Advertisement

Human Relations

, Volume 52, Issue 6, pp 805–832 | Cite as

Organizational Cultures as Holding Environments: A Psychodynamic Look at Organizational Symbolism

  • William Van Buskirk
  • Dennis McGrath
Article

Abstract

The traditional formulation of symbols as“bundles of meaning” has supported manyfine-grained analyses of organizational culture.However, it tends to obscure deeper psychodynamicelements that are essential to shaping how culture forms,develops, and dies. This paper adapts the idea of“holding environment” from Winnicott, Kegan,and others to sketch the potential contribution of such a psychodynamic perspective. An illustrativecase is presented to support the argument.

organizational culture organizational symbolism psychodynamics holding environment 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. ABRAVANEL, H. Mediatory myths in the service of organizational ideology. In L. Pondy, P. Frost, G. Morgan, and T. Dandridge (Eds.), Organizational symbolism. Greenwich, CT, JAI, 1983.Google Scholar
  2. BARNEY, J. Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage? Academy of Management Review, 1986, 11, 656-665.Google Scholar
  3. BARTHES, R Mythologies. London: Cape, 1972.Google Scholar
  4. BION, W. Learning from experience. New York: Basic Books, 1962.Google Scholar
  5. BLACK, M. Models and metaphors. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
  6. BROMS, H., & GAHMBERG, H. Communication to self in organizations and cultures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1983, 28, 482-495.Google Scholar
  7. COOPERRIDER, D., & SRIVASTVA, S. Appreciative inquiry in organizational life. In R. Woodman and W. Pasmore (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (Vol. 1). Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1987, pp. 129-169.Google Scholar
  8. COOPERRIDER, D., & BARRETT, F. Using generative metaphor to intervene in a system divided by turfism and competition. In F. Hoy (Ed.), Academy of management best papers proceedings. Athens GA: Academy of Management, 1988.Google Scholar
  9. DEAL, T., & KENNEDY, A. Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley, 1982.Google Scholar
  10. FINEMAN, S. Organizations as emotional arenas. In S. Fineman (Ed.), Emotions in organizations. London: Sage, 1993.Google Scholar
  11. FRIERE, P. Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder, 1972.Google Scholar
  12. GAGLIARDI, P. (Ed.) Symbols and artifacts: Views of the corporate landscape. New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. HIRSCH, P., & ANDREWS, J. Y. Ambushes, shootouts and knights of the round table: The language of corporate takeovers. In L. Pondy, P. Frost, G. Morgan, and T. Dandridge (Eds.), Organizational symbolism. Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1983.Google Scholar
  14. HURST, D. K. Why strategic management is bankrupt. Organizational Dynamics, 1986, 16(2), 4-27.Google Scholar
  15. JUNG, C. G. In Psychological reflections: An anthology of writings of C. G. Jung. D. JACOBI (Ed.). New York: Pantheon, 1953.Google Scholar
  16. JACKSON, N. V., & CARTER, P. The attenuating function of myth in human understanding. Human Relations, 1984, 37(7), 515-533.Google Scholar
  17. KEGAN, R. The evolving self: Problems and processes in human development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982.Google Scholar
  18. KLEIN, M. Some theoretical conclusions regarding the emotional life of the infant. In M. Klein (Ed.), Envy and gratitude and other works: 1946-1963. London: Virago, 1975.Google Scholar
  19. KLEIN, M. The Importance of symbol-formation in the development of the ego. In M. Klein (Ed.), Love, guilt and reparation and other works: 1921-1945. London: Virago, 1975. (a)Google Scholar
  20. LEACH, E. Culture and communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976.Google Scholar
  21. MITROFF, I. Stakeholders of the organization al mind. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983.Google Scholar
  22. ORTONY, A. Why metaphors are necessary and not just nice. Educational Theory, 1975, 25, 45-53.Google Scholar
  23. OUCHI, W. Theory Z: How American business can meet the Japanese challenge. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1981.Google Scholar
  24. PETERS, T. J., & WATERMAN, R. H. In Search of excellence. London: Harper & Row, 1982.Google Scholar
  25. PONDY, L. The role of metaphors and myths in organization and the facilitation of change. In. L. Pondy, P. Frost, G. Morgan, qand T. Dandridge (Eds.). Organization al symbolism. Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1983.Google Scholar
  26. PONDY, L., FROST, P., MORGAN, G., & DANDRIDGE, T. Organizational symbolism. Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1983.Google Scholar
  27. RICHARDS, I. A. The philosophy of rhetoric. New York: Oxford University Press, 1936.Google Scholar
  28. RITTI, R. H., & SILVER, J. Early processes of institutionalization: The dramaturgy of exchange in interorganizational relations. Administrative Science Quarterly, March 1986, 31.Google Scholar
  29. SAPIENZA, A. Imagery and strategy. The Journal of Management, 1987, 13, 543-555.Google Scholar
  30. SCHEIN, E. Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Josse y-Bass, 1987.Google Scholar
  31. SCHWARTZ, H. Narcissistic process and corporate decay. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  32. SEGAL, H. Notes on symbol formation. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 1957, 38, 391-97Google Scholar
  33. STAPELEY, L. The personality of the organization. London: Tavistock, 1995.Google Scholar
  34. VAN BUSKIRK, W., & McGRATH, D. Organizational stories as a window on affect in organizations. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 1992, 5(2), 9-24.Google Scholar
  35. WILKINS, A. Organizational stories as symbols which control the organization. In L. Pondy, P. Frost, G. Morgan, and T. Dandridge (Eds.), Organizational symbolism. Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1983.Google Scholar
  36. WINNICOTT, D. W. Playing and reality. New York: Methuen, 1982.Google Scholar
  37. WINNICOTT, D. W. Aggression and its roots. In C. Winnicott, R. Shepheerd, and M. Davis (Eds.), Deprivation and delinquency. New York: Methuen, 1984.Google Scholar
  38. WINNICOTT, D. W. Aggression, guilt and reparation. In C. Winnicott, R. Shepherd, and M. Davis. Deprivation and delinquency. London: Tavistock, 1984.Google Scholar
  39. WINNICOTT, D. W. Ego integration in child development. Through paediatrics to psychoanalysis. London: Karnac Books, 1990.Google Scholar
  40. WINNICOTT, D. W. Communicating and not communicating leading to a study of certain opposites. The maturational processes and the facilitating environment: Studies in the theory of emotional development. London: Karnac Books, 1990. (a)Google Scholar
  41. WINNICOTT, D. W. The primary maternal preoccupation. In Through paediatrics to psychoanalysis. London: Karnac Books, 1992.Google Scholar
  42. WINNICOTT, D. W. Aggression in relation to emotional development. In Through paediatrics to psychoanalysis. London: Karnac Books, 1992, pp. 204-210.Google Scholar
  43. WINNICOTT, D. W. In C. Winnicott, R. Shepherd, and M. Davis (Eds.), Babies and Their Mothers. London: Free Association Books, pp. 3-14.Google Scholar
  44. ZAJONC, R. B. Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 1980, 35, 151-175.Google Scholar
  45. ZUCKER, L. The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. American Sociological Review, 1977, 42, 746-752.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Tavistock Institute 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • William Van Buskirk
    • 1
  • Dennis McGrath
    • 2
  1. 1.La Salle UniversityPhiladelphia
  2. 2.Community College of PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia

Personalised recommendations