Advertisement

Practice as Complexity: Encounters with Management Education in the Public Sector

  • Christine Davis
Chapter
Part of the Professional and Practice-based Learning book series (PPBL, volume 8)

Abstract

This chapter proposes that a cogent conceptualisation of practice as complexity provides a basis for management education within contemporary hierarchical public sector organisations. It identifies the possibilities, tensions and dilemmas for management educators working with such a framework in public sector organisations in which the logic and practices of neoliberal managerialism prevail. It references senior-middle managers within the South Australian public sector and considers the complexity for management educators of working with such managers. It argues that practice as complexity provides insight into the complex dynamic of management and management education, allowing nuanced understandings of the processes of ‘going on’ by managers in complex organisations and appropriate responses to those processes by management educators.

Keywords

Public Sector Tacit Knowledge Management Education Explicit Knowledge International Standard Organization 
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.

References

  1. Antonacopoulou, E. (2008). On the practise of practice: In-tensions and ex-tensions in the ongoing reconfiguration of practices. In D. Barry & H. Hansen (Eds.), The Sage handbook of new approaches in management and organization (pp. 112–130). Los Angeles/London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Antonacopoulou, E., & Chiva, R. (2007). The social complexity of organizational learning: The dynamics of learning and organizing. Management Learning, 38(3), 277–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakhtin, M. M. (1990). Art and answerability. In M. Holquist & V. Liapunov (Eds.), Art and answerability: Early philosophical essays (pp. 1–3). Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  4. Barnes, B. (2001). Practice as collective action. In T. Schatzki, K. Knorr-Cetina, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Biesta, G. (2010). Five theses on complexity reduction and its politics. In D. Osberg & G. Biesta (Eds.), Complexity theory and the politics of education (pp. 5–13). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  6. Billett, S., Barker, M., & Hernon-Tinning, B. (2004). Participatory practices at work. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 12(2), 233–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blackman, T. (2001). Complexity theory and the new public management. Social Issues, 1(2) http://www.whb.co.uk/socialissues/tb.htm. Last accessed 1 June 2012.
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bourdieu, P. (1984). The habitus and the space of lifestyles. In Distinction: A social critique of the judgements of taste. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  10. Carr, W. (2005). The role of theory in the professional development of an educational theorist. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 13(3), 333–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carroll, B., Levy, L., & Richmond, D. (2008). Leadership as practice: Challenging the competency paradigm. Leadership, 4(4), 363–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clegg, S. R., & Ross-Smith, A. (2003). Revising the boundaries: Management education and learning in a postpositivist world. The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2(1), 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cooper, R. (2005). Peripheral vision: Relationality. Organization Studies, 26(11), 1689–1710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davis, C. C. (2010a). Practice as complexity: A critical-collagic perspective on management education in the South Australian Public Sector. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Adelaide: School of Education, University of South Australia.Google Scholar
  15. Davis, C. C. (2010b, December). Proceduralising (complex) practice. In Proceedings of the Australian Association of Research in Education (AARE) conference making a difference. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  16. Deem, R., & Brehony, K. (2005). Management as ideology: The case of ‘new managerialism’ in higher education. Oxford Review of Education, 31(2), 217–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doyle, R. (2009). Doing, describing and documenting: Inscription and practice in social work. Unpublished doctoral thesis. St Andrews: School of Management, University of St Andrews.Google Scholar
  18. Dreyfus, H. (2000). Could anything be more intelligible than everyday intelligibility?: Reinterpreting Division I of Being and Time in the light of Division II. In J. E. Faulconer & M. A. Wrathall (Eds.), Appropriating Heidegger (pp. 155–174). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Elert, G. (n.d.). The chaos hypertextbook. Updated June 1, 2008, viewed August 4, 2008. http://hypertextbook.com/chaos/21.shtml
  20. Fenwick, T. (2006). Tidying the territory: Questioning terms and purposes in work-learning research. Journal of Workplace Learning, 18(5), 265–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fenwick, T. (2008). Workplace learning: Emerging trends and new perspectives. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 119(Fall), 17–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Foucault, M. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the College de France 1978–1979. Basinstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillian.Google Scholar
  23. Fournier, V., & Grey, C. (2000). At the critical moment: Conditions and prospects for critical management studies. Human Relations, 53(1), 7–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Garrick, J. (1999). The dominant discourses of learning at work. In D. Boud & J. Garrick (Eds.), Understanding learning at work (pp. 216–230). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Gherardi, S. (2009). Introduction: The critical power of the practice ‘lens’. Management Learning, 40(2), 115–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goldstein, J. (1999). Emergence as a construct: History and issues. Emergence, 1(1), 49–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Green, B. (2009). The primacy of practice and the problem of representation. In B. Green (Ed.), Understanding and researching professional practice (pp. 39–54). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  28. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. London: SCM Press.Google Scholar
  29. Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays. New York/Toronto: Harper Colophon Books.Google Scholar
  30. Hodkinson, P. (2008). Improving workplace learning: Learning cultures the key. Sydney: TAFE NSW, 2009. http://www.icvet.tafensw.edu.au/focus/workplace_learning.htm
  31. Jarzabkowski, P. (2004). Strategy as practice: Recursiveness, adaptation, and practices-in-use. Organization Studies, 25(4), 529–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Johnsson, M. C., & Boud, D. (2010). Towards an emergent view of learning work. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 29(3), 359–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McCall, M. W., Lombardo, M. M., & Morrison, A. M. (1988). The lessons of experience: How successful executives develop on the job. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  34. Okrent, M. (2000). Intentionality, teleology, and normativity. In J. E. Faulconer & M. A. Wrathall (Eds.), Appropriating Heidegger (pp. 191–198). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Olssen, M. (2006). Understanding the mechanisms of neoliberal control: Lifelong learning, flexibility and knowledge capitalism. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 25(3), 213–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Petzinger, T. (1999). Complexity – More than a fad? In M. Lissack & H. P. Gunz (Eds.), Managing complexity in organizations: A view in many directions (pp. 29–34). Westport: Quorum.Google Scholar
  37. Pollock, G. (2006). Counter the concentrationary imaginary: Aesthetics as resistance. Unpublished conference: Discourse, power, resistance IV. Manchester: Manchester Metropolitan University.Google Scholar
  38. Power, M. (1994). The audit explosion. London: Demos. Viewed March 14, 2008. http://www.demos.co.uk/publications/auditexplosion
  39. Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Prigogine, I. (n.d.). Interviews on YouTube. YouTube. Viewed January 12, 2009. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NCdpMlYJxQ
  41. Reay, D. (2004). It’s all becoming a habitus: Beyond the habitual use of habitus in educational research. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 25(4), 431–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development of culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In J. Wertsch, P. Del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139–164). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2001). National, international and transnational construction of new ­public management. In T. Christensen & P. Lægreid (Eds.), New public management: The transformation of ideas and practice (pp. 43–72). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  45. SASP. (2007). South Australia’s state plan. Adelaide: The Government of South Australia. Viewed February 1, 2010. http://saplan.org.au/content/view/127/159/
  46. Schatzki, T. (1996). Social practices. A Wittgensteinian approach to human activity and the social. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schatzki, T. (2001). Introduction. In T. Schatzki, K. Knorr-Cetina, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Schatzki, T. (2002). The site of the social: A philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Schatzki, T., Knorr-Cetina, K., & von Savigny, E. (Eds.). (2001). The practice turn in contemporary theory. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Strathern, M. (2000a). Introduction. In M. Strathern (Ed.), Audit cultures: Anthropological studies in accountability, ethics, and the academy (pp. 1–18). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Strathern, M. (2000b). The tyranny of transparency. British Educational Research Journal, 26(3), 309–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Strathern, M. (2008). Unintended consequences: Interview with Marilyn Strathern. Blog. Viewed February 2, 2010. http://ipnosis.postle.net/pages/UN-CONStrathern.htm
  53. Tronto, J. (1987, Summer). Beyond gender difference to a theory of care. Signs, 12(4), 644–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tronto, J. (1999). Care ethics: Moving forward. Hypatia, 14(1).Google Scholar
  55. Vickers, M. H. (2001). New managerialism and Australian police organizations: A cautionary research note. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 14(1), 7–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wertsch, J., Del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (1995). Sociocultural studies of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Westacott, J. (2009). The future of government: Introduction. Adelaide: The Government of South Australia – PSPC. Viewed September 25, 2009. http://www.pspc.sa.gov.au/index.php/challenging-the-public-sector/67-launch-of-the-pspc-partnership-with-anzsog-challenging-the-public-sector
  58. Wittgenstein, L. (1968). Philosophical investigations (3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell. (Reprint of English text with index ed.)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of South AustraliaAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations