This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Laine, P.-M. Articles by Vaara, E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Struggling over subjectivity: A discursive analysis of strategic development in an engineering group

Turku School of Economics, Finland, pikka-maaria.laine{at}saunalahti.fi

Eero Vaara

Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration, Helsinki, Finland, Ecole de Management de Lyon, France, eero.vaara{at}hanken.fi

We have seen growing interest in discursive perspectives on strategy. This perspective holds great promise for development of an understanding on how strategy discourse and subjectivity are intertwined. We wish to add to this existing research by outlining a discursive struggle approach to subjectivity. To understand the complex subjectification and empowering/disempowering effects of organizational strategy discourse, this approach focuses on organization-specific discourse mobilizations and various ways of resistance. Drawing on an analysis of the discourses and practices of ‘strategic development’ in an engineering and consulting group we provide an empirical illustration of such struggles over subjectivity. In particular, we report three examples of competing ways of making sense of and giving sense to strategic development, with specific subjectification tendencies. First, we show how corporate management can mobilize and appropriate a specific kind of strategy discourse to attempt to gain control of the organization, which tends to reproduce managerial hegemony, but also trigger discursive and other forms of resistance. Second, we illustrate how middle managers resist this hegemony by initiating a strategy discourse of their own to create room for manoeuvre in controversial situations. Third, we show how project engineers can distance themselves from management-initiated strategy discourses to maintain a viable identity despite all kinds of pressures. Although our examples are case-specific, we believe that similar discursive dynamics also characterize strategizing in other organizations.

Key Words: discourse • discursive struggle • hegemony • identity • power • strategy

Human Relations, Vol. 60, No. 1, 29-58 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0018726707075279


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. T. Fairhurst Considering context in discursive leadership research Human Relations, November 1, 2009; 62(11): 1607 - 1633. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W. Kwon, I. Clarke, and R. Wodak Organizational decision-making, discourse, and power: integrating across contexts and scales Discourse & Communication, August 1, 2009; 3(3): 273 - 302. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Palli, E. Vaara, and V. Sorsa Strategy as text and discursive practice: a genre-based approach to strategizing in city administration Discourse & Communication, August 1, 2009; 3(3): 303 - 318. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Driver Encountering the Arugula Leaf: The Failure of the Imaginary and its Implications for Research on Identity in Organizations Organization, July 1, 2009; 16(4): 487 - 504. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Mantere and E. Vaara On the Problem of Participation in Strategy: A Critical Discursive Perspective Organization Science, March 1, 2008; 19(2): 341 - 358. [Abstract] [PDF]