Minerva Elements Records

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11343/251382

Filters

2010 - 2012 8
2
Reset filters

Settings
Statistics
Citations
Author: Hardy, Cynthia × End date: 2012 × Start date: 2010 ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 8 of 8
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Reframing resistance to organizational change
    Thomas, R ; Hardy, C (ELSEVIER SCI LTD, 2011-09)
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Managing Organizational Change: Negotiating Meaning and Power-Resistance Relations
    Thomas, R ; Sargent, LD ; Hardy, C (INFORMS, 2011-01-01)
    Theoretical developments in the analysis of organizations have recently turned to an “organizational becoming” perspective, which sees the social world as enacted in the microcontext of communicative interactions among individuals through which meaning is negotiated. According to this view, organizational change is endemic, natural, and ongoing; it occurs in everyday interactions as actors engage in the process of establishing new meanings for organizational activities. We adopt this approach to study how meanings were negotiated by senior and middle managers in a workshop held as part of a culture change program at a telecommunications company. Our study identifies two very different patterns in these negotiations, constituted by the particular communicative practices adopted by participants. We discuss the implications of these patterns for organizational change in relation to generative dialogue and power-resistance relations between senior and middle managers.
  • Item
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    WHERE ARE THE NEW THEORIES OF ORGANIZATION? INTRODUCTION
    Suddaby, R ; Hardy, C ; Huy, QN (ACAD MANAGEMENT, 2011-04)
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Subjects of Inquiry: Statistics, Stories, and the Production of Knowledge
    Ainsworth, SA ; Hardy, C (SAGE Publications, 2012)
    Statistics and stories are often equated with different types of knowledge in contemporary western societies: statistics are associated more with the authority of objective, disinterested experts while stories are able to encapsulate subjective, personal experience. In this paper, we explore how both genres were used to produce knowledge in the context of a public inquiry on the problems facing older workers in securing and maintaining employment. Drawing on the concept of power/knowledge relations we examine how statistics and stories were used in different inquiry texts and trace their use across texts over time. Our findings show that to establish their authority as a valid form of knowledge representing the subject of inquiry, statistics and stories both had to be embedded in the appropriate discursive conventions. In the case of statistics, knowledge had to be expressed through discursive conventions that conveyed distance from the subject of inquiry, i.e. independent, objective research. In contrast, stories produced knowledge through discursive conventions that established proximity to the older worker – by being or knowing an older worker. The study shows the effects of these discursive conventions on how knowledge is institutionalized through processes of textual re-inscription, as well as the way in which they constructed a marginalized older worker subject.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Readers beware: Provocation, problematization and...problems
    Hardy, C ; Grant, D (SAGE Publications, 2012)
    In their recent Human Relations article and subsequent rejoinder to three commentators, Alvesson and Kärreman make a number of assertions concerning the development of organizational discourse analysis and the current state of research in this area. We believe their emphasis on provocation results in an unsatisfactory problematization of discourse-based work with the result that there are significant problems with both their analysis of the literature and their solutions to the shortcomings that they believe exist. We discuss a number of reasons why we believe that readers should be wary of what they read about organizational discourse analysis in Alvesson and Kärreman’s work. Drawing on our critique of their article and rejoinder, we propose some ideas that we believe will be more useful in developing studies of organizational discourse than those put forward by these authors.
  • Item
  • Item