Advertisement

Cultural Projects in 2030: A Performative Approach

  • Małgorzata ĆwikłaEmail author
Chapter
  • 212 Downloads
Part of the Management – Culture – Interpretation book series (MCI)

Abstract

In this paper, I argue that focusing on the future in re-thinking management would help achieve a positive, affirmative, and emancipatory change of current organizational flaws. By introducing the perspective inspired by the performative turn, I analyze visions of project management in 2030. Based on the empirical research conducted at several cultural institutions, I have created and present five metaphorical scenarios of project management in the future in order to show possible ways of development, opportunities, and threats. I also present the recommendations for change formulated by the research participants in relation to several aspects of project management. According to the idea by John L. Austin, the research and the text itself are intended to take the form of a performative utterance. This inspiration should help involve the interviewees and readers in the modification of project management by engaging them in the process of thinking, talking, and designing the visions of future.

Keywords

Project Management Human Relation Cultural Manager Cultural Policy Cultural Project 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Austin, J.L. (1962): How to Do Things With Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bachmann-Medick, D. (2016): Cultural Turns. New Orientations in the Study of Culture. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  3. Barańska, K. (2013): Muzeum w sieci znaczeń. Zarządzanie z perspektywy nauk humanistycznych. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Attyka.Google Scholar
  4. Bauman, Z. (2012): Times of interregnum. In: Ethics & Global Politics, 5 (1), 49-56.Google Scholar
  5. Bishop, P., Hines, A. and Collins, T. (2007): The current state of scenario development: an overview of techniques. In: Foresight, 9(1), 5-25.Google Scholar
  6. Blair, H., Grey, S. and Randle, K. (2001): Working in film – employment in a project based industry. In: Personnel Review, 30(2), 170-185.Google Scholar
  7. Bradfield, R., Wright, G., Burt, G., Cairns, G. and Van Der Heijden, K. (2005): The origins and evolution of scenario techniques in long range business planning. In: Futures, 37(8), 795-812.Google Scholar
  8. Butler, J. (1990): Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Chermack T., Lynham, S. and Ruona, W. (2001): A Review of Scenario Planning Literature. In: Futures Research Quarterly, 17(2), 17-28.Google Scholar
  10. Czarniawska, B. (2011): Performativity in place of responsibility? In: Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(6), 823-829.Google Scholar
  11. Ćwikła, M. (2013): Teatralizacja pracy emocjonalnej we współczesnych organizacjach. In: Zarządzanie w kulturze, 14(1), 71-81.Google Scholar
  12. Derrida, J. (1972): Marges de la philosophie. Paris: Minuit.Google Scholar
  13. Fournier, V. and Grey, C. (2000): At the Critical Moment: Conditions and Prospects for Critical Management. In: Human Relations, 53(7), 7-32.Google Scholar
  14. Gielen, P. (2012): The Murmuring of the Artistic Multitude. Global Art, Memory and Post-Fordism. Amsterdam: Valiz.Google Scholar
  15. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Chicago: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  16. Groys, B. (2002): The Loneliness of the Project. In: New York Magazine of Contemporary Art and Theory, 1/2008, [online: http://www.ny-magazine.org/PDF/Issue%201.1.%20Boris%20Groys.pdf (8.08.2014)].
  17. Guerard, S., Langley, A. and Seidl, D. (2013): Rethinking the concept of performance in strategy research: Towards a performativity perspective. In: M@n@gement, 16(5), 566-578.Google Scholar
  18. Haunschild, A. (2003): Managing Employment Relationships in Flexible Labour Markets. The Case of German Repertory Theatres. In: Human Relations, 56(8), 899-929.Google Scholar
  19. Hodgson, D. (2005): ‘Putting on a Professional Performance’: Performativity, Subversion and Project Management. In: Organization, 12(1), 51-68.Google Scholar
  20. Huault, I., Perret, V. and Spicer, A. (2014): Beyond macro- and micro- emancipation: Rethinking emancipation in organization studies. In: Organization, 21(1), 22-49.Google Scholar
  21. Lindgren, M. and Packendorff, J. (2006): Projects and Prisons. In: Hodgson, D. and Cicmil, S. (Ed.): Making Projects Critical. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 111-131.Google Scholar
  22. Morgan, G. (1998): Images of Organization. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  23. Rowlands, L. and Handy, J. (2012): An Addictive Environment: New Zealand Film Production Workers’ Subjective Experiences of Project-Based Labour. In: Human Relations, 65(5), 657-680.Google Scholar
  24. McKenzie, J. (2001): Perform or else: From Discipline to Performance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Sage, D., Dainty, A. and Brookes, N. (2013): Thinking the ontological politics of managerial and critical performativities: An examination of project failure. In: Scandinavian Journal of Management, 29(3), 282-291.Google Scholar
  26. Spicer, A., Alvesson, M. and Kärreman, D. (2009): Critical performativity: The unfinished business of critical management studies. In: Human Relations, 62(4), 537-560.Google Scholar
  27. Standing, G. (2011): The Precariat. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  28. Wickert, C. and Schaefer, S. (2014): Towards a progressive understanding of performativity in critical management studies. In: Human Relations, 68(1), 107-130.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instytut Kultury UJWZiKS UJKrakówPoland

Personalised recommendations