Sunteți pe pagina 1din 25

O Acodemy ol Monogemenl Review 1997, Vol. 22, No. 2, 453-481.

POSTMODEBNISM AND OBGANIZATIONAT BESEARCH


MARTIN KILDUFF AIAY MEHRA The Pennsylvcrnicr State University
Drcrwing selectively lrom the olten countervoiling currents ol postmodernism, we crgue lor <rn epistemology thcrt combines cr skepticism towcrrd metcncrrrative with a commitment to rigorous stclndcrrds ol

enquiryinpursuitotrcdicclchallengestoccceptedknowledge.We discuss five problemctics concerned with normql science, truth, representation, siyle, cnd generclizcrbility, crnd we provide excrmples ol

postmodern crpproaches to clcrssic datq sets, Ioccrl knowledge, eclectic sources, crnd the counterintuitive. In this article we seek to provoke crn ongoing converscrtion concerning the potenticrl of postmodernism lor revolutionizing orgcnizcrtionql research'

Multiculturolism ond deconstruction qre the new rcge on coilege ccmpuses-cnd they ore destroying q student's obility to think and to vslue. (Excerpt from q lecllet distributed to fcculty odvertising cl public lecture on postmodernism, April 4, 1996, ot c major Eqstern university.)

Orgonizctional reseqrchers hcve tended to neglect or reiect the critiques ol acqdemic enquiry offered by those who write {rom one ol the mqny postmodernist perspectives. This mcry be because the import o{ postmodernist cpproqches for orgcrnizqtional studies is unciesr. Indeed, the term postmodern is itself vaguely understood: it is often equated with deconstruction (e.g;, Linsteqd, 1993)and is generqlly viewed as o nihilistic enterprise (as the lecture exqmple crbove indicates) that offers nothing beyond o cynical skepticism (cf. Codrescu, 1986: 203). Nor crre the works of quthors, such as Derrido, Foucctult, crnd Boudrillard, who ole often qssocicted with the postmodern turn, cccessible to the moiority ol those procticing organizction resecrch. Postmodern writings qre derided for their unintelligibility (Thompson, 1993: 198) crnd dismissed for reducing resecrch to textucrl crncrlysis (Giddens, I9B7).
We thonk three crnonymous reviewers qnd Jomes Wcrlsh ior pushing us to clcrrily ond shcrrpen our qrguments; Dennis Gioio, Henry Giroux, Douglos Holt, ond Ben Kleindor{er ior helplul comments on crn eorlier drolt; ond Jqcques Derridq, whose speech and writing inspired us to write this orticle. The usuol disclqimer crpplies.
453

454

Acodemy oI Monagemenl Revjew

April

hos crroused widespread clnxiety. Postmodernism h6rs been viewed entelprise thqt calis for the decrth of all scientific inquiry; the end o{ -all new linowiedge; the dissolution of 6Iny stqndards thcrt may be used to iudge q one theory crgqinst another; q banishment into uttqr relcrtivism wherein clcmor of lrogmented and contentious voices reigns (see Pauline Rosenau's 1992 bcrlanced review of these concerns and Stonley Fish's tl996l recent discussion o{ misunderstondings of postmodernism)' this Our intent in this article is to rescue the term postmodernism from to chorus of negcrtivity, ond to use the insights of postmodern epistemology alorm resecrchers in orgonizcrtional studies into pursuing provocotive is reseqrch. we chollenge the conventional wisdom th(It postmodernism incompotible with reslorch obout the world, and algue ogainst the prem-othe ture dismissal of postmodern contributions. In presenting the ccse for we discuss two relevcnce of postmodernism for organizcrtional resecrch, a cpprooches to postmodernism (the skeptical ond the offirmative), outline both these approaches, discuss ptstmodern epistemoiogy that drqws from o{ the mojor probiematics thqt derive from this postmodern episte"o*" cnd comment on (I range of resecrrch that responds to these postmology, modern problemotics.l
UNDENSTANDING POSTMODERNISM

within the sociol sciences in general, the spectel of postmodernism qs qn

Although relcltively new to olganizationol studies, postmodernism hcrs exelcised c growing influence in the sociol Sciences, from sociology and psychology to women's studies ond history (Rosenau, 1992: 85), ond is Lonsidered by =o*. to be one of the 20th century's grectest chollenges to estcrblished knowledge (Wisdom, 1987: 5). Even within the so-colled hqrd sciences such crs physics, postmodernist dilemmos cre increcrsingly deboted (Forney, I994). One reqson for postmodernism's glowing populority ocross such a wide rcnge of disciplines is cr disillusionment with whot some critics view crs the oversimplified, ncrrow, ond discrppointingly irrelevcnt work qssociqted with modern social science (Rosenqu, 1992:. I37). Gergen (1992), for excrmple, critiqued a wide longe of organizqtionol research becquse of its underlying qdherence to a crude mechqniccrl model of humcrn behcrvior. Similcrrly, Kilduff (I993) offered q detqiled critique of the Tcylorist crssumptions underlying Marqh qnd Simon's (1958)modernist mani{esto, ond Carter qnd Jackson (1993) criticized resecrrch based on
rA ccrutiongry {ootnote is in order to wqrn recrders to expect o rodiccrl depcrture from whot posses qs conventioncl thinking crmong sell-declared organizctionol postmodernists' As one reviewer hos pointed eut, we mcrke no crttempt to con{orm to existing pQstmodern critiques within organizotionql studies (see Alvesson & Deetz, 1996, {or <r review ol previous

work). Rother, we o{{er our own interpretation of the relevonce of postmodernism, <rn interpretation thcrt mcrkes no cloims to being more cuthentic thon any other, but one thcrt does try to motch the excitement ol idecls with the possibilities ol resecrrch.

I997

Kilduff c'nd Mehrq

455

expectoncy theory {or neglecting the importonce of subjective understanding in fqvor of o ncrrow focus on meosurement issues. in whot woys do these critiques derive lrom cr shsred understonding ol postmodernism? Inevitably, ony precise definition of postmodernism is likely to be disputed becouse the postmodernist label includes mony di,r.r=" intellectuql trends. As Best and Kellner (I991: 2) pointed out, "There is no unified postmodern theory, or even q coherent set of positions'" Featherstone (ig88: 207) suggested thcrt there moy be cs mcny postmodernisms os there cre postmodernists. Indeed, this very diversity is one o{ postmodernism's distinguishing chorocteristics. A typicol comment {rom repeticr postmodern perspective is 'lDiversity encouroges creqtivity, while tion anesthetizes it" (Kroll, i987: 29).

Going Beyond the Skeptical Versus Affirmctive Dichotomy In discussions ol the mony vorieties of postmodernism availoble, two distinct styles or ideci types ore often contrqsted: the skepticol ond the Gffirmcrtive (Rosenou, Ig92). Skepticcl postmodernism offers "crpessimistic, negctive, gloomy sssessment" of the possibilities of socicrl science (Ro,.tou, 1992: l5). From the skepticol perspective, cll interpretqtions of phenomenq ore equclly vclid, and the world is so complicated that concepts such os prediction ond cousolity ore irrelevont. Everything is reloted to everything else so the secrch for couses or origins must be discontinued. Skepticol postmodernists deny the possibility of on empiricql sociql science ond engcge lcrgely in critiquing existing work rqther thon undertaking new empiricol opprooches. According to Rosenau (I99I: I5), skepticol postmodernists "emphcrsize the negctive Snd lock confidence or hope in cnything" (Rosenqu, I992: I83). Afiirmative postmodernism retqins the possibility of moking discriminotions omong competing interpretotions. For exomple, Fish (I980) orgued thct interpretive communities of scholqrs guide reoders' interpretations of texts. Thus, not crll texts ore considered equolly vqlid or voluqble.2 Indeed, from this perspective, within the interpretive context, "it should be possible to invoke rules of competence, criteria of discussion snd oi consensus, good fqith, lucidity, rigor, criticism, and pedagogy" (Derridc, I988: I46). The deconstructive scholor who wishes, for exsmple, to exomine the work of the IEth century French philosopher Roussecru, "must under-

Note thcrt Fish's vision oI cn interpretive community does nqt entcril the necessity of resecrrch tecrms crttocking common problems, only the existence ol loosely afiilicrted individuol scholars. From our postmodern perspective, lrcrgmentation is q virtue, not cr weqkness. We ore
2

in sccord with Weick (1983), who questioned the benefits to scholorship of cohesive resecrrch teqms, invoking instecrd c vision of individuql reseqrchers for whom heterogeneity is strength, origincrlity c virtue, tecrm reseorch on enemy, ond creotivity valued ever synthesis cnd replicetion. Given the increcrse in the number of speciolty forums (i.e., journels, cenlerences, e-mail listservers) serving the needs ol dispersed scholqrs, it mqy well be possible for the Acodemy to sustqin mony more frcrgmented scholorly communities thon it hcrs in the post.

Acodemy of Manogement fieview

April

the stqnd and write, even tronslqte French cs well os possible, know thot corpus of Roussecu cts well CIs possible, including all the contexts determineit(thelitercrry,philosophicol,rhetoricaltrcrditions,thehistory of the French lcrrrguoge. stciety, hlttory, which is to say' so mcny -other ifri"g" as well). Oifrer"*ise, one could indeed say lust anything crt all " '" (Derrida, 1988: I44). For Derridcr, deconstruction is cln explorcrtion within strict boundqries of the indeterminocies to be found in texts' indeterminqcies that open up rcrdiccl reinterpretations of such texts' writings of An qffirmqtive postmodernism, then, ss clrticulated in the enquiry Derrido, continues to bind reseqrchers to rigorous stcndords of (1992: 169)' os they pursue radiccrl interpretotions. According to Rosenau postmodernism "would underscore novelty and reflexivity "" it looks to the richness of diflerence crnd concentrcrtes on the unusuol' the as "rtii*"tive "crny crttempt to outline a singulcrr, ond the origincrl." Rosenau argued thct will, on balonce, depend more on the offirmapostmodern social "fi"rr." (Rosencru, 1992: 169)' iives thcrn on the skeptics" In identifying the impliccrtions of postmodernism for orgcrnizcrtionol and crfiirmareseqrch, we dra* upon contributions lrom both the skepticcri tive styles and try toqvoid demonizing either. we find much ol the writing from cl skepticcrl position use{ul in countering the new clge ngivet6 o{ crn qffirmative postmodernism thot celebrcrtes "wonder qnd qmazement" crnd pursues voyqges into the "unforseen" (Rosenou, I992: 169). AIso, following qffirmqtive berridcr (1988: I46), we reject the nihilist position in favor of <rn world' cnd'crctivist socigl science thqt "embrqces and does not exclude the reclity, history" (Derrida, I988: 137). Thus, in this qrticle, we selectively borrow from the often countervoiling currents of postmodernism' rother thon grcrnting cbsolute authority to one pcrrticulcr approcrch. Incredulity Towcrrd Metqnarrqtive: Lecrrning from Architecture Lyotord (1984), in o widely influential text, suggested thcrt postmodernism'cln be understood as incredulity toward metoncrrrcrtives3 (such crs Marxism and structuralism) in controst to modernism, which makes crn crppeol to just such ncrrrotives. Postmodernism, then, tends to "delegitimate aif mastercodes" (Rosenau, 1992: 6). Dqvid Hcrrvey (1989: I0) suggested that postmodernism involved c rejection of overqrching propositions, qn o"""tto.r.e of plurclism and fragmentation, cn emphcsis on dillerence and heterogeneity, crnd qn ironic qdmission of the ephemerality of thingsThe emphasis ol postmodernism, then, qs Hcrrvey (l98g) crnd others mqke cleqr, is not all negcrtive.In abcrndoning metonqrrctive, postmodernists allow for renewed qttention to the trqditionql and to the porticulcrr (Rosenau, 1992: 6). Postmodernist architects, for excmple, hqve abcndoned the myth of endless progress in Icrvor ol qn eclecticism that, qt its best,
3 A metongrrcrtive is c globcrl world view that qssumes the (Rosencru, I992: xi).

velidity of its own truth cloim

I997

Kilduff ond Mehro

457

clectes designs exhibiting <r striking synthesis of dilferent traditions' Thus' "crn the crrchitect Chcrrles Jencks (1989: 7) defined the postmodern style <rs eclectic mixture of ony tradition with that of its immediqte pcst," or more generally, "the combinction oi modern techniques with something else with Iusually traditional building) in order for orchitecture to communicote (usucrlly other qrchitects)" (I989: I4)'a the pubtic qnd qr concerned minority There cre severol ospects of this architecturcl postmodernism thot we think are helpful in redefining organizational postmodernism' First' according to this perspective, postmodernism, compcrred to modernism, crims to communiclte both to the concerned minority ol techniccl experts in the {ield and to the wider populcrtion of those sffected by the proctice of science. We crrgue for o posimodern orgcrnizational science thcrt exhibits both c mcstery oi trcrditional sociql science techniques and <r relevcnce (1976: to the contemporcrry situcrtion of organizationgl members. As Derrida of a text I58), for exomple, makes crbundqntly clecrr, cny interpretation "requires crll ihe instruments of trcrditional criticism," for "without this recognition crnd this respect, critical production would risk developing in orry.dir".tion at oll <rnd outhorize itself to soy almost anything." That care{ul crnd rigorous interpretqtion is compatible with rodical postmodern re-readings isevidenced by research such crs Joqn Cqssell's (1996) investigction oi ho* the embodiment o{ difference crffects the coreers of women surgeons. Postmodernism Versus Antimodernism
We emphcsize c postmodernism thcrt is, gbove crll, eclectic rother thon exclusive. Thus, our postmodernist perspective seeks to include <rnd use techniques, insights, methods, crnd crpprocrches from cr vcrriety of trqditions, recrching bcrckwards, forwcrds, snd sidewoys with little regcrrd for ocademic boundqries or the myth of progress that condemns some texts as old foshioned while procloiming others state ol the art. From this postmodernist perspective, crll styles crre simultcneously <rvailcrble. This postmodernism does not limit itself, then, to semiotic and decbnstructive techniques, even though these approoches hqve been singled out crs especiclly useful "postmodern reseqrch methods" (Dickens & Fontqnq, 1994). We 61gree with the feminist resecrrcher Charlene Depner, who,rrgued <rgcrinst the exclusion of methods typically associoted with positivism: "lF]eminist psychology must implement evqry tool crt its disposql-qnd creste new ones-rcrther thon reject crny out o{ hqndl' (quoted in Reinhsrz, 1992: 93). Shulamit Reinhcrrz (1992), in her book on ieminist reseqrch methods, disAlthough we drow ideas from qrchitecture in mcking sense Qf postmodernism, we intend neither to downplcry the importcrnce ol pos{modernist idecrs in other oreqs, such gs crrt qnd ]iteroture, nor to impose cr lcrlse consensus on the lield of architecture concerning
{

postmodernism. Postmodern orchitects olten disogree concerning crsPects of postmodernism. Thus, Frompton (]983: I9), for example, criticizes some ol Iencks'views on postmodern orchitecture os promoting "grotuitous imoges" for q medio society.

458

Acoderny of Monogement Review

April

intercusses experimentql qnd survey methqds os well os ethnoglaphic, how the method view, and orql history methods. Fto* her perspective, it is is used that defines whether the research exemplifies feminism' In postmodern resecrrch the gocls ore to chollenge the content crnd forms of form of dominant models of knowledge ond qlso to produce new

giving knowledge through breoking down disciplincry boundcries and (Giroux, 1992: voice to those ,roi r"pr."entJd in the dominant discourses

56).Weolguethotpostmodernresecrchers,inpursuitofrevolutioncry perspec-

chollenges to conventionol wisdom, con mix ond motch vqrious with tives or resecrch styles for cresthetic effect or in order to contrqst follows from the trodition. This freedom to combine styles o{ discourse reseqrch beliel that no method grants privilegedL..."= to truth Gnd thot clll proctice thct postmodernists seek cpprooches qre embodied in culturql of to mat<e explicit (smircich & calds, 1987). The mixing cnd matching style diverse stylls helps surioce the cultural proctice within which ecch is embedded. modern' Those postmodernists who declale cn qbsolute opposition to science ond ity, including cn opposition to the achievements of modern "just onother postmodernism os its method", ii"k l.t"titying the dismissol o{ conceivonti-modern intellectual current" (Rosencru, 1992: 169)' Rcrther thon ing of postmodernism as antimodernism, Jencks (1989: I0), omong others, "the continuqtion ol modhc-s chlmpioned a postmodernism thot involves ernism qnd its transcendence." This sentiment is embodied in the postmodern rebuilding of the Palmer Museum ol Art- When commissioned to reploce on exiiting modernist qrt museum on the Penn Stcte compus, postmodern crchitect Chqrles Moore decided to retqin and revise, rother than hide or destroy, the old structure' He extended the modernist cube horizontcrlly with c sweeping Romonesque portico thcri reflected and commented on the visible ornqmentqtion ol surrounding buildings' Postmodern buildings employ double coding in thot they moke use o{ tradition ond the lqtest scientific knowledge ond techniques without committing to cny dogmcrtic revivol. Kenneth Frcmpton (1983: 23) discussed, lor excmple, the Bagsvcerd church thct employs reinforced concrete (c typicclly modern technique) to create an ombiguous voult thst precludes;'qn exclusively Occidentql or Orientql reading of the code by which the public qnd socred spoce is constituted." ![e crgue for c postmodernism thclt is similcrly informed by, and yet crmbivalent toward, classic statements qnd techniques of the Iield in question. The intent is not to venerote the work of predecqssors or privilege the techniques o{ science; rather it is to situate research issues in crective tension with historicol qnd scientific contexts. We join ieminists such os Corolyn Sherif in toking issue with Kurt Lewin's call for concerning onself with history only os its iorces ore "reveoled in the immediote situation ot the time of study" (Sherif, lgTg: I00). In order both to evoke q irqdition and transcend it requires c detqiled fcmilicrity with the clcrssic stotements of that trsdition. It is this detailed fcmiliarity that qllows the postmodernist to evoke the trqdition

I997

Kildutf qnd Mehrq

in on often ironic or ambivolent woy thcrt contrcsts with other elements of the design or project. Postmodernism, then, is, among other things, cr coll lor renewed attention to the history o{ the field, ond an c{firmotion of

mythithe relevcrnce ol importont work regardless of its plccement in some postmodernists both celebrate trodition col modernist progrression. Thus, ond deny the mYth of Progress.

POSTMODENN EPISTEMOTOGY

.This qrticle focuses on postmodernism (Is cn intellectucll movement rather thon on the possibility of postmodernity cs cr stcrge in the historicol .o"i.ti"t (see HCIssqrd, 1994, qnd Jsmeson, 1984' development ol "opitoli"t is considerfor useful discussions). Among writers on postmodernism there the claims by some (e'9" crble skepticism (e.g., Park"t, tggg) cQncerning Clegg, tdg0; Vcrttirno, tSgZ) thct a postmodernity label is helpful in undersocietcl crnd organizationcrl developments, such crs flexibility, "toriJirrg multiskilling, decentrcllizltion, qnd mcss medio. Thot orgonizcrtions.crnd societies sre making rcrdical chcrnges in response to competition both local clnd globol ccln hordly be denied, but such changes ore chorocteristic of copitcrlist society (Marx, I867/1976; Schumpeter, 1947)' More persuasive, perhcps, is the possibility thot the significcrnce of certoin crspects ol the contemporary world ccrn be reevcrlucrted from a postmodern perspective. Whether or not the world we live in cqn be represented cs differing dramatically from the recent post, postmodernism highIights neglected clspects of contemporqly everydcry life (crs well crs negLcted crspects of historicql life; see Reqdings & Schqber, 1993)' For !*ompie, Baudrillqrd (1983) drew attention to the extent to which people

inhobitsimulatedworldswherethedistinctionbetweenreglandunreol

is blurred. Models replcrce the real cnd "the boundary between hyperreolity ond everyday life is elcrsed" (Best & Kellner, I991: 120). From this skeptip"r.p"ctive, writing cnd reseqrch consists ol systems of self-significcl"ol with no relevcrnce to onything ouiside the text. Whether we agree tion with Baudrillard's nihilistic vision or not, his work is valuqble in crlerting us to how much of our experience is structured by representgtions thqt in many cqses hove no originols. This suggests a reseslch ogendo locused on the process by which signs cnd imcges crre produced cnd their effects on produCers and consumers. Thus, semiotics gcrins importonce os ct resecrrch method (Gottdiener, I994). Postmodernism cs cn intellectual movement qlso cqlls attention to the mcrgins crnd c:wcry from a preoccupqtion with some mythiccll center. This attention to the mcrrgins cgn be ss literol crs cn crttention to crpporently unimportcrnt but revecrling textual morginolia such crs crcknowledgments (e.g., Ben-Ari, I995; Derridcr, 1988). But postmodernism also opens spcce for lroi".=, texts, cnd viewpoints previously neglected or ignored. As Rosenqu (1992: 168) wrote, postmodernism "focuses on what is nonobvious, le{t out, ond generally forgotten in a text qnd exqmines whst is unsaid, overlooked,

460

Academy of Monagement Review

April

understcted, ond never overtly recognized." The standord modernist gesture is to focus only on the center qnd to ignore the margins' Thus, Seorle (Ig70: 55-50; quot;d in Derridq, I988: 68), in describing his speech-cct theory, wrote, "In the present cqse, our cnolysis will be directed at the center of the concept of promising. I crm ignoring morginol, iringe, ond pcrtially deiective promises." This is akin to the common statisiical prociice of dropping orili.r" from the dato in order to concentrqte on typicol coses. But this prcctice of eliminqting the perceived morgins from discussion mcy have irelped promote qnd mointqin an overly homogenous sociql qttention to third science. The postmodern turn coincides with lenewed world, feminist, ond minority voices in the Accdemy (e.g., Nkomo, i992). Postmodernism, by bringing hitherto mcrrgincrlized voices within the scope of enquiry, cmpliiies viewpoints thot hove struggled to be heqrd. trn attending to the moigins qnd to suppressed voices, postmodernists inevitcbly struggle ogoinst powerful entrenched interests. For exompie, Derrido's critiques of phitosophy so profoundly chollenged the privileged position of phiiosophers that the President of the Associotion for Symboiic Logic (qnd ex-Chcir of the American Philosophicol Associqtion), Ruth Morcus, wrote to the French govelnment to try to prevent Derrido's election to the position of Director ol the Internqtionol College of Philosophy' In her letter she wrote, "To estqbish on'Internqtioncl College of Philosophy' under Derrida's chorge is something ol c joke or, more seriously, roises the question qs to whethlr the Ministdre d'Etst is the victim of on intellectuol fioud." The letter repeats c newspoper cccusqtion thcrt Derrido wos on "intellectucrl terrorist" (for further details see Derrido, 1988, footnote 12' 158-159). At Boston University, President Silber declcred his "resistqnce" to o curious list of opprooches thot includes criticql legol studies, structuralism, radical feminism, deconstruction, The Fronkfurt School of Criticol Theory, qnd dance theropy Flint, 1993). These attempts to stifle qcodemic enquiries reflect the perceived threot postmodernist ond other criticol opp/ocches pose to the status quo. In organizqtionol reseqlch, work that chcllenges the tqken-for-grontgd distribution of power in orgonizqtions hos begun to cppeor' For excr.nple, Robin EIy (1995) showed how sex roles qre more stereotypicql and problemctic in firms with relctively low proportions of senior women. Her work exhibits postmodern chqrccteristics not just in its focus, but olso in its methods. She qdds c set of vivid stories told in the voices oi the women themselves to the positivist edifice of hypotheses snd ststistics, These \Momen jump from the pqge with brutslly candid ossessments concerning power games in orgcnizqtions. Ely's quolitcrtive dotq qre not iust summqrized and seoied within classification borders. They spill forword within the context of the stondard journcl qrticle to trcnsgress propriety, to chollenge convention, qnd to crticulote the voices of previously siIenced women. We dmphssize, therefore, the importance of postmodernism cs cn epistemology thot redirects ottention to phenomeno in the world. Our

i997

Kiiduff ond Mehrq

461

qnd direct focus is on how postmodern epistemology cqn inform, enrich, in reseqrch enquiries concerning organizqtionql phenomena. we follow the trcrdition of Americon prcgmotism (e.g., Peirce, 193I) in osserting We thot there is a reol world thcrt coh be systemoticclly investigated.. by ,"rogrrir" thot this opporently innocuols cssumption is rejected Gottdiener skeplicol postmodernists such as Baudrillord (1983), but, os of the moteriolity (lgga: I70)bointed out, "lMlcrny of us . . . cre convinced oreos of existence here ond of the foct thqt sociol spaces crre staging thct' of social interoction." Following Derridcr (1988: 150-l5l) we <rrgrue

Irom o progmctic perspective, contexts cqn be considered relotively cilows for coherent interpretotion' At stoble qnd this relstive stobility ,,o morgin of plcy, of difference,, thqt the same time, there is olwoys of the opens the possibility of new interpretqtions within the limits reduction context (Derrida, l98b: 152). We resiit, there{ore' the skeptics' ploy of signifiers' of cll sociql enquiry to cr concern with the shifting me'anings The materiol world i*po"." constrcints on the multiplicity of thct con be attributed to signifiers, and postmodern inquiries thot we believe con qddress social contexts, sign systems, cnd the interrelqtionships between them (Gottdiener, 1994)' Postmodernism, os Jencks (1989: 50) qnd others hove pointed out' is chqrocterized by "cn increcrsing plurclity of beliefs'" some modernists hove decried whoi they see os thl decline of the Academy into o bobble of cacophony, ond there hove been colls for orgcnizotional studies to embrace cI consensus typiccl of more porcrdigmcrticolly well-dev-eloped fields so thqt we moy glitt"t greoter prestige qnd influence (see Pfeifer' of these concerns, qnd Merton, 1975, for Igg3, for on eloqueni ".r**oiy colls for porodigm consensus in sociolon emphatic reiection of eqrlier qn outogy). From o postmodern perspective, "consensus hqs become moded and suspect voluel' (Lyotcrrd, 1984: 66; see olso McKeon, 1985, for a progmctic perspective on the impossibility of even o temporory in philosophy). From a postmodern perspective, porodigrrt "orrr"rrs,r" colls for devotion to porcdigmotic unity ore perilous, becsuse they tend to remove socicl scilnce from the concerns of practitioners, inciuding workers qnd mcnogels, qnd because the devotion to pcrrcdigmctic unity reduces the obillty to criticaliy combine diverse crpprooches' The modlrnist devotion to c grond nqrrqtive of progress is understcndoble as nostcrlgiq for c hypothesis-testing logico-deductive past in which the direction of scientifiC resecrch was controlled by cn elite. But such q post hos never, in {qct, existed in the socicl sciences. The postmodernist Lmphosis on pcrcdox, irony, eclecticism, cnd plurolism is fuliy evident in the work of such (post)-modern mcsters cls Leon Festinger in psychology and Erving Gof{mon in sociology. Festinger brought the p:inciple of counterintuitive experimentalism to iis brilliqnt opogee, crnd Gof{mcn deconstructed even the most mundqne socisl situqtions into qfioirs of drqmq ond desperotion. From o postmodernist perspective, there is no reqson to limit enquiry to q Iew poths mqrked out by cny one pcrrticulcr

40L

Academy oI Management fieview

April crt the

elite, and it is undesirclble for resecrrchers to pursue the obvious expense of the unusucrl'
FIVE POSTMODERN PROBTEMATICS

A quick glcrnce at the leading journals in the orgcrnizotional sciences (e'9" confirms thoi explicitly postmodern reseqrch hcs begun to appecr overt Boje, I995; Kildulf, l99b; Mcrtin, 1990), but there is relotively little orticles discussion of why crnd how such resecrrch is different from other postmodern enquiry strugjournals. Those pursuing cppearing in the "o*" problemqtics thqt cre either ignored or suppressed gie with I number of in much of the empiriccrl work in our field. We see evidence of empiricists in in orgcrnizcrtioncrl studies turning their bccks on these problemotics cs pursu-it of conformity to "normcrl science" (e.g., Doncrldson, 1996), even F:oncis, ieseorchers in otherii"ld=, including accounting (e.g., Arrington & press)' borrow I989)qnd economics (e.g., Covcrleski, Dirsmith' & Samuel' in from postmodernism to transform enquiry. In the following section, the intent is to delineate those epistemologiccrl crises thgt seem to us to be prcrcpcrrticulcrrly reievont to the reseqrch engagement with events and iices in the world. We jollow this rcther qbstract discussion of problemctics with specific examples of resecrrch thqt illustrate qnd expcnd on our postmodern perspective.

proLlemcrtizing Normcrl Science: The Revolutioncrry Stance We have crlrcdy mentioned thot postmodernists reject metcncrrrcrtives, crnd this translates into a distrust of grond theories of cll kinds' The move owoy from grond theorizing wos signcrled in sociology by Merton (1957: "mcrster 9), who pointed to the relative poverty o{ work derived Irom ony conqeptual scheme" crnd colled for the development of theories of lhe middle rcrnge-thot is, theories "applicsble to limiied ronges ol datcr."But this commitment to progrcrms of reseqrch derived irom either grcrnd or middle-range theories is questioned by postmodernists who dispute the importonce thqt Kuhn (1962) grcnted to what he called "normal science"' Kuhn ciaimed that the vast mcjority of scientists mostly worked on puzzle solving within crccepted snd unchollenged theoreticcri frqmes. This wcrs not just a descriptive cccount: as Kuhn (1970)himself mode clear, the scientist's commitment to puzzle solving rather thcrn innovotive thinking is cr normcrtive stcnce. This is whqt Kuhn believed scientists should be doing (cf. Feyerobend, 1970). But Kuhn's view is disputed by mcny philosophers o{ science, including Popper (1970: 53), for whom puzzle-solving science is dangerous both to scierrce and to civilizotion becguse it involves the qbqndonment of critical thinking. According to Popper (1970: 55), scientists cre revolutioncrries not puzzle solvers. Problems continuqlly provoke scientists to criticolly ,"opptoi"e existing theoretical opprocches. The work of scientists involves not routine puzzle solving but "bold conjectures, controlled by criticism"

1997

Kldulf ond Mehro

463

the (popper, 1970: 55). Further, Popper dismisses cs "dcngerous dogmq" (cf' porcrdigms view that scientists cre unabll to shift between competing Stqblein, 1996; Wecrver & Gioia, I994)'s postmodern, his Aithough popf"r," views ccn hcrrdly be described os existing emphasis in the revolutio,ncrry stcrnca of the scientist towcrd with diffiporcrdigms on4 his orgument thqt scientists ccln move ialbeit depending on the demcnds of the problem culty) between p;;i;*s, epistemology' under investigcrtion, aie consistent *ith orrt postmodern itself to long subject contrcrry to Kuhn's insistence thct science should

periodsofroutinepuzzlesolvingwithinthe{rameworkofcIdominant ol mony

ifr"ory, postmoderrri.t" chcrmpion the simultqneous avcrilability ever-present critidifierent theoreticaipo"itiot s, and the importcrnce o{ an Drews (1987: 36) mqde clecrr' ccrl discussion oi underlying crssumptions. As frcrmes of referthis postmodern vigilclnce *ith ,."pect to philosophicol i" provoked orid oid*d by inveitigctions of phenomencr by scientists' "rr.. postmodernists refuse to priviiege middle-Iange ncrrqtives over Thus, porticulcrr norgrcnd ncrrrqtives beccruse they reject the hegemony oi ony rative irresPective o{ its range'
Problematizing Truth: The Importcrnce ol Fiction hcs forgotNietzsche observed that "truths are iliusions of which one perspective' the pursuit ten thcrt they cre illusions" (I873/1995: 92)' From this q science becouse of truth becomes deeply problematic as gooi of sociql conventions what counts as truth i= noilixed, but derives in part from sociql only th;l;" di{Ier .,mong contexts crnd lcnguage games. Certqinty is(wittlcrnguoge game pos3ible within the Loundqries of o pcrticulor genstein, i958: 224), crnd postmoderniits hclbituclly breok down such rooted in f,oundcrries. Truth is not something that inher."_t_.^ ncrture; it is (Nietzsche, 1873/1995)' Ecrch linguisiic conventions fqbriccted by humcns individual, ccn poteniiclly perceive the truth community, cnd .,r"r, "o"h about the world differentlY" What may be most importcrnt, thereiore, in understcnding humon behavior mcy be the perceptions and judgments thct shcrpe the world th_rough self-fulfilling propiecies crnd enactment processes (cf. Weick, i995: 55-Gt)' To understand the crecrted world-thot is, the world that humqns have
qssumes thqt Note thot much ol the existing work in orgcrnizotionol postmodernism series of expicnotory postmodernism is incommensurcrble with modernism. In porticulcr, the 1988) toke Lrticles by Cooper qnd Burrell (Burrell, 1988, 1994; Cooper, 1988; Cooper & Burrell, qre "two rodicolly diflerent systems ol thought the view thcrt modernism ond postmodernism (Cooper & Burrell' I988: 1i0)' This crnd iogic" that "may be iuniclmentolly irreconcilqble" postincomri.r,srrrability perspective would qppeqr to rule out the possibility of a creotive in this pqper, lecving room only for modern engcrgement witt reseqrch thot we outline of the whot Cooplr Lnd Burrell refer to os "organizqtionol ono'lysis," cn ongoing Critique ond donger" il b,rr.o,rcrocy (see Burrell, I996, Jor lurther elobocrssumptions, implicotions,
5

ration),

464

Academy

ol Management Feview

April

to undercrected cnd to which they respond-scientists mcy hcve to strive that there is stand the fictions that p""pt. perceive and enact. To cccept we .'ll ., world to which ;.O1. i."potrd is not the sqme cs scying thcrt fact' is, in ogr.. on how trris woria should be represented, or thqt there cny universolly crgreed on representation'

increcsed perceptions in the creation of shqred socicrl worlds suggests crnd conresecrch attention to how individuols mcke sense of experience tqke on struct and mcrintclin sociol worlds, and how social constructions studies community' the crppearcnce o{ certointy. Within the orgonizationcrl sense mcking many reseorchers ore now pursuing topics in the crecr of work ctppeals strikingly post(see weick, 1995, for o review). Some of this in its crective use modern in its crttention to the detcil o{ cr specific ccrse, of narrcrtive and of unusucl evidence, in its emphcrsis on the importcrnce informed speculotion text, ond in its contribution o{ new concepts bcrsed on insight{ul (see weick, 1993, for one excmple, and Vqn Mqonen, I995, for on
commentcrry).

Indeed,thepostmodernemphasisontheimportcnceofindividucrl

Problemctizing Representation: The Obiect Is Subiective o The question o{ occurote representcrtion of the world hcls become within crnthropolmoior issue within postmoder., ii="o,rrse, pcrrticulcrrly goes ogy {r"., e.g., clifford & Mqrcus, 1986). The postmodern position beyond the clcrim thct ethnogrclphy is a form of writing and is, therefore, sublect to litercrry interpretction. Rqther, postmodernists seek to undermine crll claims to methodological purity: for postmodernists, there is no methodology ccpcrble o{ achieving cn unmediated, objective representotion of the facts. Instead of trying to ercrse all perSoncll trsces of the reol secrrcher from the work so cs to provide the reqder with an illusion unmedioted occess to the subject, postmodernists seek to demysti{y the technology of medicrtion by explicitly detcliling the involvement of the resecrcher.When q writer invokes cr methodology with its pcrnoply of ossumptions, vclue judgments, crnd exceptions, this invoccrtion is in pcrrt cr rhetorical attempi to lersuode the recrder of the scientilic cluthenticity of the document (Goiden-giaat. & Locke, 1993). The dcrnger is thct c concern for method Ccrn overwhelm cr concern fOr relevqnce, surprise, chollenge' and discovery. The cppeorcrnce ol objectivity in scientific texts is then does not hold o mirror up to ncture (cf' Rorty' misleqding, because ".i"tt." IgTg). Rqther, scientific work tcrkes plcce in contexts of interpretation involving rhetorical conventions cnd token-for-grcrnted assumptions"
Problemcrtizing Writing: Style Mqtters If science is pcrrtly o rhetorical production overwhelmingly expressed in writing in which textucl elements such crs the title, acknowledgements' tobles, filures, hecrdings, and references work together to structure crnd enliven the body of the iext, then style becomes important. Postmodernists refuse to exempt cny text from rhetoriccrl exomincrtion, no matter how

IS97

KiIdutI ond Mehro

to objective sounding, no matter how mqtter-of-fsct the text moy crppecrr how crrguments Ue. Rtt texts reprlsent a series of choices concerning should be presented, qnd these choices are embodied in the text. from From a postmodern perspective, scientific texts ore not immune ortistic constructions aesthetic considerotions. Persuasive iexts olso ore (van Moqnen, 1995). This hos long been qccepted in the hord sciences elegance where equotions and results ore iudged on criteria thot include who produce o.rd porsi*ony. In the sociol sciences, similarly, resesrchers qestheticolly pleosing texts gcrin influence because their insights compei qttention. A surprisirr!.*o*lle from the modernist litercture is the origicommunol work introducing orgonizotionol ecology to the sociol science construcnity, achieving high levels ol ortful crofting in terms of norrqtive (H61nnon & Freemqn, 1977 ' tion, themotic uniiy, ond compelling intuitions reler to the rhetoricol 1984). The style of'expression (wtrere by style we the sudcommond of syntox, logic, excmple, ondstructure) helped ensure idecrs from populotion den disseminqtion to orgcrnizotionol scholors of (Howley, 1950)' Their biology (e.g., Levins, 1968) qnd community ecology this porticulor style mode 61v61ilqble "qn entire bottery of "*pr"""rioriin cnd iorrg.rog" foidescribing orgcnizations qnd their envinew concepts ronments" (Davis & Powell" 1992: 343)' Cronbqch (1986: 97) mqde <r similor "Murpoint concerning Murrcry's list o{ psychologicql needs ond presses: ioy offered, not o set of propositions intended to disploce oll competitors, but cn olternotive ,rocotullry for tolking obout persons, incentives, ond grotificctions." Whcrt is importont to note is the impcct such cestheticolly lompelling work ochieves irrespective of the vaiue of the empiricol work it inspires. ttr,r", the work of Kqrl Weick compels ottention not becouse it oflers tesiqble hypotheses for teoms ol groduote students, but becouse of its distinctive and persucsive style (Vcn Moonen, 1995). Problematizing Genercrlizcrbility: The Advqnce ol lgnorqnce From a postmodern perspective, the qim oI sociql science is not generolizability. Postmodernists ogree with Giddens (1984: xix)that "the uncovering of generalizqtions is not the be-qll qnd the end-cll oi sociol theory," Cronboch (I982: 70-71) thct "general, losting definite 'lqws' qre ""alitft beyond the reoch oi social science . . . . sheer empiricai generin principle

qlizotion is doomed 61s q reseorch strategy." There sre mony lessons for the crisis of generolizcbility in the sociol sciences, such cs (q) the impossibility of isoloting cll the possible contingencies thot con a{iect o.rt"o*"., (U) tfr. historically situoted ncture of social science reseqrch, and (c) the eqse with which resesrch results ore tronslqted into policy recommendotions or disseminoted to the potentiol subiects of resesrch (thus radicolly oltering the possibilities ol replication). If sociql science is

not in the business of ploducing lcws of behavior, then whot is its purpose? Some postmodernists might be tempted to onswer in terms o{ the plecrsure of th. text: sociol science is vqluoble to the extent thct it provokes interest qnd excitement crmong proctitioners cnd recrders. But qn octivist

466

Academy of Manogement Revjew

April

(1992: I5) wrote of tecrchers postmodernism requires more thon this. Giroux ior putting ideas into os transiormctive intellectucls skiiled in strcltegies o{ the ivory tower practice. This is very d.ifferent from the modernist ideal of resecrrch' Postintellectucl uninterested in the practiccrl impliccrtions humcrn sciences modernists crccept the double hermeneutic by which the thqt are the foci oI o{fect ihe very phenomena (humclns and their wor}ds) laws on these infinitely study. The quest, then, is not to impose c series of policies (crs Derrido chcngeoble phenomenq, but to strive to shape public ihe teaching of philos_ohos done, fo, e*cr*fle, in ccrmpaigning to preserve questions' As phy in French trig'; school{ crn$' ab-ove- cII' to pose new in possessing not Cronbqch (1986:9i) ,tot"d, "socicl science is cumulative' questions, but in possessing crn refined cnswers about fixed "rr.r-*or. r.p"rtoiie of questions.f'From ihi= p"t"pective, one of the most ever-richer problemotic' interesting pcrodoxes oi science is that progress is deeply crccomponied of knowledge is beccluse, as Kuhn pointed out, the expcrnsitn by the expcrnsion of ignorance:

with Though the bulk of scientific knowledge 9l:-"tly increases The problems solved time, whotle *t to say obout ignororice? o during tf,tlltt thirty yeors did not exist cls open questiols ot i" ;;t'"it", the scienti{ic knowledge olreodv century visible ";;. virtria-il;;;h;"ri= whot there is to know, lecvingIs it not hand knowledge' the horizon of existing puzzles o"lv "t possible, oi'p"iit"pt even likely' that contemporqry scientists know less oiwhot'there is to know qbout their world thqn the (1970: 20) scientists ol the IBth century knew of theirs?
sense that the The idea of progress in science is a myth, thereiore, in the We progress towcrd more we know, the more we realize we don't know' ever grecrter knowledge of our own ignoronce'

SUGGESTIoNSFonANDEXAMPIESoFPoSTMoDEnNISTRESEARCH thot Awcrreness of postmodern problematics mcy result in reseorch raised' ThOse who tcrke tqkes crccount of some or all ol the issues we hcve of existing a postmodern stcrnce mcry strive for the revolutioncrry overthrow rather thqn working to methodiccrlly fill in taien-for-gronted o""r*ptions the blcrnks in existing releorch programs. An qctivist postmodern stsnce chollenges conventionol wisdom ond trgnsgresses. eEtqbiished boundories with bold conjectures ond innovqtive methods' ReSeqrchers working exqmfrom q postmodern perspective moy limit themselves to the detailed rqther thqn trying to genercrlize over hundreds inotion oi one or q few "or"" the of iases. The postmodern preference is for detoiled understsnding of qnd locql times, os opposed to statistical porticuiar, foilocai knowlldge from irends. In presenting eviden.L to "npport conclusions, those working o postmoiern position tend to provide os much vivid immediste detail to the recrder os possibie. Stondord stotistics ctre not enough to provide authenticity to the resecrch report. The reseqrcher moy shore not iust

1997

Kildult ond Mehro

as letters' summcries of evidence but the cctuql evidence itself, such own photos, detailed conversotions, crnd a discussion of the resecrrcher's pcry great attenintuitions, Reseqrchers odopting postmodernism tend to the reader tion to the writing process itself. This meqns striving to involve voice' in the text, esch"*irrg pcrssive obiectiviiy for an active authoricrl ncrrcrtive' crnd carelully crofting an aestheticcllly pleasing to reiect We olso or""rt ticrt postmoderniit reseorch does not hqve selective use' the modernist legcrcy, ,oih.r, this legocy is cvoilable for pick on positivism Postmodernists in thl social sciences have tended to qnd, therefore, as the strcrw mcrn as somehow representative of modernism (e.g., Agg-er, l99l). But qttocks crgoinst which their own work can be judged Mi]] (1865i1965) comon positivism crre ot lecst o century old. iohn stucrrt the terms plained in 1865 thqt "though the mode ol thought expressed by

positivecrndpositivismiswidelyspread,the.wordsihemselvesqre,cs thinking thcrn usua], better known through the enemies of thcrt mode of postmodern through its iriendsli (q.rot.l in Roscoe, 1995: 492)' From our pre{erence {or perspective, the frypoifr"tico-deductive method and the are elements qucrntitcrtirre crnaly=is chcrrScteristic oi positivist resecrrch

elements cvailcrble to the reseqrcher, to be combined, possibly' with other and semiotic insuch crs ethnogrcrphy, biography, textuql deconstruction, does not terpietctiorr. The pr"."*."t of hypotheses in c: text, for exomple, priori predictions' necesscrrily signol the researcheis' commitment to o used as helpful summcries Hypotheses crre rhetoriccrl devices thqt ccln be of ih"oty and qs guide posts for the reader' qpproach from the We reluse, tlierefoie, to rule out any method or duqlities such qs modpostmodernist's repertoire. We intend to go beyond ernist/ontimodernist, or positivist/ontipositivist. We chcrmpion the simultcrincluding neous availability of crppcrrently incongruous resecrch methods sophisticcted Icrborctory .*p.ri*"rrts, deconstruction, ethnogrcphy, cnd stqtisticai or,oiy"... As cn indicotion o{ the rqnge of resecrrch th6rt we think exhibits elements of postmodernism, we decided to comment on work as some excrmples of resecrrch. Our intent is not to privilege some a canoniccrl, but to give the reqder confidence to pursue reseorch from creatively to postmodern voriety o{ styles. We included work that responds problemctics irrespective of whether the authors identified themselves os postmodernists (ci. Mcrnning, 1995). The intent is to widen rother than rorro* the possibilities o.toilobl" from a postmodern pelspective' Discussing crctuql exomples ol research crlso cllows us to comment on many fecrtures of postmodein writing that develop Irom engogement with epistemological questions. If postmodernism is impossible to summtrrize' be.o,r=. its manifestations cre so multiforious, one wcy to convey the excitement of this cpprocrch is to point to specific excmples' In mcrking =err". of postmodernism's relevqnce, we continue to drow inspirction from postmodern architects who combine postmodernist theory oni prcrctice. Architects have not only engcrged in crilicai debates concerning iostmodernism (Frcmpton, lg83; Jencks, 1987; KroII, ig87; Portoghesi,

468

Academy o! Managemenl Feview

April

work' and they hove qlso constructed buildings where people live' Stctes now incorpoploy.lndeed, mGny university cqmpuses in the United Kresge rcte exqmples of postmodeinist orchitecture (exomples include Pqlmer ond the College, ot the Urii""t"it' ol California crt Sqnta Cruz, of orchitecture' then' for clues Museum ot Penn Sl"t.J. W.look to the field might look like' as to whcrt o' opfii.d postmodernism of orgcnizqtions olso prcrctice it' Architects ,rot orrliy theorize about postmodernism, they postmodernism we argue that orgonizationol resetrchers con criso put into reseorch Prcrctice. Decorqte the Spcrce: Reviving the Clcssics
1982),

Fromourpostmodernperspective,thetqsksofproblemotizingnormol qided by detcriled knowlscience cnd undermining metonorrctives are postmodernists mode edge of the classics of tie iietd' In mony cctses' clqssic their most audacious stqtements in the context-of the reigningcommuby the scholcrly stcrtements thqt sre customcrily token for gronted qddition of gloss pyromids to irr"", in the fierd of orchitecture, thL "iiv.Louvre in Pcrris draws attention to architecturol detail thot Otherwise the ottention might poss unnoticed, ond sets up c clcrsh of styles that owakens his repuDerrida established to controsting traJitions. Similcrly, Jqcques of coreful deconstructions of clqssic works" For totion through o the corre".ri"" excmple, he critiqued Saussure's (I966) ossumptions concerning bet*een signifiers crnd signilieds, thus rcdicolly undermining "porrd^"rr".structuralist-enterprise, which, qt the time, wcrs dominqnt scross the whole the social sciences (Derrida, I976)'

ol estobIn the orgcrnizctional studies Iitercrture, such deconstructions NeverIished canon-icol works ore rcre but in demcrnd (Van Maanen' 1988)' quclities of communicctive theless, work that exhibits the postmodernist methrelevonce, evocCItion qnd trcnsmutqtion of tradition, stqte-of-the-art porticipcrte odological {inesse, and on explicit invitation to the recrder to in the resecrrch crdventure ot" to be Iound. One excrmple is token irom

sociology, where interest Fuchs & Ward, 1994).

in

postmodernist enquiry

is growing

(e.9.,

account of the dilfusion of the ontibiotic tetrocycline qmong Midwestern physicicrns is one exomple ol reseorch thot exhibits some postmodern chcrrocteristics without crny explicit claim to a postmodernist lobel' Burt's work is, in many ways, q recussitation of the origincl. He literqlly rescued the datq lrom destrr"tiott by recovering the oncient woter-damcged dctc cards from a moldy *or.ho,.rre, crnd he made these dcrta avqiloble to everyone interested in investigcting the stories presented by the originol outhtrs crnd himsel{. Thus, the project is left unfinished in cI typicolly postmodernist gesture of inclusion o{ the crudience. Burt, in reconstructing ihe originsl dqlo, qnd in offering (in cr {ootnote to his qriicle) to provide the dcrtc on disk to the reader of tris radical recnolysis, brought the reader into the project of science rather than insisting on <r rigid demorcotion between scientist ond qudience.

(I966) Burt',s (1987)recrnalysis of the clcrssic colemon, Kqtz, and Menzel

l9g7

KilduII o.nd Mehrs

469

quolity Burt both invoked the originol work, proising it for the high originol explaof the dotc, ond undermined the work by showing thot the original work suggested notion for diffusion could not be sustained. The thot physicions relied on conversotions with collectgues in deciding physiwhether or not to odopt G new drug. According to Burt',s onolysis' on their perceptions of cions relied, not on ctllegial convlrsqtions, but structure the octions proper to occuponts o{ their positions in the sociql ol collecgues. ,. drug in , Physicians, crccording to this view, odopted the innovotive qmong structurql equivoorder to gcin cdvontog" oi", rivols. Competition the lents-thqt is, omoni rivals who could substitute lor eqch other in In presenting socisl system-helps"expioin the diffusion of innovqtions' his own expionation foi diffusion, premised on structural equivolence the tools rother thon on cohesion omong disCussion portners, Burt used hoving to rituolly of the typicolly modernisi structurcrl opprooch' For from such reject modernist qdvonces in technoiogy, postmodernists con use advcnces Ior their own ends' In the case of Burt's qrticle, the structurol oncrlysis progrcrms were - used to advance cn ogends thot wqs cleorly importont to Burt' There is simply in no pretense in the orticle that the oncrlysis has been performed lor o porticuthe service o{ science. As o possionote stotement of odvocqcy i;;;;;=p""tive, Burt's work succeeds in communicoting the excitement of p"r"orrot discovery rother thon the dullness of objective onalysis' At the s.,me time, reoders are invited to onalyze the work from their o*rrtf.r.pectives; thus, the piece serves to ignite discourse rqther thqn o clqssic to compiete the seorch for truih. Note thqt Burt did more than tqke dotq set cnd reqnclyze it os a methodologicol or conceptucrl exercise (qs he does elsewhere; see, for excmple, Burt, 1976). Rcrther, he rodicolly chollenged not only the occepted interpretotion of one of the clqssics in the iield, he <rlso ovlrturned our faith in whcrt had come to be the cccepted explonotion for sociql influence. Thus, the dato reonalysis is powerfuliy tied to o revolutionory undermining of ossumptions thot go for beyond the porticulcr dota set in question. By choosing G ccnonical doto set to deconstruct, qnd by offering everyone the opportunity to confirm his critique, Burt succeeded, like Derrido, in chollenging the occepted proctice ol enquiry.
Celebrcrte the Local

chontment with the modernist style of Le Corbusier, Mies Von der Rohe, ond their ossociqtes wos the perceived foilure ol the "machine-for-living" ethos. The giclnt housing projects, for excrmple, thot disfigure the cities o{ the world opp.ot, {rom a postmodernist perspective, to lack cny connection to classical ideals o{ hormony with surroundings. Brutolist architecture often violotes the colloquiol giommor of surrounding buildings ond lcndsccrpe"

One oi the mojor recsons for postmodernist architects' disen-

474

Acodemy of Monogement Feview

April

l'f Kenneth Frcrmpton (1983: l7)wrote o{ modernization's optimum """ eqrth-movlng equipment to crecte flcrt sites thcrt ore the prerequisites Ior "the victory of universcl civilizcrtion over loccliy inflected culture"' cnd Postmodernist architecture, by contrast, seeks to both comment upon, cr sense integrcrte within, such fecrtures of the environment thot promote the postmodern developof cJntinuity with the local past. For excmple, house ment of Franklin court, Philodelphia, fecrtures Benicrmin Franklin's scryings "ghosted" in stoinless steel above his preserved memorabilicr ond public space ollows o-r piaqu.s (Iencks, I989: l4). This outdoor museum and immedicrte understondp"opt"io rrro.r. through the ores whiie gcining an to ing of the historiccrl signiliconce o{ th-e sP:ce. The architecture serves past' Other promote 61 connection t surrounding buildings and the locol to creote idioiostmodern buildings tcrke crdvontoge of loca-l topogrcrphy using modernsyncrcrtic cross-cultu-rcrl challenges to occepted conventions istic techniques (Frompton, 1983: 22*23)' In the socioi scienles, the coil for increased attention to local knowl& Mcredge hos been sounded most clearly in cnthropology.(see Clifford ..rr, tgg6; Geertz, 1983). The modernist ospiration to "drclw pure structure by from its culture-specific crccretions" (Barkun, I968: 33) hqs been decried to turn Geertz (1983: I82i "os o proposol for a perverse sort of olchemy gold into leod." Within orgcrnizcrtionol studies, the movement owoy lrom (cr movemcss survey reseqrch on dtzens of empiricclly derived variobles ment signcried, for excrmple, by Starbuck's tl98Il devastqting critique of the Aston studies) hcs been fiercely resisted by those who deline sociol science os consisting of only this tcind of work (see, e.g., Donsldson' 1995)' work within conflicted ond locolized Nevertheless, detail"a "thtttgrophic crppeor. orgonizationql settings hos begun to A book thcrt provides s detqiled ethnogrcphic exomincrtion Of the confiicted orgonizationol production of the seil is Kondo's (1990) occount of identity tionsformation in Tokyo sociol settings. In this work Kondo convincinjly suthenticqted the postmodern emphosis on the fluidity ol identity. She showed how her own identity cs o Jcponese-Americcn womon *o= ,e.orrfigured in a voriety of contexts including the ]oponese home ond workplcrce (o small Tokyo candy mcrnufacturer). Kondo's success (ond consternation) in mcstering the vcrieus gendered identities cvcilqble to young women in Icpcn provoked cn intense interest in how identity "is negotloted, open, shifting, crmbiguous, the result of culturally crvoilcble meonings and the open-ended, power-lqden enqqtments of those mecnings in everydoy situotions" (Kondo, i990: 24). Her work is postmodern in c veiy explicit wcy: she showed how texts qnd selves cre cra{ted productions within very specific sociol contexts. Fiction, there{ore, crpplies not just to the world ouiside the sel{, but also to the constitution o{ the seil. A recent excmple o{ how to achieve a degree ol authentic local representotion within the limits of c journcrl qrticle is Cqssell's (I996: 4i)exomination of how women surgeons embodied themselves in s ccreer dominated by "crggressive, mcrcho mqle peers." Cosseil ovoided the reduction

1997

Kildutl c'nd Mehra

47r

ol male/femole dif{erences to either biology or c socicl constructionist crnd experiplcsticity. she sought cn explonation of the ccreer patterns the crguments that to ences of femqle ="ig"o;" without limiting herseli into two sexes, crnd all else follows' (a) humons .,re bioiJgically divided processes' She drew or (b) gender differenJe" o," t'"oted by sociqlizction why some mqle suron Bourdieu's (1g77) concept of hobitus to illumincte of femole Surgeons g"on= regcted with visce,ol *i*ogyny to the presence

inoperotirrgroo*"'*frttheiemqlt""g"ot'stendedtohoveCotholic sometimes reccted vi-

bcrckgrounds, and why subordinote women nurses social order' ciously to femcrle-",rrg"ott='chcrllenges to the embodied the personal, Cassell pta..d c" =trong emphlsis on understonding she tried to balance embodied experience of the 33 women she studied' sampling clt the first representctirreness ond diversity. A comprehensivethe diversity o{ thesomple site wqs followed by the =trct.gy of moximizing wos Africonin the four remqi"i"g sites: "l-l-l lecrrrred of c surgeon who yet observed' I hcd not Americcrn or Orthodox Jewish, or one in o speciolty oi professioral situation' I tried or in a pcrrticulorly interesting personcrl the possible to study her" (Cas="tt, tggO' IZi. Co=="il speculoted oboutthe nun' who of importanc" ro, tu*"re surgeons of the cotholic habitus ,,permitted to oUaoi' nilg1ter educotion, to iniimidote ond discipline is (Cossell, 1996: 48)' According mcles,.qnd to tecrd,in the seivice of humonity" habitus is ovoilable lor Jewish women disto cqssell, ,ro "orr""ponding on qn individuol senters, eoch of whom must "pcrinfully de{ine herself, principles ond Ievel, crs q rebel cgoinst an embodied set of structuring (cossell, I996: 49)' common schemes ol perception ond conception" obout the possibility thot she CosseII, os outhtr, *L= quite fronk ,,projecting upon the surgeons my Qwn personq] reactions to the might be certcinty choices they must Lot ond thot my feeling of utter viscercrl "more obout me thcn obout the women surgeons" obout this onolysis soys (Cassell, tgS6:51). Her work is postmodern in possessing personol certointy

work ond conviction, but eschewing dogmctic cloims to verity. cossell's seeks olso underploys the rhetoricoi importonce of methodologicol rigor, dichotoon explonation of difference beyond simple gender or biologicoi qmbimies, gives voice to underrepresented ncrrratives, and crttempts an tious'r"esolution to the problem ol generclizing from her scmple' She crrgued thclt the concept of hobitrt "qllows for fine-grained discriminations without sccrificing t'he crbility to generalize" (cassell, I996: 47)' Bourdieu's (1g77) concept is Jsensitizinj aevice that permits the elucidation of differences without the resort to either grond theory or reductionist dichotomies' Ccrssell's work is pcrt ol the leminist chollenge to the mqster nqrrqtives of modern mctn. Feminist postmqdernism is politiccl in its chcrllenge qn to the stcrtus quo in pctricrchical Society, and of the scme time offers (Foster' epistemologicol critique of existing proctices of representstion not Igg3: xiii). .i.s owens (tsgg, 5g) has poirrt.d out, postmodernists seek of power thot outhothct system to trcnscend representotion but "to "*po=" while blocking, prohibiting or invcrlidoting rizes certoin representqtions

472

Acodemy

ol Monogement Feview

April

women cs others.,, Feminist postmodern reseqrchers seek to represent norrqtives of those sublects rother thcn obiects crnd to give voice to the "principles of the qs the who violate whcrt Cc="eU (1996: 46) ielerred to incornote sociol order."

Mix and Mctch: The Eclectic Approcrch visual impclct Postmodern qrchitecture (Ichieves much of its stunning styles through on explicit eclecticism that ccrefully combines clqssicol humor with o Pop-icon {rom <r voriety of iiff.rent periods ond traditions scene' For exomple' designed to cppecrl to .'nd rlilect on the contemporory crnd Philip the AT&T Hecrdqucrters buiiding designed by Philip Johnson references eclectic Burgee feotures q cqthedral-like tose thot incorporctes buildings: 37 stories to both the Itolion Renaissonce cnd Egypticrn sqcred "with gently upturned eors' of pink gronite ond a 50-foot split pediment of refinement" (lencks' 1987: cr characteristic eighteenth century gesture in opening up 23I). This most Iorious of postmodern buildings succeeds ,,with its neighiors, the pcst, cnd the grid of New York" (Jencks' o discourse 1987:234)'AttheScmet-ime,thebuildingretoinsotypicalSenseofpostsplit pedim-art modern humor: mechqnical equipment hidden behind the "*tt"" the tempercrture is right" (Jencks' 1987: blows out cloudsoi
23r).

""pot

crnd This porticulqr combination of humor, historicol scholorship, mostered eclectic borrowing is rcrre in the sociql sciences. but has been "If I have the ophorism, by Robert Merton (1965) in trocing the source of in his more ond seen further, it is by stclnding on the shoulders of gicnts," pcrticrl citqtion phenomenon' Merton recent qrticle (1995) excmining the hod attributed the so-colled Thomas theorem ("If men define situations cs recl, they are real in their consequences") to w. I. Thomcs in severol previous publications despite the fqtt thot the theorem cppecrred in the Thomqs' 1928 book written by both W. I. Thomqs and Dorothy Swqine

Merton hod previousiy exploined in footnotes thot Dorothy Swoine Thomas herself hod confir*"d io him that this theorem wcrs formulated by qccusotion W. I. cllone. Nevertheless, he found himsell confronted by cln ol institutionalized sexism in qttributing the theorem solely to the male quthor o{ the book in which it crppeored. His previous Iootnotes explcrining the crttribution hqd no discernible effect. In whqt way is Merton',s orticle clcrrilying the cluthorship of the Thomqs theorem postmodern? First, the style ol the article "deports from the tidy format that has come to be prescribed for the scientific pcper" (Merton' of 1995: 379). Merton relerred to the article qs "this discu.rsive composite to copture the 6lqn with which he qrchivql documents," but this fclils weqves textuql frcrgments, letters, and obServcrtions together in pursuit oI the biogrophy of <r sociologiccll ideq' The mystery qs to whlther W. I. cctuclly wcs responsible for the poweltheorem is solved ecrrly in the qrticle in an extended footnote' But o relqtes to the iul norrcrtive tension irives the crticle forwqrd, crnd this

1997

Kildu|l ond Mehro

473

us o{ whqt dilficulty of establishing the truth. How con Merton convince from o he believes? This is the dilemmo fqced by the sociol scientist privcte qssert thot postmodern perspective. It is not enough to m_erely Thomqs declored correspondence exists that shows thqt Dorothy Swoine attempted w. L Thomas to be the sole progenitor ol the theorem' Merton',s includes This solution is to put oll the etide.r-c" he has before the reader' himsell qnd facsimiles of qII letters becrring on this question between

appcrently irreleDorothy Swaine Thomqs, letters ihat contoin much other, in the body of the vont information. This full inclusion of source moteriqls of Dorothy text enqbles the reoder to discern not merely the strengthand Merton' iiomqs's testimony, but the rel<rtionship between her i;;; qnd w' I' Thomqs' between her and w. I. Thomqs, ond between Merton of the mqtter in q Readers crre enqbl"a to judge ior themselves the truth to summcrrize the wcry that would be impossible were Merton content not merely typescripts evidence, rqther thcn to preseni it in Iull, including heip with cubut crctuql photocopies. The cpporently irreievcnt detcrils qnd contextuolizing the dispute over thenticqting ttr. within "orr.rporrde"cl, origins. Further, these detcils establish the culturcrl bcckground conembedded' qnd which the collaborqtion between the Thomcrses wcts context of the trasts eqrlier.rrtt,r*t prcrctices with the somewhat dilferent contemporarY occrdemY.

Thus,Mertonsucceeded,tosomeextent'inovercomingtheprobiems of o cloim' of how to represent the evidence and how to assert the truth presented os cr story' with He did this through c highly pelsonalized text, Merton identi{iqble chorcrcters, cnd cn clrlcly of epistolotory evidence' As the mentioned, he drew on the tlcditio; of the epistolory novel and on the ISth-century npvelist strecrm-of-consciousness techniques initioted by Laurence Sterne (in lristrcrm Shondy)' This ccrse study seeks to estqblish overthe truth concerning ong sentence in the history of sociology' Merton but monoged to whelmed the reodJr with the sheer volume oi evidence orrsy this evidence in an oestheticcllly pleosing text thot mosquerodes oi not &s scienqe but os finely wrought fiction. This work is one exomple and highly how cqreful scholorship, ciiticol thinking, personol nsrrqtive, .orrrbine to produce work of lcsting vcrlue in the best chcrged humor "or, postmodern eclecticism' tradition of emerging
Secrrching for Pcrradox The modernist ethos is summqrized in Mies Vcrn der Rohe's ophorism, don't wcrnt to be interesting, I wqnt to be good" (Fleming, Honour, &

"I Pevsner,l972:193)'Echoeso{thisstqtementoreoftenhecrrdconcerning

orgcnization6rl reseqrch (e.g., Donqldson, I995: 23D.By contrqst, postmod.rii"t" preler the interesting over the obvious crnd plqce cr high vcrlue on porodox, contrqst, counterintuition, and humor (see Fine & Mqrtin, 1995, for o discussion of scrcqsm, scrtire, cnd irony in the work oI Erving Goi{mcn). From o postmodernist resecrrch perspective, there is no point in estqblishing the obvious through laborious reseorch. Such reseorch not

474

Academy ol Monagement Ferriew

April

(thus violoting only brings soci6rl science into disrepute with its publics the postmodernist emphqsis on relevqnce), but it olso wqstes resources knows' on reseqrch questions thqt simply conlirm what everyone olrecdy nonobvious, the counPostmodernism, then, invoives .' search for the terintuitive, and the surprising. This does not mecn cln endless pursuit of ploce the new. As we hqve olieody crrgued, postmodernist enquiry tcrkes Thus, the parodoxes in the context of the long trcdition of modernism. in discovered by postmodern enquiry ore likely to be deeply embedded cnd counterpoised to the clossic themes of the field' Reference has olready been made to the postmodern chorcrcteristics and their of the experimentol work oi L"otr Festinger, stonley schqchter, associates (e.g., Festinger & carlsmith, I959; Schochter & Singer. i962)' One exqmple will suffice to illustrate how far this work depcrts from the majority of the lqb experiments thqt crowd the pages of the clpplied psychology journclls in which most microorganizotioncrl behavior reseorch is published, of Schcrchter and singer's (1962) effort to uncover the determinqnts emotional stote exhibiti mqny postmodernist features' First is crn explicit crppecrl to clossic references in the field. In the cqse ol the emotions, the clqssic reference wcs William James's (1890) theory of a connection between bodily stcrtes ond emotions. Jcmes is referenced ond quoted in the first sentence o{ the resecrrch report, thus setting the report in the requisite classicql tradition. Note thot this reference to James is not grcrtuitous, nor cccompcrnied by other grond-sounding nomes to buttress the q crrticle's'claim to ottentio.r. on the contrqry, the trqdition is evoked crs mesns ol communicoting the continuity of the scholqrly trcdition, which is shown to spcrn over 7b yectrs. In a typiccrl postmodern fashion, work from very difierent eras is treoted cs port ol cr continuum' There is no pretence ol c drostic "breqk" with trcrdition. Not only is work from o very different erq introduced c:s c classicol frame {or the contemporory, but resecrrch from <r diflerent culture is crlso presented crs relevcnt ond vitql io the resecrrch continuum: the quthors reference, quote extensively from, ond comment on a 1924 poper publishgd in a French journol, 6:nd.o{fer, in o.footnote, trqnslsted copies of this work to the reqder, thus, in a chcrqcteristic postmodernist gesture, including the reader in the reseqrch endeavor. references establish qn historiccrl context lor the contemporcry resecrrch. The experiment itseli is a mcrsterpiece of doublecoded, hilarious dromq. Adrenaiin-influenced subjects are either provided with the correct explonction for symptoms of qrousol, crn incorrect explonction, or no explcrnation. The quthors go to consideroble trouble to enqct the drqmatic props, setting, qnd diqlogue necesscrry for the creation of the illusion thqt cn experiment on vision is underwcy. The high point of this drqmc comes in the description of how the stooge creoted for the subject either ci euphoric or on cngel explcnction of the puzzling odrenalin-induced crrouscrl. In the euphorio condition, the stooge plogresses

All of these vitql

I997

Kildulf ond Mehra

475

qng:er condition from doodling to paper bosketball to hula hoops. In the qbout the questionnqire to ongrily the stooge progr""r"" from complcrining qnd hurling the pieces crossing out items to tecrring nf tf,. questionnoire told, ends on the floor. The questlonniire in the cnger condition, we clre with "With ho* mony men (other thqn your fcther) hqs your mother hod "4 qnd under' extrqmqrital relotion=hips?" The avcliloble ccrtegories crre 5-9, ond l0 and over"' as the The results of the experiment include such humorous touches "who threw open description of the sublect in the euphorio condition, the window cnd, loughing, hurled pop"t bosketballs crt pcrssersby"'The given preconclusions confirm the potentiolly revolutionory hypothesis: arousql"'we hclve' cisely the some stqte of qdrenqlin-induced emotionol qble to produce in our subiects by mlcrns of cognitive mcrnipulctions, been the very dispcrrote stotes of euphoria cnd cnger"' This experiment is qn excmple ol how q postmodernist social science qnd the IuIl pcrnoply of modernist con employstcrgecraft, tradition, hr*ot, methodology to excrmine topics, such cs the determinqnts of emotionol thus esccpe stcrte, thcrt lie of the boundories ol severcl disciplines ond irom segregoted acodemic departments. Postmodernism, in its "i,""iio" stretches qcloss disciplines in pursuit ol the interesting ot eclecticism, ih"t"*p"nse of the obvious. Postmodernists, like Schachter, tend to hove highly diverse ccrreers. (schochter, besides his colloborative work on sociql qffiliotion, emotioncl stcrtes, ond cognitive dissoncnce, olso colIaborated on pioneering contributions to reseorch on obesity, smoking cesscrtion, ond the ,orido- wcrlks theory of stock market vqriqtion') Orgcnizctionql studies, Iying ot the crossroqds of mcrny disciplines, offers *orry opportunities for qctivist postmodern reseclrch. The postmodern og"rrdo-i" to crvoid parcdigmatic norrowness, obvious hypotheses, and contextless empiricism while borrowing freely from the crvcrilqble repertoire of methods crnd resegrch styles in rigorous chollenges to conventioncl wisdom.

ANTI'CONCLUSION

We were at o meeting of quantitotive sociql scientists recently and one of us hcppened to mention, in the course of q conversotion between sessions, on interest in the work of Derrido. The result wqs cstonishing: cr senior socicrl scientist stcrggered backword os if physiccllly struck' Thot the invocqtion of Derridq's ncme should evoke such q viscerol response is one indicotion of the polorizotion between empiricists ond postmodernists. It is ecrsy to forgei the gulf between those empiricists distrustful of speculotion in the ob"err". of rigorously collected qucntitstive doto cnd those postmodernists dismissive of oll cttempts to use data to represent the world. Across this gulf, the two sides eye eoch other suspiciously while fighting for journcl spcrce crnd ocademiq advcrncement' We crre not sure whot can be done about this undeclared wqr. We hove emphcsized cr relqtively inclusive version of postmodernism in this

476

Acodemy of Monogement Feview

April

article, but, clearly, much of the hypothesis-testing empiricql rese-qrch thot oppeqrs in our journols hqs tew it clny ol the features thot we hclve discussld crs postmodern. Mcny researchers who seek to confirm conventionol wisdom qssume thqt dotcr represent the truth about crn objectively subjecmeqsured world. Such resecrrchers rigorousiy exclude intuition or tive experience from their resecrrch reports, and s_ignclly distrust humor' any irony, crnd the parcrdoxicql. Much resecrrch, in short, Ioils to roise from chcllenges to pcrradigms ol enquiry or proctice'-ot'q fails to benefit the whiilwind oi idecs crssociqted with postmodernism. con Those caught up in the excitement of postmodernism, however, for eosily lose siglt of the revolutionory potential of postmodern ideas in this article the picctice oiso-colled normol science. Pqrt of our purpose reshoped by postmodis to suggest how orgcrnizctionol studies might be ir, *oy" thqt lnhonce rcrther thqn detroct from the research adven-

"rrri"* ;;;:w"

hove'endorsed the inclusive elements in postmodernism ond hqve outlined how postmodern commitments to breaking down disciplinory viewboundqries, chollenging conventionql wisdom, ond giving voice to points ond perspectivei hitherto silenced ccrn employ some cspects of Lpprooch.s-conrmonly identified with modernism. In drqwing ottention io-ipitt"*ologicol problematics thot postmodernists have surfaced' ond in suggesting how =on1" reseorchers hove begun to deol with these probI.*oii.=, ws offer less a mop o{ the territory thcrn signposts on how to storm the Bostille of conventionqi thinking. The prcctice of resecrch should never be a timid qdventure'

'

REFERENCES

releAgger, B. I991. Criticcrl theory, poststructulolism, postmodernism: Their sociolqgicql vonce. Annuol Review o/ Sociology, i7: 105-13I' Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S. I996. Criticol theory ond postmodeln opprooches to orgonizotionol qrgqnizqtion studies: studies. In s. R. Clegg, c. Hordy, & w. R. Nord (Eds.), Hondbook o! I9l-217. London: Scrge' Arrington, C. E., & Frqncis, R. I. 1989. Letting the chot out o{ the bcg: Deconstruction, privilege, ond occounting. resecrrch, Accounting, organizations ond sociely' 14: l-28' Bqrkun, M. I968. Law without scrnctions: Order in prirnitive sociefies ond the world community. New Hqven, CT: Yole University Press.

Boudrillcrrd, I. I983. Simulotions. New York: Semiotext(e)' (Ed'), RepresenloBen-Ari, E. 1995. On crcknowledgments in ethnogrophies' In J. Von Maonen lion in ethnography: t30-164. Thousond Oaks, CA: Soge' Best, S., & Kellner, D. 1991. Posfmodern theory: Ciltico| inlerrogolions. New York: Guillord
Press.

Boje, D. M. lgg5. Stories ol the storytelling orgonizotion: A postmodern cnolysis ol Disney os "T<rmqro-lqnd." Academy oI Managemenl /ournoL 38: 997-1035' Bourdieu, P. Ig77. Outline ol a theory o/ proctice. Combridge, Englclnd: Combridge Univer-

sity Press.
Burrell, G.
1g88.

Modernism, post modernism qnd orglonizotionol anolysis

2: The

contribution

ol Michel Foucqult. Organization Sludies, 9:221-235'

S-ar putea să vă placă și