Abstract
Chapter 2 suggested that the problems associated with rationality must be regarded as problems that are intrinsically linked to representationalism and that they manifest themselves as deception and exclusion. Another conclusion was that the problems of organization studies with rationality are very similar to the problems that philosophy identifies around rationality. This affinity provides a rationale for consulting philosophers in the course of a discussion of problematic rationality in organisation studies. Before Levinas will be consulted in Chapters 4 and 5, we turn in this Chapter 3 to organisational scientists who are guided by Foucault’s and Derrida’s postmodernism, and then to those who are inspired by Heidegger and Wittgenstein. The focus of attention is directed to the question in what way those philosophical currents help organizational scientists in combating representationalism and its concomitant manifestations deception and exclusion. It turns out that, as to deception, both the Foucault/Derrida orientation and the Heidegger/Wittenstein orientation offer organisation scientists some help in unmasking representationalism and unjustified knowledge-claims. As to the countering of the exclusion which is caused by representationalism the contributions of both philosophical currents are less convincing. In Chapter 6 a comparison will be performed between these contributions and Levinas’s alternative for representationalism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The choice for Chia’s book therefore is not based on the idea that he would be representative for the group of mentioned authors who are orientated towards postmodernism. Indeed, this group is too diverse and there is too much mutual criticism within that group (see for example, Organization 7 (3)) to allow anybody to be representative. The fact that Chia takes representationalism and its problems as a starting point for his argument determines the importance of his book within the context of my book.
- 2.
The term deconstruction is usually associated with the philosophy of Derrida. In fact, the term is derived from him. But conceived of as the activity that aims “to ‘undo’ or to ‘dismantle’ the conceptual oppositions in linguistic convention which have provided the bases for framing our modern experiences of social reality” (Chia 1996: 145) it is quite possible to bring parts of the work of Foucault under that umbrella. In his archaeological and genealogical studies he tries to trace back the genesis of all kinds of social phenomena, with an eye for the fundamental role language plays therein (Chia 1996: 137 et seq.).
- 3.
I use the English terms because the organizational scientific literature that I consulted is mainly in English. The original German terms that correspond to ready-to-hand and present-at-hand are: Zuhandenes and Vorhandenenes.
- 4.
Peperzak (1997: 66) defines Mitsein in Heidegger as the expression of our participation in a common culture (66) and in a common understanding which precedes everything (64). Both at the level of Das Man, at which there is no question of consciously dealing with existence and at the level of the articulated Mitteilung in which that participation is made explicit.
- 5.
Although linguistic usage in this view allows for the possibility to reject commitment. Even then it is presupposed for people to talk about that with one another.
References
Chia, R. 1996. Organizational analysis as deconstructive practice. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Cooper, R. 1993. Technologies of representation. In Tracing the semiotic boundaries of politics, ed. P. Ahonen. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cooper, R., and J. Law. 1995. Organization: Distal and proximal views. In Research in the sociology of organizations, ed. S. Bacharach. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Foucault, M. 1983. The minimalist self. In Michel Foucault: Politics, philosophy, culture, ed. L. Kritzman. London: Routledge.
Gustavsen, B. 2003. Action research and the problem of the single case. Concepts and transformations 8 (1): 93–99.
Latour, B. 1988. The politics of explanation: An alternative. In Knowledge and reflexivity: New frontiers in the sociology of knowledge, eds. S. Woolgar and M. Ashmore. London: Sage.
Pålshaugen, Ø. 1998. The end of organization theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Parker, M. 1993. Life after Jean-François. In Postmodernism and organizations, eds. J. Hassard and M. Parker. London: Sage.
Peperzak, A. 1997. Beyond the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Weick, K. 2003. Theory and practice in the real world. In The Oxford handbook of organization theory, eds. H. Tsoukas and C. Knudsen, 453–475. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Winograd, T., and F. Flores. 1986. Understanding computers and cognition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Law, J. 1992. Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy and heterogeneity. Unpublished manuscript from the Department of Social Anthropology of Keele University, cited in Chia (1996).
Alvesson, M., and H. Willmott. 1992. On the idea of emancipation in management and organization studies. Academy of Management Review 17 (3): 432–464.
Barnett, R. 2000. Working knowledge. In Research and knowledge at work: Perspectives, case-studies and innovative strategies, eds. J. Garrick and C. Rhodes. London: Routledge.
Cooper, R. 1989. Modernism, post modernism and organizational analysis 3: The contribution of Jacques Derrida. Organization Studies 10 (4): 479–502.
Gergen, K. 1992. Organization theory in the postmodern era. In Rethinking organization, ed. M. Reed. London: Sage.
Gergen, K. 2003. Beyond knowing in organizational inquiry. Organization 10 (3): 453–455.
Townley, B. 1993. Foucault, power/knowledge, and its relevance for human resource management. Academy of Management Review 18: 518–545.
Hassard, J. 1993. Postmodernism and organizational analysis: An overview. In Postmodernism and organizations, eds. J. Hassard and M. Parker. London: Sage.
Parker, M. 1997. Dividing organizations and multiplying identities. In Ideas of difference, eds. K. Hetherington and R. Munro. Oxford: Blackwell.
Linstead, S. 2002. Organization as reply: Henri Bergson and casual organization theory. Organization 9 (1): 95–111.
Calás, M., and L. Smircich. 1992. Using the “F” word: Feminist theory and the social consequences of organizational research. In Gendering organizational analysis, eds. A. Mill and P. Tancred. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Weick, K. 1989. Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of Management Review 14 (4): 516–531.
Cooper, R. 1992. Formal organization as representation: Remote control, displacement and abbreviation. In Rethinking organization, ed. M. Reed. London: Sage.
March, J. 1971/1988. Decisions and organizations. Oxford: Blackwell.
Maanen, J. Van. 1995. Style as theory. Organization Science 6 (1): 133–143.
Weiskopf, R., and H. Willmott. 1999. The organization of thought. Organization 6 (3): 559–571.
Gustavsen, B., H. Finne, and B. Oscarsson. 2001a. Introduction. In Creating connectedness. The role of social research in innovation policy, eds. B. Gustavsen, H. Finne, and B. Oscarsson. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Gustavsen, B., H. Finne, and B. Oscarsson. 2001b. Innovation: Working together to achieve the unique. In Creating connectedness. The role of social research in innovation policy, eds. B. Gustavsen, H. Finne, and B. Oscarsson. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Shotter, J., and J. Lannamann. 2002. The situation of social constructionism; Its ‘imprisonment’ within the ritual of theory-criticism-and-debate. Theory and Psychology 12 (5): 577–609.
Wittgenstein, L. 1961. Tractatus logico-philosophicus. London: Routledge.
Rorty, R. 1996. Solidariteit of objectiviteit. Drie filosofische essays. Meppel: Boom.
Shotter, J. 1998. An organization’s internal public sphere: Its nature and its supplementation. In The end of organization theory, ed. Ø. Pålshaugen. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Shotter, J. 2000. Wittgenstein and his philosophy of beginnings and beginnings and beginnings. Concepts and Transformation 5 (3): 349–362. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Shotter, J. 2004. Expressing and legitimating ‘actionable knowledge’ from within ‘the moment of acting’. Concepts and Transformations 9 (2): 205–229.
Gustavsen, B. 2001. Contemporary European developments. In Creating connectedness. The role of social research in innovation policy, eds. B. Gustavsen, H. Finne, and B. Oscarsson. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Van der Ven, N. (2011). Two Alternatives to Representationalism. In: The Shame of Reason in Organizational Change. Issues in Business Ethics, vol 32. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9373-8_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9373-8_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-9372-1
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-9373-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)