For management?

Publication Type:
Journal Article
Citation:
Management Learning, 2006, 37 (1), pp. 7 - 27
Issue Date:
2006-03-01
Metrics:
Full metadata record
Files in This Item:
Filename Description Size
Thumbnail2006004170.pdf1.66 MB
Adobe PDF
Over the past decades there have been persistent radical critiques of management. Previously the goal was to apply forms of Marxian analysis to the world of management and organizations, usually seeing it as a sphere of false consciousness, distorted and unreflective practices, and three-dimensional power or hegemony. Surprisingly, even after the Marxist scaffoldings that supported such claims have been deconstructed - both practically and theoretically - there are still current contributions to management thought that seek to resuscitate the same critiques, often under the rubric of Critical Management Studies. These representations seem increasingly bizarre, given the theoretical currents emanating from post-structuralist and postmodern thought that have been emergent in recent years, associated ideas such as polyphony, difference, deconstruction and translation. In this article we draw on these sources to produce a different representation of management - one that we would argue acts as an effective counter-factual to that which provides support to some of the central tendencies manifest in critical approaches to management. Rather than seeing modern management as necessarily a totalitarian practice, one that should necessarily be subject to a negative critique, we would argue that, at its best, it enables polyphony rather than tyranny, and the possibility to be both critical and for management. Copyright © 2006 Sage Puplications.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: