Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the emancipatory promises and realities of information and communication technology (ICT) in Egypt.

The combination of Habermasian and Foucauldian ideas implemented by a critical discourse analysis of the Egyptian Information Society Policy and interviews with employees of local decision support systems employees. Promises and rhetoric are contrasted with findings and questioned with regards to their validity.

On the policy level, analysis shows that the emancipating rhetoric of ICT is not followed through. ICT is mostly seen as a means of attracting foreign direct investment. Neither political participation nor educational benefits are promoted seriously. On the local level, culture and organisational realities prevent individuals from exploiting the emancipatory potential of the technology.

The combination of the Habermasian and Foucauldian approach exposes the problems of ICT use in developing countries. It shows that emancipation is used to legitimise ICT policies but is not taken seriously on a policy level in Egypt. Local implementations also fail to deliver on their promise. In order to have emancipatory effects, ICT policy and use will need to be reconsidered.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a Foucauldian concept into the theory and practice of OD and change management. The piece challenges Habermasian a priori assumptions about organizational diagnosis and intervention.

This is a conceptual paper.

Literature points to the benefit of considering the possibility of parrhesiastic behavior in change management and organization development as part of a broader set of diagnostic tools.

Future research should engage in practice driven test cases, interview practicing change managers, and refine the concept for use as a diagnostic tool.

Including discussions of parrhesia in change management and OD study and practices can better prepare change professionals for the realities of contemporary organizational practices.

To date, the links developed in this manuscript have not been made in the management literature, though it builds upon emerging literature in critical management studies and human resource management. It has the potential to influence both theory and practices of both OD and change management.

This review essay of Amy Allen's The Politics of Our Selves focuses on the book's excellent work in addressing some of the centermost philosophical and metaphilosophical problems in contemporary critical theory. I first consider the book's intricate discussions of the work of Habermas and Foucault. I then leverage these discussions to pose a question that is crucial for contemporary critical theory. The crucial question concerns the metaphilosophical status of critical theory with respect to what we ought to expect contemporary critical theory to do. What is the best way of interpreting critical theory as a philosophical project?

According to its advocates, community mediation empowers disputants in their dealing with conflict. However, critics of the community mediation movement have often contended that far from being empowering, community mediation programs constitute a means of social control and of informal state power enhancement. This paper undertakes a socio-theoretical examination of community mediation's empowerment claims and of its criticisms. The paradigmatic and contrasting works of Habermas on communicative action and of Foucault on power, freedom and governmentality are applied to community mediation. The paper contends that although Habermas’ insights are supportive of the community mediation agenda, the criticisms they engender might provide a way to move beyond optimistically naive assumptions regarding empowering claims. Conversely, although Foucault's work has often been used to dismiss community mediation's empowerment promises, the paper argues that it is possible to re-examine the empowering potential of community mediation from a Foucauldian perspective. It concludes that community mediation can provide a space for personal empowerment, if understood in a nuanced way.

The purpose of this paper is to review extant accounting research combining institutional and critical theories to examine whether the paradigmatic tensions associated with such research can be alleviated whilst engendering politically engaged scholarship aimed at facilitating processes of emancipation in organisational fields.

The paper provides a review of relevant accounting research and offers recommendations for how to combine institutional and critical research approaches in a paradigmatically consistent way.

Extant accounting research combining institutional and critical theories has not dealt effectively with the partly inter-related problems of ontological drift (i.e. misalignment of ontological assumptions and epistemological commitments) and the conflation of notions of agency and structure. If such problems remain unaddressed institutional research aimed at generating politically engaged scholarship and human emancipation is unlikely to progress in a paradigmatically consistent direction. Recommendations for how to address these issues, grounded in recent advances in critical realism, are elaborated upon. This results in a contingent view of the ontological possibilities of emancipation in organisational fields as well as the epistemological premises that need to be filled to engender processes of emancipation.

The paper reviews an emerging body of research seeking to radicalise institutional accounting research and enhance its contributions to democratic debate in organisations and society. It also outlines how some pertinent paradigmatic tensions associated with such research may be addressed.

This paper aims to respond to recent calls to rethink the concept of managerial capture as it has been used to date to explore and explain the limited impacts of new forms of stakeholder engagement.

The paper explores the grounding of views of managerial capture in the Habermasian ideal of participative democracy. It then attempts to re‐conceive the understanding of capture by drawing on Foucault's account of disciplinary power and its constitutive effects on subjectivity.

Capture appears as a managerial mindset constituted by the pervasive demand for shareholder value. When stakeholder issues are considered within this frame they must be recast in ways that pose no moral or emotional challenge to the dominant logic of shareholder maximisation. This moral distancing or amoralisation can be traced to the accounting practices that make management visible to their superiors (board of directors or more senior levels of management) in terms of their utility. In seeking the recognition of their superiors, individual managers make themselves subjects of this deeper form of capture.

A less restricted lens for conducting future research in managerial capture is offered. While in practice stakeholder engagement fails to live up to the Habermasian ideal, it still holds some promise for delivering management accountability.

The paper shows that ideas of power and subjectivity are key to an understanding of environmental accountability and open the social and environmental accountability literature to a new set of interesting problematics.

In this chapter, I respond to the thoughtful and insightful critical discussions of my book, The Politics of Our Selves, offered by Colin Koopman, Johanna Meehan, and Christopher Zurn. After distinguishing between the interpretive, conceptual, and practical–political aims of the book, I defend my interpretive claims vis-a-vis Foucault and Habermas against criticisms raised by Koopman and Zurn, clarify my understanding of the conceptual aim of the book in response to Koopman's critique, and indicate how my approach to the practical–political questions about overturning gender subordination raised by Zurn and Meehan can be developed further.

While mainstream organization theory has contributed to making organizations a productive part of society, they have simultaneously contributed to the creation of a “dark side” of organizational existence that stifles the individual, frustrates the attainment of desired social ends and distorts many core values of democratic societies. Mainstream theory recognizes this “dark side,” but has been unsuccessful at suggesting how it might be ameliorated or avoided. The writings of Foucault, however, reveal not only how the “dark side” arises but also how it might be avoided so that organizations may develop and pursue interests in common with both society and the individual.