it is even more so under newer forms of organizational design where there is no unitary centre of control (Clegg et al 2002). Weitzenboeck (2001) reported that in one commercial sector, the maritime industry, participants in virtual organizations initially saw their working relationship in terms of trust and shared purpose; however, in practice they faced difficulty building trust and recognised a need for legal frameworks to regulate their activities.…”

Section: Children's' Trusts: a Public Sector Virtual Organization?mentioning

confidence: 99%