Interpretation-Appropriation: (Making) An example of Labour Process Theory

Wray-Bliss, E

Interpretation-Appropriation: (Making) An example of Labour Process Theory

Wray-Bliss, E

Permalink

Publisher:: Sage
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Organizational Research Methods, 2002, 5 (1), pp. 81 - 84
Issue Date:: 2002-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2007003225OK.pdf		1.56 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	Wray-Bliss, E	en_US
dc.date.issued	2002-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Organizational Research Methods, 2002, 5 (1), pp. 81 - 84	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1094-4281	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/10188
dc.description.abstract	This article explores ethically problematic relations that may be reproduced within a genre of interpretive organizational research: namely, (UK) labor process theory (LPT). Although LPT's critical and explicitly antioppressive values are endorsed, it is argued that interpretive practices employed by core authors contradict the genre's value base and function to silence and appropriate challenging empirical elements to affirm LPT's valued interpretive schema. The article draws out deeply problematic implications of such appropriation through highlighting parallels between interpretation, appropriation, and colonization. It ends by considering the nature of, and possibility for, more ethical critical interpretive organizational research.	en_US
dc.publisher	Sage	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Organizational Research Methods	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1177/1094428102051006	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Business & Management	en_US
dc.title	Interpretation-Appropriation: (Making) An example of Labour Process Theory	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	1	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	5	en_US
utslib.for	150310 Organisation and Management Theory	en_US
utslib.for	220102 Business Ethics	en_US
utslib.for	220107 Professional Ethics (incl. police and research ethics)	en_US
utslib.for	1503 Business and Management	en_US
utslib.for	1505 Marketing	en_US
utslib.for	1701 Psychology	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
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.consider-herdc	false	en_US
pubs.issue	1	en_US
pubs.volume	5	en_US

Abstract:

This article explores ethically problematic relations that may be reproduced within a genre of interpretive organizational research: namely, (UK) labor process theory (LPT). Although LPT's critical and explicitly antioppressive values are endorsed, it is argued that interpretive practices employed by core authors contradict the genre's value base and function to silence and appropriate challenging empirical elements to affirm LPT's valued interpretive schema. The article draws out deeply problematic implications of such appropriation through highlighting parallels between interpretation, appropriation, and colonization. It ends by considering the nature of, and possibility for, more ethical critical interpretive organizational research.

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

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/10188