Beyond critique: Towards transformative practice in critical management studies. Editors' introduction

Murphy, Jonathan Richard, Malin, Virpi and Siltaoja, Marjo 2013. Beyond critique: Towards transformative practice in critical management studies. Editors' introduction. Dialogues in Critical Management Studies 2 , xiii-xxxi. 10.1108/S2046-6072(2013)0000002004

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Critical management studies (CMS) is a vibrant and increasingly substantial subfield of management studies. From geographically and theoretically diverse seedlings in the last years of the 20th century, CMS has blossomed into an international movement with large biannual international conferences, a Division at the Academy of Management, and a burgeoning scholarly literature. The growth of CMS – particularly in the Anglo-American world – has fostered an intensive debate on the historical background, current research agenda, and the future of CMS over the past decade (see, e.g. Adler, 2002, 2008; Adler, Forbes, & Willmott, 2007; Alvesson, 2008; Clegg, Kornberger, Carter, & Rhodes, 2006; Cunliffe, 2008; Fournier & Grey, 2000; Ibarra-Colado, 2008; Parker, 2006; Phillips, 2006; Spicer, Alvesson, & Kärreman, 2009; Thompson, 2004; Voronov, 2008; Willmott, 2008). Despite its share of doctrinal disputes, by and large CMS scholars have been willing to encourage the participation of those from different disciplines and research interests under the same umbrella (see, e.g. Adler et al., 2007; Alvesson, 2008; Cooke, 2008). One product of the relative openness of the CMS community, however, is that there is no common agreement on what is meant by CMS. Neither is there something that could be called CMS-theory (Adler, 2008). As Alvesson (2008) points out, different groups perceive criticality differently. While there are a number of accounts that explore the meaning(s) of CMS (see, e.g. Adler et al., 2007; Alvesson, 2008; Alvesson, Bridgman, & Willmott, 2009; Alvesson & Willmott, 2003; Fournier & Grey, 2000), the CMS project as a whole remains theoretically fragmented with no clearly dominant approaches and perspectives. This epistemological, ontological, and teleological diversity in turn is reflected in highly divergent attitudes towards the possibility of engaged practice, as the varying interpretations by the different authors in this collection demonstrate.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Business (Including Economics)
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > HD Industries. Land use. Labor > HD28 Management. Industrial Management
Publisher:	Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN:	2046-6072
Last Modified:	10 Oct 2017 15:16
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/51425

Citation Data

Cited 4 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item