Search results

Although Niklas Luhmann refrains from an explicit treatment of power as a force of social constraint, I propose that, if partially reconstructed, his Systems Theory can illuminate the subject considerably. I show this by distinguishing between five elements in Luhmann's treatment of each of the following six social subsystems: the economy, politics, law, science, religion and education. The five subsystem elements are: (1) a binary code, (2) a basis of authority, (3) a language of social communication, (4) a generalized medium of communication, and (5) a social function. Whereas Luhmann assumes that each subsystem approximates autopoiesis, or self‐contained internal operation and autonomy, I assume the pervasiveness of interpenetration, whereby operations is one subsystem nonetheless affect operations in others. Subsequently, I juxtapose the reconstructed systems‐theoretic framework developed in the first half of the paper with Michel Foucault's power/knowledge framework. I conclude that the use of a reconstructed systems‐theoretic approach, based loosely on Luhmann's original theory, could greatly illuminate the specifics of power/knowledge in modern societies, to an even greater extent than Foucault does himself.

The purpose of this paper is to engage knowledge management (KM) researchers and practitioners with Foucault’s power/knowledge lens as a way of thinking about and recognising the central role of power in organisational knowledge cultures.

The empirical illustrations in this paper are drawn from two qualitative studies in different professional and institutional contexts (insurance and theatre work). Both studies used in-depth interviews and discourse analysis as their principal methods of data collection and analysis.

The empirical examples illustrate how practitioners operate within complex power/knowledge relations that shape their practices of knowledge sharing, generation and use. The findings show how an application of the power/knowledge lens renders visible both the constraining and productive force of power in KM.

Researchers may apply the conceptual tools presented here in a wider variety of institutional and professional contexts to examine the complex and multifaceted role of power in a more in-depth way.

KM professionals will benefit from an understanding of organisational power/knowledge relations when seeking to promote transformational changes in their organisations and build acceptance for KM initiatives.

This paper addresses a gap in the literature around theoretical and empirical discussions of power as well as offering an alternative to prevailing resource-based views of power in KM.

There is much hype about academics' attitude to Wikipedia. This paper seeks to go beyond anecdotal evidence by drawing on empirical research to ascertain how academics respond to Wikipedia and the implications these responses have for the take‐up of Web 2.0+. It aims to test the hypothesis that Web 2.0+, as a platform built around the socially constructed nature of knowledge, is inimical to conventional power‐knowledge arrangements in which academics are traditionally positioned as the key gatekeepers to knowledge.

The research relies on quantitative and qualitative data to provide an evidence‐based analysis of the attitudes of academics towards the student use of Wikipedia and towards Web 2.0+. These data were provided via an online survey made available to a number of universities in Australia and abroad. As well as the statistical analysis of quantitative data, qualitative data were subjected to thematic analysis using relational coding.

The data by and large demonstrate that Wikipedia continues to be a divisive issue among academics, particularly within the “soft sciences”. However, Wikipedia is not as controversial as popular publicity would lead one to believe. Many academics use it extensively though cautiously themselves, and therefore tend to support a cautious approach to its use by students. However, evidence supports the assertion that there is an implicit if not explicit awareness among academics that Wikipedia, and possibly by extension Web 2.0+, are disruptors of conventional academic power‐knowledge arrangements.

It is clear that academics respond differently to the disruptive effects that Web 2.0+has on the political economy of academic knowledge construction. Contrary to popular reports, responses to Wikipedia are not overwhelmingly focused on resistance but encompass both cautious and creative acceptance. It is becoming equally clear that the increasing uptake of Web 2.0+in higher education makes it inevitable that academics will have to address the “political” consequences of this reframing of the ownership and control of academic knowledge production.

The paper demonstrates originality and value by providing a unique, evidence‐based insight into the different ways in which academics respond to Wikipedia as an archetypal Web 2.0+application and by positioning Web 2.0+within the political economy of academic knowledge construction.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate the act of shadow reporting by a social movement organisation as a form of shadow accounting within a sustained campaign against a target corporation. Situated within a consideration of power relations, the rationales underlying the production of the shadow report, and the shadow reports perceived value and limits as a shadow accounting mechanism, are investigated.

A Foucauldian approach to power/knowledge and truth is drawn upon in the analysis of a single case study. Alongside a consideration of the shadow report itself, interviews with both the preparers of the report and senior management of the corporation targeted comprise the main data.

The paper provides an empirical investigation into shadow reporting as a form of shadow accounting. While a range of insights are garnered into the preparation, dissemination and impact of the shadow report, key findings relate to a consideration of power relations. The perceived “truth” status of corporate accounts compared to accounts prepared by shadow accountants is problematised through a consideration of technologies of power and power/knowledge formations. Power relations are subsequently recognised as fundamental to the emancipatory potential of shadow reporting.

Results from a single case study are presented. Furthermore, given the production of the shadow report occurred several years prior to the collection of data, participants were asked to reflect on past events. Findings are therefore based on those reflections.

While previous studies have considered the preparation of shadow reports and their transformative potential, this study is, the author believes, the first to empirically analyse the preparation, dissemination and perceived impacts of shadow reporting from the perspectives of both the shadow report producers and the target corporation.

After reviewing cultural heritage institutions; crowdsourcing initiatives and tension between univocal and multivocal views of those who interact with cultural expressions, this paper argues that to support vibrant and effective crowdsourcing communities while ensuring the quality of the work of crowdsourcing project volunteers it is essential to reevaluate and transform the traditional univocal, top-down approach to representation and organization. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This conceptual paper applies Foucault’s power–knowledge construct and theories of representation to the processes and practices employed in cultural heritage crowdsourcing projects.

Viewed through the Foucauldian lens, cultural heritage professionals are regarded as active parts of the power–knowledge relationship due to their direct engagement in the representation, organization and dissemination of knowledge, exercised not only through the traditional role of cultural heritage institutions as gatekeepers of knowledge but, more importantly, through the power of representation and organization of the cultural heritage.

This paper provides a theoretical understanding of cultural heritage crowdsourcing initiatives and proposes a framework for multivocal representation of cultural heritage expressions in which the voices of volunteers have the same validity as the voices of cultural heritage professionals.

This case study examines whether an academic listserv functions primarily as a medium for progressive discourse in which enacted power relations are collaborative or primarily as a medium for discourse in which norms are unilaterally established and off‐line hierarchical power relations are re‐enacted. A few instances of progressive norm setting and other indicators of collaborative power relations were found. However, findings overall suggest that the hierarchical power relations of the college context were re‐enacted in the listserv as revealed by the manner in which the discourse was patterned by gender, rank, and role.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the dynamics that underlie contradictions and paradoxes in organizational change over time. Little research has explored the role of contradictions and paradoxes in the continuous cycle of organizing, which are simultaneously embedded in the process and outcomes of organizational change. An encompassing framework, based on the thinking of Michel Foucault, more fully captures both the paradoxical roots and the effects of organizational change.

An in‐depth qualitative case study of an IT‐based organizational change in a company offers a clear longitudinal analysis, based on 31 semi‐structured interviews and direct field observation.

The Foucauldian framework deepens understanding of organizational change and its underlying dynamics by highlighting contradictions and paradoxes as both the medium and the outcome of the organizing process over time. The organizing process evolves through power‐knowledge relations, which are forces that provide the energy to make change possible.

The findings indicate the need for further research to develop insight into Foucauldian concepts, such as by replicating the proposed methodology in other companies or with other types of organizational change.

This paper is of managerial interest for various corporate players (management, human resources, information management) who must understand what underlies employees' acceptance of organizational change.

The proposed conceptual model can help interpret the role of contradictions and paradoxes in the organizing process. The strength of this “political model of organizational change” is that it can be combined with other perspectives, such as change management, to explore how organizations drive change and how managers can integrate contradictions and paradoxes in change management to help the organization further evolve.

This research studied the integration of Ontario midwives into the hospital system, through analysis of 15 semi-structured interviews with midwives throughout the Canadian province. In 1994, following activism from parents and families who wanted “alternative” choices for childbearing, Ontario became the first Canadian province to legislate and publicly fund midwives. This followed nearly a century in which midwifery had all but disappeared in Canada, in part due to deliberate campaigns to discredit woman-centered health care and knowledge. The findings from this research were considered through the lens of Foucault’s concept of power/knowledge, to identify the ways in which medicalized norms have been privileged in Ontario birth care, and to demonstrate how pregnant people¹ and midwives have struggled against the power/knowledge of hospital environments. This research looked at the ways that midwifery, as a social movement born of feminist and countercultural activism, offers possibilities for resisting disciplinary power. Midwives in Ontario offer an alternative to medicalized childbirth which recognizes that a birth caregiver’s role is not only the physical care of parents and babies, but guidance for families during a liminal experience – the birth of a new child, which changes a family permanently and profoundly.

In order for any discussion of employment relations or HRM to be of value, debate must be theoretically grounded. Not only this, it must allow for consideration of specific employment practices, rather than being couched in very general terms. This paper examines the theoretical frameworks available for such an analysis. It takes as its focus the ‘technology’ traditionally associated with personnel management — job analysis, evaluation, appraisal, training and development etc.‐and tries to offer a framework of analysis which provides an analytical as opposed to a merely descriptive coherence. Only by doing so are the foundations laid for a comparative analysis, which allows statements to be made to the effect that changes have occurred in patterns of employer‐employee relations.