Foundations of organization power

Clegg, S

Foundations of organization power

Clegg, S

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Journal of Power, 2009, 2 (1), pp. 35 - 64
Issue Date:: 2009-01-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2008002590OK.pdf		4.32 MB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Clegg, S https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6083-4283	en_US
dc.date.issued	2009-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Journal of Power, 2009, 2 (1), pp. 35 - 64	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1754-0291	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/10073
dc.description.abstract	I shall argue that the foundations of organization power were laid down in practice through theories of power - in the sense that they sought to explain power - but through quite pragmatic practices that were not necessarily regarded as embodying a theory of power, which I shall maintain they most assuredly did. Thus, in a second move, I shall argue that while these practices began with a focus on the body of the employee they moved on to consider their consciousness and soul. Third, I shall briefly consider the main themes in organization theories’ treatment of power, organized around notions of system rationality and uncertainty. These have an implicit idealism attached to them, I shall suggest. Fourth, I shall switch focus to the broader canvass of social theory in the post-war era and suggest that this has also displayed a strongly idealist streak, focusing especially on the celebrated structuralist account of power as a matter of layered dimension that Steven Lukes (1974, 2005) produced. Fifth, I shall contrast the idealism of this approach with a more pragmatic conception of power, one that can be found in the perspectives with which I opened the paper, perspectives that derive from more Foucauldian-influenced currents of contemporary social theory. Drawing on these, I will suggest a different way of understanding Lukes’ radical third dimension of power as a means of organizing and rationalizing innovations in power relations, drawing on the literature of the ‘dominant ideology thesis’ (Abercrombie et al.) to do so. Finally, I shall suggest switching from the structuralist metaphors of dimensions to an imagery of flows as a more appropriate model for understanding power relations. © 2009 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Journal of Power	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1080/17540290902760873	en_US
dc.title	Foundations of organization power	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	1	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	2	en_US
utslib.for	150310 Organisation and Management Theory	en_US
utslib.for	1503 Business and Management	en_US
utslib.for	1606 Political Science	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business/Management Discipline
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	1	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	2	en_US

Abstract:

I shall argue that the foundations of organization power were laid down in practice through theories of power - in the sense that they sought to explain power - but through quite pragmatic practices that were not necessarily regarded as embodying a theory of power, which I shall maintain they most assuredly did. Thus, in a second move, I shall argue that while these practices began with a focus on the body of the employee they moved on to consider their consciousness and soul. Third, I shall briefly consider the main themes in organization theories’ treatment of power, organized around notions of system rationality and uncertainty. These have an implicit idealism attached to them, I shall suggest. Fourth, I shall switch focus to the broader canvass of social theory in the post-war era and suggest that this has also displayed a strongly idealist streak, focusing especially on the celebrated structuralist account of power as a matter of layered dimension that Steven Lukes (1974, 2005) produced. Fifth, I shall contrast the idealism of this approach with a more pragmatic conception of power, one that can be found in the perspectives with which I opened the paper, perspectives that derive from more Foucauldian-influenced currents of contemporary social theory. Drawing on these, I will suggest a different way of understanding Lukes’ radical third dimension of power as a means of organizing and rationalizing innovations in power relations, drawing on the literature of the ‘dominant ideology thesis’ (Abercrombie et al.) to do so. Finally, I shall suggest switching from the structuralist metaphors of dimensions to an imagery of flows as a more appropriate model for understanding power relations. © 2009 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/10073