International Management, Should We Abandon the Myth of Cultural Hybridity? A Re-examination of the Contribution of Postcolonial and Decolonial Approaches

Abstract

The postcolonial and decolonial approaches open the way for a rich analysis of the material and cultural conditions in which international management operates, is spread, interpreted, and implemented. They also offer food for thought on the possibilities, tensions, and resistance associated with reinventing alternative organizations more respectful of the dignity of all, while still providing knowledge that is socially and politically useful for oppressed and marginalized groups. Nevertheless, and despite their undeniable contribution to the theoretical development of critical approaches in international management, these perspectives are faced with challenges and difficulties in both intellectual and empirical terms. In this article, I suggest a series of ways forward, which might allow for the renewal of the critical fruitfulness of this intellectual and political project, crucial to face the contemporary challenges of international management.

An emic-etic-emic research cycle for understanding context in under-researched countries

“…Finally, the emic-etic-emic cycle approach contributes to decolonial approaches to management which call for the liberation from economic and knowledge domination from the West (Nkomo, 2015). Decolonial approaches in international management view globalization with the domination of the American model as a colonization of knowledge and an indication of what is considered good management (Youfi, 2021). International management theorists (e.g., Alcadipani and Faria, 2014; Alcadipani et al, 2012; Ibarra-Colado et al, 2006) have condemned the hegemony of American managerial literature, which views the American management knowledge as the only means to improve the economies of the Global South and increase the productivity of local businesses.…”

Decolonising management and organisational knowledge (MOK): Praxistical theorising for potential worlds

“…The genesis of postcolonial theory (specifically the Holy Trinity of Said, Bhabha, Spivak) in departments of comparative literature located in the Global North prioritised textual criticism and colonial discourse as objects of inquiry. As such, postcolonial theory may be considered limited in furthering a more praxistical decolonising agenda due to its Eurocentric theoretical language and limited action-orientation that creates boundaries separating predominantly Westernised university scholars and co-existing 'others' (Yousfi, 2021). Postcolonialism is sometimes also characterised by assumptions that critique or critical MOS (as much as its mainstream foil) is universal, rather than reflective of a particular location.…”

Decolonizing Arab organizational Knowledge: “Fahlawa” as a Research Practice

“…This absence can be explained by not only the ethnocentrism of the assessment frameworks used by the dominant Western journals in the management field but also by the lack of financial means crucial for knowledge production and dissemination in Arab countries. Consequently, it is not surprising to observe that decolonial/postcolonial perspectives in management have flourished in Brazil, India, and South Africa, relatively more powerful economically and politically (Yousfi, 2020b).…”

“…The central question raised in the postcolonial and decolonial school of thought becomes: How can one recognize cultural roots while avoiding essentialism; and, how can one take into account the cultural mélange/mixture, without imposing colonial categories when considering various ways of organizing and working and different trajectories to construct an identity in the countries of the South? (Yousfi, 2020b;Islam, 2012;Nkomo, 2011).…”