2020
DOI: 10.1108/jmh-08-2020-0050
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

False binaries in management history, and the scope for a postcolonial project

Abstract: Purpose This study aims to offer a postcolonial approach that goes past current management history controversies. Design/methodology/approach Discussion of current management history controversies with examples. Findings Post-colonial approaches to management history enable engagement with questions of power and knowledge in the management discipline. Research limitations/implications Further historical research is needed that considers the interplay of disciplinary knowledge and the historical events un… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The first part identifies March's work on organizational behaviour and decision-making as an enduring concern with a cascading set of three paradoxes that beset modern organizations, leaders and those who work within them, namely, a paradox of rationality; a paradox of performance; and a paradox of meaning. This part of the framework answers appeals for greater attention to paradox in historical studies (Clegg et al, 2021), extends the historical analysis of the contributions to paradox studies of figures such as Mary Parker Follett and Douglass North (Bruce and von Staden, 2017;Eylon, 1998) and contributes to reflexive thinking about the history and future of modernization and modernity (Bowden, 2016;Seifried and Novicevic, 2017;Srinivas, 2021).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…The first part identifies March's work on organizational behaviour and decision-making as an enduring concern with a cascading set of three paradoxes that beset modern organizations, leaders and those who work within them, namely, a paradox of rationality; a paradox of performance; and a paradox of meaning. This part of the framework answers appeals for greater attention to paradox in historical studies (Clegg et al, 2021), extends the historical analysis of the contributions to paradox studies of figures such as Mary Parker Follett and Douglass North (Bruce and von Staden, 2017;Eylon, 1998) and contributes to reflexive thinking about the history and future of modernization and modernity (Bowden, 2016;Seifried and Novicevic, 2017;Srinivas, 2021).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…The implication of adopting presentist and universal perspectives is that one history can become imposed on collectives whose heritage and worldview are at odds with the dominant version. This circumstance leads to a collective adopting of a disenfranchising or even constraining way of knowing the past (Jones et al , 2012; Srinivas, 2021; Verhoef, 2021).…”
Section: Reflections On the Shape Of The History Of Management Thoughtmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Management education is generally understood to have emerged in tandem with modern industrialization in the West in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, subsequently diffusing into the rest of the world (St. John, 1986;Bowden, 2018). In the postcolonial nations, however, this emergence happened in the midst of the colonial encounter when the factory system gradually replaced the home-based cottage enterprises and capitalism replaced feudalism (Srinivas, 2020). History informs us that from the sixteenth century onwards, the most potent form of work and organization was the colonial institution of slavery.…”
Section: Iqbal and Management Educationmentioning
confidence: 99%