Reconceptualising vulnerability and its value for managerial identity and learning

Abstract

Dominant, masculinised constructions of managerial identities are associated with expectations of being in control and strong, and not with vulnerability. Managers may conceal vulnerability and protect themselves through defensive identity work, and such responses may close down learning opportunities. We reconceptualise vulnerability and recognise its value for managerial identity and learning by drawing upon Butler’s theory of vulnerability. Analysing interviews with middle and senior managers and presenting our own reflexive learning, we address a lack of empirical accounts of managerial vulnerability. We offer three processes of relational vulnerability: (1) recognising and claiming vulnerability, (2) developing social support to share vulnerability with trusted others, and (3) recognising alternative ways of conceptualising and responding to vulnerability. Rather than defensiveness in the face of vulnerability constructed as weakness, the value of vulnerability lies in its openness and its generative capacity for alternative ways of managerial being and learning.

Learning (not) to be different: The value of vulnerability in trusted and safe identity work spaces

“…New understandings are offered about how, in the ALSS, senior executives learn to become comfortable with being uncomfortable, are able to drop the mask of invulnerability, claim difference as part of their self-repertoire and can choose how and when to be different or not. The research therefore extends consciousness to the value of vulnerability for leader and manager identity and learning (Corlett et al, 2019;Hay, 2014).…”

“…Scholarship is beginning to appreciate the importance of emotion (Hay, 2014;Tomkins and Ulus, 2016) as an integral part of being human and, rather than seeing emotions as 'taboo' and too messy to deal with (Tomkins and Ulus, 2016: 168), to explicitly recognise them in learning processes. Theoretical recognition of the role of vulnerability for managerial learning and identity work is burgeoning (Corlett et al, 2019;Hay, 2014;Warhurst, 2011) and, for us, 'vulnerability is the core of all emotions and feelings. To feel is to be vulnerable' (Brown, 2012: 33).…”

“…vulnerability' (p. 521). Nevertheless, dominant managerial discourse constructs vulnerability as weakness (Corlett et al, 2019;Hay, 2014) and encourages leaders and managers to deny or hide it. Expressing emotions, and particularly vulnerability, can be risky and place leaders in a greater vulnerable position (Raelin and Raelin, 2011).…”

“…Notwithstanding the growing interest in vulnerability and managerial learning, the processes which may support claims of vulnerability remain underexplored. We respond to Corlett, Mavin and Beech's (2019) call to conduct studies in non-research contexts, such as action learning sets, to theorise the implications of recognising and claiming vulnerability for identity work and managerial and leadership learning. A starting point is to recognise that dominant masculinised leadership and managerial discourses shape constructions of leader, leadership, manager and management (Hay, 2014;Watson, 2008).…”

Meaning in Mentoring: More Than Meets the Eye/“I”

“…Making sense of the self is a key element of all types of identity-work (Corlett & Mavin, n.d.), and mentoring interactions have been found to be invaluable identity-workspaces for such meaning-making (Muir, 2014). Identity-work for developing self-understanding is particularly needed in just those situations where mentoring is most likely to occur, such as when a protégé is in a new or evolving situation and is, therefore, likely to have suffered a loss of meaning.…”