Organizational Symbolism: A Topic To Expand Organizational Analysis

Dandridge, Thomas C.; Mitroff, Ian I.; Joyce, William F.

doi:10.5465/amr.1980.4288894

Cited by 241 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our understanding of myth is largely inspired by interpretivist work on organizational symbolism (Brown 1994;Dandridge et al 1980;Pondy et al 1983), which aligns with the constructivist underpinnings of most paradox research (Jarzabkowski and Lê 2015;Smith and Lewis 2011). Furthermore, we consider mythmaking and the defensive responses constituted therein as having certain discursive effects (Fairclough and Wodak 1997).…”

Section: Data and Analytic Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores how paradoxical tensions between economic growth and environmental protection are avoided through organizational mythmaking. By examining the European oil and gas supermajors' ''CEOspeak'' about climate change, we show how mythmaking facilitates the disregarding, diverting, and/or displacing of sustainability tensions. In doing so, our findings further illustrate how certain defensive responses are employed: (1) regression, or retreating to the comforts of past familiarities, (2) fantasy, or escaping the harsh reality that fossil fuels and climate change are indeed irreconcilable, and (3) projecting, or shifting blame to external actors for failing to address climate change. By highlighting the discursive effects of enacting these responses, we illustrate how the European oil and gas supermajors self-determine their inability to substantively address the complexities of climate change. We thus argue that defensive responses are not merely a form of mismanagement as the paradox and corporate sustainability literature commonly suggests, but a strategic resource that poses serious ethical concerns given the imminent danger of issues such as climate change.

show abstract

Section: Data and Analytic Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As we noted, in the literature review, four categories of artifacts can be distinguished: stories, arrangements, rituals, and language (Dandridge, Mitroff, and Joyce 1980;Trice and Beyer 1993). Stories in organizations frequently refer to exceptional behaviors of a senior manager (Martin et al 1983).…”

Section: Market Dynamismmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multiple-Layer Model of Market-Oriented Organizational Culture: Measurement Issues and Performance Outcomes

Homburg¹,

Pflesser²

2004

Perspektiven Der Marktorientierten Unternehmensführung

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research addressing market orientation from a cultural perspective typically has used behavioral measures of this construct. Drawing on literature in the fields of organizational theory and marketing, the authors develop a multilayer model of market-oriented organizationajl culture. They draw an explicit distinction among values that support mar,-ket orientation, norms for market orientation, artifacts indicating high ana low market orientation, and market-oriented behaviors. On the basis Of qualitative research and a subsequent survey, the authors develop scales for measuring the different layers of market-oriented culture and analyzfe relationships among the different components of market-oriented culture. Findings indicate that artifacts play a crucial role in determining behavior within organizations. Results also indicate that a market-oriented culture influences financial performance indirectly through market performance and that this relationship is stronger in highly dynamic market$.A Multiple-Layer Model of Market-Oriented Organizational Culture: Measurement Issues and Performance OutcomesDuring the past decade, there has been a growing stream of research exploring the construct of market orientation. Research in this area has addressed the construct's conceptual clarification

show abstract

“…The linguistic turn in organizational studies emphasizes the vital role of language in understanding organizations (Alvesson & Kä rreman, 2000;Dandridge, Mitroff, & Joyce, 1980;Ford & Ford, 1995;Pondy & Mitroff, 1979;Zald, 1996). Previous research has shown that managers are essentially discursive beings, spending twothirds to three-fourths of their time engaged in verbal activity (Mintzberg, 1973).…”

Section: A Rhetorical Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

A Rhetorical Theory of Diffusion

Green¹

2004

The Academy of Management Review

198

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I use rhetorical theory to reconceptualize the diffusion of managerial practices. Specifically, I argue that the diffusion of a practice depends on the discursive justifications used to rationalize it. When such justifications are accepted and taken for granted, a practice reaches a state of institutionalization. Furthermore, I propose that changes in justifications and diffusion provide a basis for explaining institutionalization as both a process and a state. I then develop several propositions from this model.The management field has witnessed the rise and fall of many managerial practices, including sensitivity training, quality circles, and reengineering (Carson, Lanier, Carson, & Guidry, 2000;Eccles, Nohria, & Berkley, 1992). Most management innovations arrive and dissipate quickly (Abrahamson & Fairchild, 1999), while a few thrive and diffuse broadly throughout the business community. Although several theories explain variation in the diffusion of managerial practices (Abrahamson, 1991;O'Neill, Pouder, & Buchholtz, 1998;Rogers, 1995), critics argue that these explanations often emphasize realist concerns at the expense of linguistic considerations (Hirsch, 1986;Strang & Meyer, 1994). Therefore, in this article I use neoinstitutional theory, because it emphasizes the role of language or discourse in the diffusion process (Strang & Meyer, 1994).Proponents of the neoinstitutional perspective view the spread of managerial practices as a salient organizational act that must make sense to decision makers and must satisfy the institutional environment (Scott, 1995;Tolbert & Zucker, 1996). Managerial practices are accompanied by legitimating managerial discourse, which explains how practices help managers rationally pursue valued goals (Friedland & Alford, 1991;Strang & Meyer, 1994). For example, the management fashion variant of neoinstitutionalism (Abrahamson, 1996;Abrahamson & Fairchild, 1999;Kieser, 1997) describes how managers use discourse to communicate to organizational stakeholders that the adoption of a given practice complies with norms of rationality and norms of progress (Abrahamson, 1996;Abrahamson & Fairchild, 1999). Thus, discourse shapes decisions about the adoption and wider diffusion of managerial practices (Abrahamson & Fairchild, 1999;Strang & Meyer, 1994).Although neoinstitutional theory includes a role for discourse, two key problems remain. First, it suggests a model of diffusion that is inherently adaptivist (Hasselbladh & Kallinikos, 2000). It shifts rational adaptation from the need to acquire resources in the technoeconomic environment to the need to conform normatively to the social environment (Hasselbladh & Kallinikos, 2000;Hasselbladh & Theodoridis, 1997), and it fails to explain why those needs exist or become influential or why a particular structure fulfills the need in question (Perrow, 1993). Second, neoinstitutional theory focuses on how institutions constrain actors at the expense of explaining how actors create institutions (Barley & Tolbert, 1997;Zucker, 1987). Culture and...

show abstract

Organizational Symbolism: A Topic To Expand Organizational Analysis

Cited by 241 publications

References 8 publications

Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking

Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking

A Multiple-Layer Model of Market-Oriented Organizational Culture: Measurement Issues and Performance Outcomes

A Rhetorical Theory of Diffusion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About