Situated knowledge: A Foucauldian reading of ancient and modern classics of leadership thought

Wilson, Suze

doi:10.1177/1742715012455129

Cited by 12 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…more proximate to the present day) date-range, encouraged by the ease of digital search engines, may be working against substantive innovation (Evans, 2008), we advocate the opposite: looking back, looking deeper and reading articles like Lewin 1947 rather than just citing them. Our counter history, along with others that seek to look and think differently about the history and future of different elements of management studies (Cooke and Alcadipani, 2013;Cummings and Bridgman, 2011;Hassard, 2012;Wilson, 2013), promotes this sort of liberation from the present: one that inspires us to be more 'retro-active' so as to recreate what we see as historically important and think differently for the future of management and human relations. assistance with this research.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kurt Lewin's 'changing as three steps' (unfreezing  changing  refreezing) is regarded by many as the classic or fundamental approach to managing change. Lewin has been criticized by scholars for over-simplifying the change process and has been defended by others against such charges. However, what has remained unquestioned is the model's foundational significance. It is sometimes traced (if it is traced at all) to the first article ever published in Human Relations. Based on a comparison of what Lewin wrote about changing as three steps with how this is presented in later works, we argue that he never developed such a model and it took form after his death. We investigate how and why 'changing as three steps' came to be understood as the foundation of the fledgling subfield of change management and to influence change theory and practice to this day, and how questioning this supposed foundation can encourage innovation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The paper has sought to contribute to an emerging range of cultural and historical works within Organization Studies which have sought to return to original sources of organizational phenomena and look deeper into their significance (Cummings and Bridgman 2011;Hassard 2012;Wilson 2013;Cummings, Bridgman, and Brown 2016;Bridgman, Cummings, and Ballard 2018). While this paper was not an attempt to oppose the way that Fordism has continued to be developed and understood as a political economic phenomenon (Gramsci 2005;Jessop 1991;Amin 2011), the focus has demonstrated how ideas travel; are taken up, refined, appropriated and often become removed from the source and their author's (broadly conceived) control and original intention.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ford’s metaphysics: On the Transcendental origins of Henry Ford’s Fordism

Watt

2020

Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since it was first articulated by Antonio Gramsci in his Prison Notebooks (1929–1935), Fordism has been understood at two interconnected levels. At one level, it is understood in secular materialist terms as an archetypal system of mass production. At another, as a techno-economic paradigm of capitalist expansion. However, little attention has been given to the philosophical influences and ideas that underpinned Henry Ford’s (1863–1947) worldview and how this came to influence the formation of the factory systems at his Highland Park and River Rouge complexes. In most textbooks, it is assumed that Ford based his industrial design on a technological intensification of F.W. Taylor’s Principles of Scientific Management. This article seeks to examine the origins and rationale behind Ford’s factory system by exploring the relationship between his personal worldview and the ‘ism’ which came to bear his name. Through a cultural-historical analysis, this article critically explores Henry Ford’s personal Fordism, and argues that what has come to be understood as one of the most ‘secular’ and ‘materialist’ processes of organising ‘men and machine’ began with an attempt by Henry Ford to realise a ‘metaphysical’ ideal that was informed by the popular philosophical and theological thought of the previous century. By returning to the ideas and the context of this period, Ford’s engagement with the work of the American Transcendentalist, Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882) is considered to both contextualise Henry Ford’s Fordism and explore the philosophical tensions at the heart of his organisational theory and practice.

show abstract

“…Consequently, in the 'process description theories' a leader and followers are the two properties that must exist for leadership to exist, and this is how leadership is defined. Wilson (2013) has also defined leadership with the properties of leader and follower, though without reference to tasks, goals or owners. Leadership studies are dominated by leader-centric conceptions of leadership (ibid.…”

Section: The Definition Of Leadershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership scholarship: all bridges have been burned

Andersen¹

2016

LATH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this article is to enhance the understanding of the present state of leadership scholarship by describing similarities between leadership theories and underlining significant differences between them. Based on four criteria, two broad groups of leadership theories are identifiable. These two groups are fundamentally different with respect to the conceptions of both organisations and leadership. While one group of theories concentrates on descriptions and understandings of leadership processes, the other group emphasises causal relationships between leadership and organisational outcomes. A critical result of the divergent emphases is that the theoretical relationships between these two groups of scholarship appear to have ended. Advancements in one area may no longer be beneficial to other areas. This article stresses that it is necessary to come to grips with the consequences of the present fissured state in leadership research.

show abstract

Situated knowledge: A Foucauldian reading of ancient and modern classics of leadership thought

Cited by 12 publications

References 35 publications

Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management

Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management

Ford’s metaphysics: On the Transcendental origins of Henry Ford’s Fordism

Leadership scholarship: all bridges have been burned

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About