Advertisement

The Political and Ethical Potential of Affective Resonance Between Bodies

  • Justine Grønbæk Pors
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter explores affective resonances between bodies and direct theoretical and analytical attention to their political and ethical potential. Thereby, the chapter problematizes the concept central in much management literature of a confined, rational individual as the centre of decision-making. The chapter draws on concepts of affect, and feminist writing on vulnerability and corporeal generosity to analyse a conversation at a seminar for educational managers in Denmark. Pors shows how an initial emotional outburst from one manager sat in motion an embodied and affective sharing of concerns through which the managers came to oppose the political pressures they are enmeshed in. The chapter offers new possibilities for thinking about organizational ethics by attending to affective and trans-subjective ways of thinking and feeling in organizations.

References

  1. Ahonen, Pasi, Janne Tienari, Susan Meriläinen, and Alison Pullen. 2014. Hidden contexts and invisible power relations: A Foucauldian reading of diversity research. Human Relations 67 (3): 263–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvesson, Mats, and Kaj Sköldberg. 2000. Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Blackman, Lisa. 2001. Hearing voices: Embodiment and experience. London: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
  4. ———. 2008. Affect, relationality and the problem of personality. Theory, Culture and Society 25 (1): 23–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blackmore, Jill. 2004. Restructuring educational leadership in changing contexts: A local/global account of restructuring in Australia. Journal of Educational Change 5 (3): 267–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blackmore, Jill, and Judyth Sachs. 2012. Performing and reforming leaders: Gender, educational restructuring, and organizational change. Albany: Suny Press.Google Scholar
  7. Brennan, Teresa. 2004. The transmission of affect. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Butler, J. 2009. Frames of war. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  9. Christiansen, Tanja J., and Sine N. Just. 2012. Regularities of diversity discourse: Address, categorization, and invitation. Journal of Management and Organization 18 (3): 398–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Costea, Bogdan, and Lucas Introna. 2006. Self and other in everyday existence: A mystery not a problem. In Organization and identity, ed. Alison Pullen and Steven Linstead, 55–76. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Danish Ministry of Education. 2007. Improving School Leadership – En national baggrundsrapport. [Improving School Leadership – A national report.] Pluss Leadership A/S. Copenhagen: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  12. Despret, Vinciane. 2004. Our emotional make-up: Ethnopsychology and selfhood. New York: Other Press.Google Scholar
  13. Diprose, Rosalyn. 2002. Corporeal generosity. On giving with Nietzsche, Merleau-Ponty, and Levinas. Albany: State University of New York.Google Scholar
  14. Elgaard, Jan E., Henrik Smit, Anne Marie Hagelskjær, and Jesper W. Frandsen. 2011. Human Resource Management – menneske og organisation. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzel.Google Scholar
  15. Ettinger, Bracha L. 2010. (M) Other re-spect: Maternal subjectivity, the ready-made mother-monster and the ethics of respecting. Retrieved from http://www.mamsie.bbk.ac.uk/documents/ettinger.pdf
  16. Fotaki, Marianna, Beverly D. Metcalfe, and Nancy Harding. 2014. Writing materiality into management and organization studies through and with Luce Irigaray. Human Relations 16 (10): 1239–1263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fotaki, Marianna, Kate Kenny, and Sheena J. Vachhani. 2017. Thinking critically about affect in organization studies: Why it matters. Organization 24 (1): 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grear, Anna. 2007. Challenging corporate ‘humanity’: Legal disembodiment, embodiment and human rights. Human Rights Law Review 7 (3): 511–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kenny, Kate, and Marianna Fotaki. 2015. From gendered organizations to compassionate borderspaces: Reading corporeal ethics with Bracha Ettinger. Organization 22 (2): 183–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Loacker, Bernadette, and Sara Louise Muhr. 2009. How can I become a responsible subject? Towards a practice-based ethics of responsiveness. Journal of Business Ethics 90 (2): 265–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. OECD. 2008. Improving school leadership, education and training policy. Teaching and learning international survey. Conducted by Beatriz Pont, Deborah Nusche, and Hunter Moorman. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  22. Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas. 2011. The sound of a breaking string: Critical environmental law and ontological vulnerability. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment 2 (1): 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. ———. 2013. Actors or spectators? Vulnerability and critical environmental law. Vulnerability and Critical Environmental Law. Oñati Socio-Legal Series 3 (5): 854–876.Google Scholar
  24. ———. 2015. Spatial justice: Body, lawscape, atmosphere. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Pors, Justine G. 2011. Noisy management. A history of Danish school governing from 1970–2010. PhD. dissertation, Copenhagen Business School.Google Scholar
  26. Pors, Justine G., and Helene G. Ratner. 2017. The emergence and workings of a process view in public education policy. International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy 10 (1): 16–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pullen, Alison, and Carl Rhodes. 2014. Corporeal ethics and the politics of resistance in organizations. Organization 21: 782–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. ———. 2015. Ethics, embodiment and organizations. Organization 22 (2): 159–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sellar, Sam, and Bob Lingard. 2014. The OECD and the expansion of PISA: New global modes of governance in education. British Educational Research Journal 40 (6): 917–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Staunæs, Dorthe, and Helle Bjerg. 2017. Governing the intermediary spaces. Reforming school and subjectivities through liminal motivational technologies. In Critical analyses of educational reform in an era of transnational governance, ed. Thomas S. Popekewitz, Elisabeth Hultquist, and Sverker Lindblad, 197–202. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Wyn, Johanna, Malcolm J. Turnbull, and Lyndall Grimshaw. 2014. The experience of education: The impacts of high stakes testing on school students and their families. In A qualitative study: The Whitlam Institute. Sydney: University of Western Sydney.Google Scholar
  32. Ybema, Sierk, Dvora Yanow, Harry Wels, and Frans H. Kamsteeg, eds. 2009. Organizational ethnography: Studying the complexity of everyday life. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Management, Politics and PhilosophyCopenhagen Business SchoolFrederiksbergDenmark

Personalised recommendations