Organization Studies

A post-deconstruction ethics of honoring, respecting, and/or theorizing anOther via a concept of polyphony seems very attractive to organizational studies (De Cock and Jeanes 2006; Clegg et al. 2006). Many organizational studies intellectuals prefer ‘reasonableness’ and/or ‘historical meanings’ as an object of study to a more empirical one. This rhetorical strategy (amongst others) has claimed polyphony as a leading concept, celebrating dialogue, diversity, and intertextuality. But, as Gayatri Spivak has indicated, it is necessary to ask if anOther speaks at all in such practices. Spivak (1999) explores polyphony in terms of the subaltern and her (his) representation, making use of différance to clarify what a many-voiced perspective actually could imply. In this article, I deconstruct two organizational studies articles on polyphony, making use of Spivak’s insights.

This study explores the discursive positioning of managers involved in inter-organizational relationships (IORs) within industrial supply chains. In closely examining a series of interviews, we find a number of interpretive repertoires of boundary construction used in IOR managers’ identity discourse. Our analysis of these repertoires suggests that, although the development of IORs apparently signals the emergence of ‘widening circles of identification’, distinction drawing and boundary setting is as much a part of managers’ IOR talk as boundary transcendence. IOR managers can thus be seen as ‘boundary bricoleurs’ who discursively mark different self/other boundaries that varyingly position themselves, and their colleagues, competitors, customers and suppliers, as ‘inside’ or ‘outside’ the organization, the market, the relationship or their field of expertise. In this tensile positioning, they forestall closure on their identity by constantly shifting identifications, sometimes within the same stretch of talk. Oscillating between an inclusive and an exclusive ‘us’, and thus articulating embracing yet distinctive identities vis-a-vis other network actors, enables IOR managers to navigate through their complex and dynamic inter-organizational field, maintaining multiple inter-firm relationships while at the same time preserving their own organizational and professional status within these relationships.

This paper compares the Italian Renaissance painter Caravaggio’s two versions of the Conversion of Saint Paul (1600/1601) with two modern models of organization. These comparisons show how organization is produced in art through ‘aesthetic landscaping’ (Gagliardi 2006), and in particular how these artistic reproductions convey certain images of the appropriate modern, entrepreneurial self and regimes of organization. The painting was originally commissioned by the Catholic Church, but it rejected the first and accepted the second version. The paper claims that this strategy strengthens the given organization of the Church and the Church’s strategic influence on the believers that adore the painting. But this all comes with a price, namely, the production of a number of strict divisions: in the accepted version, Paul becomes a pure transcendent spirit. Isolated from his surroundings, his servant and his horse, he is cut off from the very event of conversion. The rejected version harbours radically different, transgressive images of subjectivity, collectivity and entrepreneurship. By identifying these images, the paper contributes to the development of a critical approach to organizational aesthetics.

Corporate elites are not a new phenomenon. However, the ways in which significant agents gain ascendancy to positions of power vary across nations and cultures. This paper analyses the ascension of a small minority of corporate agents to positions of dominance and the subsequent accession of a select few to the power elite. Our theoretical position builds upon the writings of Pierre Bourdieu on power and domination. These constructs are elaborated and made tangible through a cross-national comparative study of dominant corporate agents in France and Britain. Our results demonstrate the extent to which power remains concentrated in the French and British corporate sectors; highlighting equally pronounced similarities and differences between the two countries. It is suggested that power elites function through governance networks to promote institutional and organizational goals.

How do elite policy-making groups make sense of complex and ambiguous environments while remaining consistent with the group’s institutionalized operating model? This paper identifies a sensemaking process based in shared narrative construction. It is a social process of pattern recognition involving abduction, the comparison of culturally approved models to the current conditions to establish relevant facts and events; plotting, the reordering of those facts and events into a plausible narrative; and selective retention, the collective negotiation of a policy choice that fits the emerging narrative. This paper uses verbatim transcripts of meetings at the Federal Reserve to explore how policy makers use a logic of appropriateness to identify relevant cues and integrate them with existing models by weaving sensible plots. These plots are designed to control the supply of money and credit and maintain the legitimacy of the central bank.