Talking About Organizations Podcast

Originally published in 1992, Gideon Kunda’s ethnographic study of a high-tech corporation altered the discourse on organizational culture. “Tech,” the firm being studied, was a firm on the rise and saw itself as a leader and ground breaker in the rapidly growing high-tech industries of the 1980s. But as the firm grew from a modest couple hundred to tens of thousands of employees and multiple sites, Tech undertook an effort to indoctrinate its members with its tried-and-true formula for success — hard work, sacrifice, and belief in the company. The degree to which this indoctrination occurred was extensive, from the choreographed leader messages, trained cultural experts and internal publications to the highly competitive and cut-throat nature of project work. Kunda captured it all in gripping detail.The centerpiece of Kunda’s thesis was Tech’s exercise of normative control. This was ironic in a way given how Tech’s professed culture valued self-determination and autonomy. But, the rewards and sanctions were constructed to enforce a particular form of autonomy, one in which Tech extracted the most out of its people while breaking their lives in the process.Does this mean ‘normative control’ as a mechanism for mission accomplishment is bad? As we dove into the text and applied its lessons to present-day matters, the question is actually difficult to answer as there are many factors to consider. Listen as we wrestle with this extraordinary and provocative text!

Having gone through the mechanics behind SST in Parts 1 and 2, we now ask ourselves if there is a more suitable way to measure individual time-span of discretion? Join us as we conclude Episode 48 on the Stratified Systems Theory!

How viable is SST and what are the 'real world' implications of using this theory to structure organizations? Is it really a good idea to use time-span to differentiate between the strata or is there something else? In part 2 of the episode we delve deeper into the Stratified Systems Theory to examine the fundamental mechanics of this approach through both theoretical and practical lenses.

As bureaucracies became more prevalent as a feature of organizations post-WWII, questions surfaced as to how they could be improved. Was there an optimal way to design them? What was the best role of individual members within a bureaucracy? Could individuals be developed to handle higher level roles?Among those asking such questions was Elliott Jaques, co-founder of the Tavistock Institute and later the author of the renowned book Requisite Organization that combined social theories with theories of organization. As a scientific approach to organizational design, the "stratified systems theory" of requisite organization sought to optimize the hierarchical structure based on the time-span of decisions at echelon. Then, using methods for measuring individual capabilities and capacity for decision making, members could be assigned posts within the organization based on best fit. Stratified systems theory (SST) established a common schema for using time-span that could be applied to any organization.Please join us for Episode 48 as we discuss this controversial yet fascinating approach to organizational design!

Conclusion of our discussion of Albert and Whetten's paper on Organizational Identity. Learn what did happen at the US Africa Command after all and what are the practical and scholarly implications of this work. What can we learn from it and is it still relevant? For this, and more, tune in to Part 3 of the episode!

Part 2 of our discussion of Albert and Whetten's paper on Organizational Identity. Is it identity of organizations or identity in organizations? What about external perceptions of the organization? How do people fill in the blanks in their perception of organizational identity? For this, and more, tune in to part two of our conversation!

"Who are we?" - The pursuit of an answer to this tantalizingly simple question began with a book chapter written in 1985 by organization theories Stuart Albert and David Whetten. "Organizational Identity" established the construct of identity at the orgnizational level and described it as the sum of three types of claims -- claims of an organization's central character, claims of its distinctiveness from other organizations, and claims of temporal continuity that tie the present organization to its history. The chapter also raised the idea that organizations can have multiple identities, which each being more salient at different times. With seven key research questions and thirty-three hypothesis, the chapter also laid out a far-reaching research agenda.But as we discuss in this episode, the twenty years that followed saw much of the research yield lots of confusion and consternation. David Whetten would prepare a follow-up commentary in 2006 to clarify and update the construct while addressing the conflicts.So how useful is it? Listen in as we grapple with answering questions like, "Who are we as the Talking About Organizations Podcast?" using Albert & Whetten's construct as a starting point. We then follow with examples, case studies, and uses of organizational identity in both scholarship and practice. We hope you enjoy the discussion and find it useful for understanding the deep culture of organizations.

What a treat! An exclusive LIVE episode featuring Paul Adler, Silvia Dorado and Marc Ventresca talking about management classics. This was recorded from a PDW hosted by Pedro at the 2018 AoM Annual Meeting in Chicago, the purpose of which was to raise interest towards classic authors/ideas in the field of organization and management theory. It offered scholars from all levels the opportunity to reflect on insights of earlier scholarship and their relevance for current research, complementing the strong emphasis (on new ideas and approaches. This is of great importance as the field has thus far been more attentive to disruptions than continuities; pursuing novelty over tradition.In the workshop, senior scholars presented talks on four classic authors (Karl Marx, Mary Parker Follett, Mary Douglas, and Albert Hirschman) to discuss their contemporary relevance. This was followed by a roundtable discussion limited to fifty participants.The workshop demonstrated how attentive (re)readings of classic scholarship reaffirm time and time again their enduring importance. The discussion provided valuable insights on central organizational research problematics (e.g., coordination and control), stimulated complex thinking, enabled analytical comparisons between current and past phenomena (e.g., industrialization and digitization), and serve as ‘exemplars’ of academic excellence and of research that is problem-driven and focused on real-world issues.

Conclusion of our conversation with Prof Marianna Fotaki on the Fate of Whistleblowers in organizations. In this last part we offer some practical reflection and Ralph shares a personal story of how he was faced with a choice to either blow a whistle or not.Fred Alford wrote the book Whistleblowers: Broken Lives and Organizational Power in 2001 to understand and make sense of these experiences. Rather than a detailed telling of the whistleblowers’ stories, the book expands upon them to develop an alternative theory of organizations and their use of power. By alternating between the individuals’ and organizations’ perspective, Alford’s book challenged conventional wisdom about the nature and character of power and politics, ethics and morality, and the individual’s motivations for standing up.

In Part 2 of the episode we delve deeper into the issues of ethics, psychoanalysis, functional and dysfunctional narcissism, romantic heroism, mandated vs 'pure' whistleblowing, and the various consequences of whistleblowing that people who engage in this activity are forced to endure.