Metaphorical and Interlingual Translation in Moving Organizational Practices Across Languages

Abstract

Organizational scholars refer to translation as a metaphor in order to describe the transformation and movement of organizational practices across institutional contexts. However, they have paid relatively little attention to the challenges of moving organizational practices across language boundaries. In this conceptual paper, we theorize that when organizational practices move across contexts that differ not only in terms of institutions and cultures but also in terms of languages, translation becomes more than a metaphor; it turns into reverbalization of meaning in another language. We argue that the meeting of languages opens up a whole new arena for translator agency to unfold. Interlingual and metaphorical translation are two distinct but interrelated forms of translation that are mutually constitutive. We identify possible constellations between interlingual and metaphorical translation and illustrate agentic translation with published case examples. We also propose that interlingual translation is a key resource in the discursive constitution of multilingual organizations. This paper contributes to the stream of research in organization studies that has made translation a core aspect of its inquiry.

“Trust But Verify”: How middle managers in a multinational use proverbs to translate an imported management concept

“…In this study, we brought together the interlingual with the discursive elements of translation to emphasise the interlingual transformation of an imported management concept as it travelled across languages. In so doing, we join recent research in organisation studies that has argued for expanding the definition of translation to encompass translation work undertaken in multilingual organisations (Ciuk et al, 2019;Piekkari et al, 2019;Westney & Piekkari, 2020).…”

The Impact of Japanese Labels on the Perceived Relevance of Lean Production Practices in a Russian Bank

“…To date, however, most translation research has focused on the complex work that goes into establishing the local meaning of a transferred practice, along with a definition well-understood by the local audience. Although the labeling of the various elements of a practice with original words or translated words is also an implicit part of the practice translation work, it has only received limited attention in the organizational translation literature (e.g., Piekkari et al, 2019;Tietze et al, 2017). Moreover, two basic questions have not been investigated until now: Does the choice of label (a transliterated original name versus a translated local name) affect the outcome of the translation, that is, the likelihood that organizational members find the practice relevant and use it?…”

“…The extent to which a practice presented under a foreign label is likely to result in a lower perceived value compared to the situation in which the same practice is presented under a domesticated label might depend on the degree to which the foreign label fits with or disrupts the socio-cultural and linguistic codes of the destination language (Venuti, 2008). That an original word or phrase might not fit another linguistic context is not a new hypothesis in translation research; yet, despite its relevance, there are few transnational organizational translation studies that examine it (Brannen, 2004;Piekkari et al, 2019;Schomaker & Zaheer, 2014). Brannen (2004) developed the concept of semantic fit for understanding successful and unsuccessful international transfers of business artifacts such as products, brands, or management practices.…”

“…One of the most serious concerns that organizations have when transferring these practices is whether their employees will find them relevant and, as such, adopt them in their work. To better capture the multiple challenges related to the transnational movement and adoption of management practices, researchers have increasingly used the concept of translation, defined as the modification that a practice undergoes when transferred into a new context (Boxenbaum & Pedersen, 2009), with a particular emphasis on the various transformations and adaptations aimed at improving the fit with local socio-cultural and linguistic contexts (Brannen, 2004;Piekkari, Tietze, & Koskinen, 2019;Welch & Welch, 2008;Westney & Piekkari, 2019).…”

“…Explicit in this conceptualization of translation is the understanding that when management practices move across national contexts, they cross not only socio-cultural but also linguistic boundaries (Brannen, Piekkari, & Tietze, 2014;Piekkari et al, 2019;Rovik, 2016;Schomaker & Zaheer, 2014;Tenzer, Terjesen, & Harzing, 2017) and that each crossing presents some specific challenges. Despite the growing recognition that linguistic differences pose distinct challenges to the transnational movement of practices, translation research has paid little attention to these challenges, leaving us with a lack of understanding of the complex processes around the re-verbalization in a new language of the original definitions and terminologies attached to a practice (Piekkari et al, 2019).…”