Actor network theory

Actor network theory (ANT) is a misnomer, for it offers not so much a theory as a method. Analytically, it owes a great deal to the tradition of ethnomethodology that was initiated by Garfinkel (1967), in as much as it starts from the premise that ordi- nary actors in everyday situations must already be

Circuits of power

1. The Aalborg case Foucault says: ‘power produces knowledge … power and knowledge directly imply one another . . . there is no power relation without the creative constitution of a field of knowledge, nor any knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute at the same time power relations’ (1977: 27–8). In such a

Engaging Foucault’s critics

1. Preamble Perhaps the single most important outcome of the trajectory that runs through Follett to Foucault on the axis of positive power is to shift attention away from an over-concentration on power as a negative and zero-sum phenomenon. At the out- set of this book we discussed how analysis of power in terms

Repositioning Foucault

1. Life-paths How might we use Foucault? We shall suggest some applications developed from human geography, namely the idea of life-paths as developed by Hannah (1997) from the work of Hägerstrand (1970), to show how Foucauldian ideas might oper- ate outside the confines of institutions – and in more open organizations. The life- path

Irony in the academy

1. CMS and the emergence of ‘critters’ So where did CMS come from? While this may seem like something of an odd question, it is an important one in terms of understanding the potential of the philosophical framework that CMS represents. Charles Perrow, for example, has described CMS as ‘an oxymoron’, alluding to the

CMS’s theoretical auspices

1. Critical Theor y In this section we will briefly discuss Critical Theory in sociology and outline its history and broad characteristics. Critical Theory is a cohesive body of work that has been highly influential across the social sciences and more broadly in the new left and other left-leaning social movements. We will begin

Critical Theory and European CMS

1. Borrowings and linkages Critical Theory was an obvious theoretical resource for the nascent CMS to draw on, but surprisingly there was very little explicit borrowing or homage for some time. Burrell and Morgan (1979) did introduce Critical Theory explicitly to the canon of organization analysis but, on the whole, the Frankfurt School remained

CMS as critique rather than Critical Theory

1. Situating CMS today In this section, we will examine some exemplars from the broad stream of litera- ture that has collected under the banner of CMS but which does not grow out of the tradition of Critical Theory and the Frankfurt School. This eclectic mix of per- spectives shares almost nothing beyond some

Wittgenstein and the linguistic turn

In earlier chapters we have seen the gradual expansion of the subject of power from the person conceived as a body, with a soul, to one with a mind. In discourse analy- ses we see the mind reconceptualized in terms of a speaking, writing, spoken and written subject that discourses through public language. The

The sociological roots of organizational discourse

1. Language games and power Wittgenstein’s analysis of language games in his scattered texts, notably the Philo- sophical investigations (1972[1953]), was thin. Central and key concepts for thinking about language were introduced, including the notions of ‘form of life’ and ‘language game’, but were analytically underdeveloped. That this should be the case was hardly surprising

Discourse analysis comes to organization studies

1. Situating discourse analysis Discourse analysis was prefigured to a great extent by the concerns of ethno- methodology (see especially Zimmerman 1971) but these were barely institutional- ized within the canon of organization theory. One significant British author did some early work using a discursive approach (for instance, Silverman 1974, which provides a good

Discursive Theories of Organizational Power

Despite a growing body of literature, organizational discourse remains, at best, a nascent field in organization studies. While there has been much work done, there is still little agreement on the theoretical and methodological foundations of the field. At the same time, it is an area that has great potential for exploring power in

Organizational form and power: the political performance of organizations

1. Situating bureaucracy Weber (1947) made the case for rational-legal bureaucracy as a bulwark against the blandishments of patrimonial power and privilege. The argument is familiar. Classical liberal bureaucracy, conceived on a rational-legal basis, stood for an ethos of service to the public, through conformance to certain means, rather than the arbitrary treatment of

Organizational form and power: Political performance

The schema in Figure 11.1 summarizes the idea of political performance. As we proposed previously, the political performance of organizations lies primarily in the patterns of authority encompassed in the political relationship of subordina- tion and in the political relationship between rival leaders. To be brief, political performance is produced by the interactions between

Organizational form and power: Organizations as regimes

In the political realm of organizations, the social fabric of power structures is the pillar for the perpetuation of patterns of domination. Through the notion of political Power and Organizational Forms                                                                                     331 performance, the contemporary action of power holders is describable as a permanent striving for new forms of legitimacy and new forms of

From consensus to contestation: the nature and culture of power

In a sense, the project of Western political and organizational theorists of power since the 1940s has been to conceptualize the constitution of forms of power which are compatible with values that are as close as possible to democratic kinds of values. It is, perhaps, for this reason that the work on total institutions

Contemporary politics: polyarchy

There are specific contemporary conditions that might account for the current dynamics of political change in organizations leading to the social fabric of a polyarchic model of power. First, there is the knowledge-intensive economy, which has been extensively documented and investigated (Adler 2001; Blackler 1995; Alvesson 1995), and which we examined in Chapter 3,

Elite production: the meaning of pluralism and elitism

1. Situating elites In his 1976 landmark The comparative study of political elites, Putnam writes wit- tily: ‘Insofar as political decisions matter, political decision makers do, too.’ He reminds us that behind the diverse façades of governance systems, which might appear to be quite transparent and accountable, ‘power was always confined to a ruling few’.

Dynamics of elite production

1. Historical snapshot There are undoubtedly common features in Western societies concerning elite recruitment and grooming. In traditional European societies, the fundamental ingredient of elite production was heredity. The accumulation of both upper-class origins and wealth mainly brought by land in agrarian societies was the rule. The existence of alternative channels of recruitment derived

The resilience of elite production patterns

In their study of the connective topography of the director and corporate board networks connecting the largest US corporations through interlocks, Davis et al. (2003: 307) raise the issue of the changes of the global network structure as a response to the political, economic and social transformations of the past 20 years. They found