Managing, managerial control and managerial identity in the post‐bureaucratic world

McKenna, Steve; Garcia‐Lorenzo, Lucia; Bridgman, Todd

doi:10.1108/02621711011019260

Cited by 25 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Contemporary corporations seem to mirror this weak version of Orwell's dystopian fantasy, particularly through 'soft' forms of control, where "autonomy" is defined "as obedience to the core values of corporate culture" (Willmott 1993, p. 527). Particularly in fluid post-bureaucratic contexts (Josserand, Teo, & Clegg 2006;McKenna, Garcia-Lorenzo, & Bridgman 2010) reliant on trustworthiness built on professional values and identity regulation (Grey & Garsten 2001), doublethink emerges to control the "autonomous educated worker able and willing to program and decide entire sequences of work" (Castells 2009, p. 257).…”

Section: -152)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dark Side of Organizational Paradoxes: The Dynamics of Disempowerment

Berti

Simpson

2021

AMR

124

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The idea that interdependent and persistent tensions are intrinsic to organizing is now well accepted. Organizational paradox theory has further stressed the importance of accepting such paradoxes, to convert them into generative forces. However, this recommendation assumes actors have full agency in responding to paradoxes and, therefore, overlooks the role of power dynamics. We expand on paradox theory by drawing attention to organizational pragmatic paradoxes: contradictory demands received within the context of an intense managerial relationship, such as when a subordinate is ordered to 'take initiative'. Our model highlights how organizational pragmatic paradoxes derive from power relations restricting actors' capacities for enacting legitimate responses to tensions. Specifically, we link different organizational power dimensions to various manifestations of pragmatic paradoxes. We further outline concrete actions for mitigating the occurrence of these pathological phenomena. Our conceptualization contributes to a critical reading of paradox theory that is sensitive to power inequalities. The capacity to manage paradoxical tensions-for example, exploitation and exploration, or competition and collaboration-has been described as the "ultimate advantage and challenge for organizations" (Andriopoulos & Lewis 2009, p. 709). Organizational paradox literature (see Putnam, Fairhurst, & Banghart 2016; Schad, Lewis, Raisch, & Smith 2016 for reviews) has demonstrated that paradoxes, defined as "persistent contradictions between interdependent elements" (Schad et al. 2016, p. 10), are an unavoidable consequence of organizing (Lewis 2000; Smith & Lewis 2011). The conceptual core of the theory, summarized in the "dynamic equilibrium model of organizing" formulated by Smith and Lewis (2011, p. 389), maintains that acknowledging the interconnectedness of opposite poles can promote organizational learning and transformation (Chen 2002; Farjoun 2010; Miron-Spektor, Gino, & Argote 2011). Challenging the assumption that organization is synonymous with order and linearity, paradox theory highlights the dynamic, complex nature of organizing (Lewis & Smith 2014). Despite the success of paradox theory, demonstrated by the growing number of publications it inspires (Fairhurst et al. 2016), preserving the vitality of this theory requires challenging its assumptions (Cunha & Putnam 2019; Schad, Lewis, & Smith 2019). In this paper, we focus on two of its limitations. First, we question the presupposition that individuals are free and able to choose how to engage with paradoxical tensions. Actors faced with organizational paradoxes have been observed to respond in various ways (Jarzabkowski & Lê 2017), with those who accept tensions demonstrating enhanced performance and innovation (Miron-Spektor, Ingram, Keller, Smith, & Lewis 2018). Therefore, accepting, rather than denying, the existence of paradoxes is believed essential in achieving sustainable outcomes (Smith & Lewis 2011). However, this view ignores the observation that, sometim...

show abstract

Section: -152)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dark Side of Organizational Paradoxes: The Dynamics of Disempowerment

Berti

Simpson

2021

AMR

124

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More recently, however, the argument that views compassion as inefficient has been reversed, with strategic compassion being justified on the basis of economic rationality as a contributor to company performance, productivity and profitability (Benioff & Southwick, 2004;Peters, 1986;Fryer, 2013;Kavan, 2005). It is particularly within the context of post-bureaucratic era (Josserand, Teo & Clegg, 2006;McKenna, Garcia-Lorenzo & Bridgman, 2010), where organizations rely on skilled knowledge workers contributing intangible creative, innovative and informational expertise, rather than manual labour in manufacturing work, that organizational compassion has seen a growth in prominence (Peters, 1986;Simpson, Clegg & Pitsis, 2014a).…”

Section: Competing Conceptualisations Of Compassionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selfless and strategic, interpersonal and institutional: a continuum of paradoxical organizational compassion dimensions

Araújo

Simpson

Marujo

et al. 2019

Journal of Political Power

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We asked 32 professionals what organizational compassion is to them. Analysis of the responses revealed four conflicting, if not paradoxical, dimensions. With insight from Habermas' theory of 'communicative action', we paired these dimensions as two lifeworld/system couples: (1) selfless compassion (lifeworld) and strategic compassion (system), as well as (2) interpersonal compassion (lifeworld) and institutional compassion (system). While the colonisation of the lifeworld by system dimensions is a legitimate Habermasian concern, our analysis highlights the potential for system to magnify the power of compassion beyond lifeworld contexts, leveraging and transcending lifeworld/system tensions, aided by dialogue as 'communicative action'. Keywords Compassion, organization, organizational behaviour, Habermas harmonised. We accordingly turn to Habermas's theory of 'communicative action' as an analytical lens. Scholars such as Cooper and Burrell (1988) and Burrell (1994) describe Habermas' (1987) project of synthesising philosophy and empirical social science as invaluable to organizational theorists needing to defend and transcend the dual competing objectives of modern performativity with post-modern emancipation, the latter described managerially as "freeing employees from unnecessarily alienating forms of work organization" (Alvesson & Willmot, 1992, p. 433). Scherer and Palazzo (2007, p. 1097) similarly describe Habermas' project as an approach "in which both forms of coordination-ethical discourse and economic bargaining-are taken into account". We analyse our findings with insight from an adaptation of Habermas' (1987) theory of 'communicative action', which sees dialogue as the ultimate expression of human potential and as a means of transcending competing tensions (Habermas, 1996). We structure the paper as follows. We initially review the literature, considering current and past theorising, revealing organizational compassion as a highly contested topic involving competing views: as both an individual virtue as well as a strategic institutional practice, as both irrational and rational, as feminine and masculine, and as having both internal and external targets. We also justify our adaptation and use of Habermas' theory of coordinated communication as our analytical lens and follow up by describing our methodology and analytical frame. In our discussion, we consider possibilities for navigating apparent contradictions in various conceptualisations of organizational compassion through an ongoing Habermasian process of dialogue and coordinated action, where apparent contradictions are reframed as potentially complementary, synergistic and energising. Our paper contributes to the organizational compassion literature by providing broader theorising of organizational compassion, problematizing assumed oppositions and suggesting means for integrating and transcending them.

show abstract

“…It is argued that management is not a fixed state of putative skills but context sensitive and an ongoing process of becoming a manager (McKenna et al . ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%