Search results

Although the gap between rhetoric and reality is not a specific human resource management (HRM) feature, the disconnection between discourse and action seems to have reached unusual stages in this case. Not much is known about HRM in Portugal, but it is clear that Portuguese academics and practitioners have extensively adopted the global HRM rhetoric. With an environment apparently unfavorable to the HRM normative model, this paper examines the ways in which global HRM rhetoric meets Portuguese reality.

The purpose of this paper is to present a critical view of rhetoric, science, scientific research, and management that discloses the role of rhetoric in these fields and that offers a conceptual framework for this special issue of the Journal of Organizational Change Management.

The approach taken is a critical and historical analysis.

The following main topics are uncovered: first, even if we think on scientific theories in terms of the classical concept of proven knowledge by empirical evidence and logical deduction, they are constituted by propositions accepted by reasonable rhetorical arguments, which depend on the paradigm of each scientific community. Second, even if we consider that scientific research is a strictly rational activity that follows precise methods, it continuously involves rhetorical reflections, judgements, arguments and debates. Third, even if management sciences usually conceptualize management as activities led by rational arguments and decisions, management constantly involves rhetorical conversations, in which managers use language for achieving their aims.

Beyond the scope of many research papers and books that emphasize the role of rhetoric in science and in management, the paper offers a systematic approach on the foundations of the functions of rhetoric in science and in management.

The purpose of this paper is to improve the understanding of the rhetoric used to promote enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, which are complex organisation-wide software packages inherently connected to the domains of management and organisation.

The study adopts a post-essentialist view on ERP systems and takes the form of a rhetorical analysis. Engaging in rhetorical scholarship in the area of technological change and management fashion literatures, this paper offers a close reading of a management text on ERP systems by Thomas H. Davenport published in 1998 in the Harvard Business Review.

The rhetorical analysis distinguishes and identifies three rhetorical strategies – namely, rationalisation, theorisation and contradiction – used to promote ERP systems and thus involved in the construction of the phenomenon revolving around ERP systems.

In spite of the importance of the rhetorical analysis of information technology in the context in which they operate, this paper argues that constructions of ERP systems should also be analysed beyond organisation-specific considerations. It further suggests that both researchers and practitioners should take seriously the rhetoric invoked by the well-known management writer that may easily go unnoticed.

Previous research has shown that eras of managerial rhetorics have alternated between normative and rational ideologies. The purpose of this study is to test the influence of generational membership on this phenomenon.

Examining data for the past 130 years, eras of managerial rhetorics are matched with recurring generational archetypes.

Empirical evidence is analyzed and found to be generally supportive of the hypotheses: generational membership is associated with the timing of the alternation in managerial rhetorics.

The findings of association suggest generational change could be a causal driver of long‐term change in managerial rhetorics.

The model tested implies a predictive ability to anticipate the movement from the current normative rhetoric to a new rational rhetoric in the near future.

This study is the first to find evidence that the alternation between rational and normative managerial rhetorics is related to generational effects.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the reasons for and outcomes of the rhetoric of disclosures of human capital (HC) management practices and to discuss how disclosures could be changed to be more meaningful and appropriate in practice. Thus, the research question of interest to this paper is “Is the rhetoric of HC disclosure achieved in practice?”

Using a case study approach, the paper utilises content analysis to examine the rhetoric of HC disclosures and the results of HC management practices utilising corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports, newsletters, annual reports, and other publicly available information, with an emphasis on media reports. The case study organisation is Westpac Bank (Australia), chosen because of the transformation in its approach to HC management since 2001 and its reputation as a global leader in CSR practice and reporting.

The paper illustrates how highly exposed HC disclosures are to scrutiny by both internal and external stakeholders and if the rhetoric is not transformed into practice how the disclosures can be used as a weapon by adversarial stakeholders to attack the organisation and/or attempt to change the balance of power between management and employees. It is argued that it could be more beneficial if HC disclosures were to report on the ongoing struggles and conflicts that are inherent in HC management practice, rather than not admitting to or not mentioning them at all, in order to reduce information asymmetry and build trust in the disclosures so that that the disclosures are less likely to be seen as merely rhetorical arguments.

The paper is limited to one particular organisation from which generalisation is not possible. Since the research is undertaken from outside the organisation, and relies largely on secondary data sources, it thus also relies in part on conjecture about the change processes which occurred inside the organisation.

The paper adds to the emerging discussion of how organisations put their HC management rhetoric into practice and whether or not they achieve their intended outcomes.

The current research agenda for construction process improvement is heavily influenced by the rhetoric of business process re‐engineering (BPR). In contrast to the wider literature on BPR, there is little evidence of critical thought within the construction management research community. A postmodernist interpretation is advocated whereby the reality of management practice is defined by the dominant management discourse. The persuasiveness of BPR rhetoric is analysed with particular reference to the way in which it plays on the insecurity of modern managers. Despite the lip service given to ‘empowerment’ and ‘teamwork’, the dominant theme of the re‐engineering movement is that of technocratic totalitarianism. From a critical perspective, it is suggested that BPR is imposed on construction organizations to ensure continued control by the industry's dominant power groups. Whilst industry leaders are fond of calling for ‘attitudinal and cultural improvement’, the language of the accepted research agenda continually reinforces the industry's dominant culture of ‘control and command’. Therefore, current research directions in process improvement perpetuate existing attitudes rather than facilitating cultural change. The concept of lean construction is seen to be the latest manifestation of this phenomenon.

The purpose of this study is to present empirical evidence of the nature of corporate rhetoric in developing human capital and how it becomes embedded within a large international organization operating in the Nordic region. The qualitative case study aims to examine the sensemaking of individual managers, and how human capital rhetoric is selected, acted upon, and retained by employees.

An exploratory case study approach is taken in order to provide an in‐depth understanding of the rhetoric and reality of human capital development. Focus groups, archival data, and interviews with key informants (i.e. external consultants, senior executives, managers, and employees from various departments across the Nordic business units) are used to explore different perspectives on the phenomena of human capital development.

The findings highlight a number of key dimensions that can distort the rhetoric of human capital: corporate strategy, organizational structure, managerial style, and the cognitive frames of individuals.

The study suggests a need for senior managers to take pre‐emptive actions to close the gap between the rhetoric of human capital development and what actually happens in practice. A lack of clarity concerning human capital concepts and their outcomes is to be overcome through more effective communication strategies.

The research suggests that managers construct rhetoric that has to be absorbed by multiple audiences and that, in some cases, a counter‐rhetoric of human capital is formed. Employees interpret human capital rhetoric, shape it and alter it in their own interests. Ambiguity and ignorance over human capital concepts is succeeded by pragmatic assessment and refinement on the part of employees, with the initial human capital development program iteratively amended as it passes through the organization.

The need for a permanent revolution in organizational structures and use of human resources is legitimated by reference to the need to adapt to ever more turbulent times. This gives rise to and is sustained by a distinctive anti‐bureaucratic rhetoric based largely on over‐hyped, unrepresentative examples and misunderstood processes. However, though empirically unsustainable, the rhetoric survives, in part because this kind of managerial discourse is playing by different rules. Explores and challenges the internal dynamics of this discourse to show that the rhetoric of discontinuity has been a continuous feature. Uses case studies of privatized utilities and analysis of the literature to explore both the gap between rhetoric and reality, and how managers operate in that gap.

This paper explores strategic change communication, framed by the idea that managers can be viewed as rhetoricians. The purpose of this paper is to present and discuss senior managers' subjective experiences of rhetorical aspects of change management.

The paper draws on a case study from ABB Sweden (a power and automation technology company). In‐depth interviews with senior managers, with vast experience of change management, constitute the empirical source.

The most important finding is the managers' overall reluctance towards rhetoric. According to the managers in this study, a rhetorician is an over‐enthusiastic person who “waves his arms when speaking”. To master the art of rhetoric is not believed to be of particular importance when managing strategic change.

Senior managers' potentially negative attitude concerning rhetoric should be taken into account when researchers situate change management within a rhetorical frame.

Given the large interest in “efficient” communication, generally managers should be encouraged to overcome their reluctance towards rhetoric to improve their ability to “manage meaning” constructively.

This paper contributes to change management communication insofar as it gives voice to the individual manager. This voice indicates; in a time when rhetoric, storytelling, and charismatic leadership are making ground; that the understanding of rhetoric is much more limited than the general impression might suggest.