Towards a progressive understanding of performativity in critical management studies

Abstract

A central debate in critical management studies (CMS) revolves around the concern that critical research has rather little influence on what managers do in practice. We argue that this is partly because CMS research often focuses on criticizing antagonistically, rather than engaging with managers. In light of this, we seek to re-interpret the anti-performative stance of CMS by focusing on how researchers understand, conceptualize and make use of the performative effects of language. Drawing on the works of JL Austin and Judith Butler, we put forward the concept of progressive performativity, which requires critical researchers to stimulate the performative effects of language in order to induce incremental, rather than radical, changes in managerial behaviour. The research framework we propose comprises two interrelated processes: (i) the strategy of micro-engagement, which allows critical researchers to identify and 'ally' with internal activists among managers, and to support their role as internal agents of change; and (ii) 'reflexive conscientization' − that is, a dialogic process between researchers and researched that aims to gradually raise the critical consciousness of actors in order to provide spaces in which new practices can be 'talked into existence' through the performative effects of language.

“Buying” Corporate Social Responsibility: Organisational Identity Orientation as a Determinant of Practice Adoption

“…In particular, large organisations tend to be subject to internal struggles over which orientation dominates (Albert and Whetten 1985;Brickson 2005;Pratt and Foreman 2000). In the context of CSR, this may apply to the possibly more socially oriented identity orientation of the CSR-department (relational or even collectivistic), and the more instrumentally oriented identity orientation of functional units such as accounting or finance (individualistic) (see Haack et al 2012;Wickert and Schaefer 2015). While these differences that reside within a single organisation are important, they can nevertheless be analysed with our typology, as it provides an analytical tool to compare not only different organisations, but also different departments or functional units within a particular organisation.…”

Pragmatism, Critical Theory and Business Ethics: Converging Lines

“…However, their aloofness from the ''problems of men'' more and more came to be regarded as inconsistent with attempts to promote social change, as reinforcing an inside-looking attitude, as preventing the articulation of positive wants and desires (instead of only negatively deconstructing the existing situation), and as reinforcing a cynical consciousness, in which Critical management scholars depend on and profit from the same organizational world they critique (Butler and Spoelstra 2014;Parker 2014). These concerns were translated into a new view of Critical management studies as Critically or progressively performative, purporting to ''actively and subversively intervene in managerial discourse and practices,'' guided by an affirmative stance, an ethic of care, a pragmatic orientation, attending to potentialities and a normative orientation (Spicer et al 2009(Spicer et al , p. 544, 2016Hartmann 2014;Wickert and Schaefer 2015).…”

Towards a Political Philosophy of Management: Performativity & Visibility in Management Practices

“…The notion of performativity lies at the heart of numerous ontological discussions in MOS (Orlikowski, 2005;Spicer et al, 2009;Cabantous and Gond, 2011;Guérard et al, 2013;Wickert and Schaefer, 2015;Gond et al, 2016;de Vaujany and Mitev, 2017). These discussions draw from debates within various areas of scholarship, such as linguistics (Austin, 1962), gender studies (Butler, 1990(Butler, , 1993 or Science and Technology Studies (Barad, 2007).…”