Reflecting on Reflexivity: Reflexive Textual Practices in Organization and Management Theory

Abstract

This paper identifies four sets of textual practices that researchers in the field of organization and management theory (OMT) have used in their attempts to be reflexive. We characterize them as multi-perspective, multi-voicing, positioning and destabilizing. We show how each set of practices can help to produce reflexive research, but also how each embodies limitations and paradoxes. Finally, we consider the interplay among these sets of practices to develop ideas for new avenues for reflexive practice by OMT researchers.

A critical argument in favor of theoretical pluralism: Project failure and the many and varied limitations of project management

“…By contrast, for many aligned with CMS, the position on the theoretical fence appears full of splinters: by adjudicating amongst distinct theoretical approaches, authors construct a specious meta-theoretical view (see e.g. Mingers and Brocklesby, 1997) to claim underlying truths (Alvesson et al 2008;Cox and Hassard, 2005;Parker and McHugh, 1991;Tadajewski, 2009), aid functionalist-positivist assimilation and orthodoxy (Burrell and Morgan, 1979;Jackson and Carter, 1991) or deny the politics and ethics of theory selection (Alvesson et al 2008;Deetz, 1996;Tadajewski, 2009). …”

“…Since Burrell and Morgan's (1979) Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis, theoretical pluralism as a research methodology has been criticized for inhibiting the potential for reflexive, non-performative, non-essentialist studies of management and organization (Alvesson et al 2008;Deetz, 1996;Jackson and Carter, 1991;Parker and McHugh, 1991;Tadajewski, 2009). As a result, despite the general acceptance of the plurality of managerial rationalities (Hotho and Pollard, 2007), the plurality of modes of organization (Morgan, 1997), and the plurality of global politics (Dussell and Labarra-Collado, 2006), critical, but theoretically pluralistic work has been rare, either as an empirical (Hassard, 1991) or review-based (Davila and Oyon, 2007) contribution.…”

Organizational and Individual Determinants of Evidence Use by Managers in Public Human Service Organizations

“…Practitioners described using internal and external sources of evidence to gain new knowledge for serving clients and to identify strategies to enhance agency performance. Other scholarship has described the importance of managers using diverse types of evidence to navigate complex human service settings in a reflective manner (Alvesson et al, 2008). Our study provides the first assessment of the extent to which human service managers use evidence for these different purposes.…”

“…The ability to adapt to changing organizational circumstances is a central aspect of evidence-informed practice in complex human service contexts. Individuals who show a willingness to respond to changing practice settings may be more likely to demonstrate reflexivity, which Taylor and White (2006) defined as the ability to engage in critical self-analysis and which they and others have deemed essential for managerial excellence (Alvesson, Hardy, & Harley, 2008;Schon, 1983). Practitioners who are responsive to change may also have the agency and autonomy to act strategically (Patterson et al, 2009;Sosin, 2010).…”

Subjectivity in psychological science: From problem to prospect.

“…In order to disrupt simplistic and self-serving uses of reflexivity, some researchers have been moved to explore alternative forms of writing (e.g., poetry or dramatic dialogue) to demonstrate multiple interpretations of a phenomenon (see e.g., Ashmore, 1989;MacMillan, 2003;Richardson, 1992). These creative forms of reflexivity have been, in turn, critiqued as indulgent and narcissistic, straying too far from the topic in question and into "navel-gazing" territory (see Alvesson, Hardy, & Harley, 2008;Gough, 2003a). Ultimately, the manner in which reflexivity is defined and practiced will depend on theoretical and, possibly, ideological predilection, but the common goal of reflexive analysis is to help contextualize and illuminate the researcher's relationship with the phenomenon under investigation (see Alvesson et al, 2008 (Finlay & Gough, 2003).…”