Harnessing the Power of Loss: On the Discriminatory Dynamic of Non-Emancipatory Organization Identity

Authors: Rickard Grassman

Abstract:

In this paper, Lacanian theory will be used to illustrate the way discourses interact with the material by way of reifying antagonisms to shape our sense of identities in and around organizations. The ability to ‘sustain the loss’ is, in this view, the common structure here discerned in the very texture of a discourse, which reifies ‘lack’ as an ontological condition into something contingently absent (loss) that the subject hopes to overcome (desire). These fundamental human tendencies of identification are illustrated in the paper by examples drawn from history, cinema, and literature. Turning to a select sample of empirical accounts from a management consultancy firm, it is argued that this ‘sustaining the loss’ operates in discourse to enact identification in an organizational context.

Keywords: Lacan, identification, discourse, desire and loss.

References:

[1] Alvesson, M., and Willmott, H. 2002. ‘Identity regulation as organizational control: Producing the appropriate individual’. Journal of Management Studies 39/5: 619–644.
[2] Barker, J. 1993. ‘Tightening the iron cage: concertive control in self-managing teams’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 4–8 - 37.
[3] Collinson, D. 1994. “Strategies of resistance: power, knowledge and subjectivity in the workplace”. In Resistance and Power in Organizations edited by Jermier, J., Knights, D. and Nord, W. London: Routledge.
[4] Barley, S. and Kunda, G. 1992. ‘Design and devotion: surges of rational and normative ideologies of control in managerial discourse’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 363-399.
[5] Foucault, M. 1991. ‘Governmentality’, in Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon and Peter Miller (eds.), The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 73-86.
[6] Jones C. and Spicer, A. 2005. “The Sublime Object of Entrepreneurship”, Organization, 12(2): 223-246.
[7] Roberts, J. 2005. ‘The Power of the ‘Imaginary’ in Disciplinary Processes’, Organization, 12(5), 612-642.
[8] Contu, A. 2008. “Decaf Resistance. On Misbehavior, Cynicism, and Desire in Liberal Workplace”, Management Communication Quarterly, 21(3): 364-379.
[9] Browning, C. (2004). Writing and teaching Holocaust history: A personal perspective. Teaching about the Holocaust, 31-49.
[10] Pierson, F. (2001) Conspiracy, BBC London: HBO Films New York.
[11] Laclau, E. 2005. On Populist Reason, London: Verso.
[12] Lacan, J. (1988) The Seminar of Jacques Lacan: Book II, New York: W. W. Norton.
[13] Hegel, G. W. F. (2018). Hegel: The phenomenology of spirit. Oxford University Press.
[14] Lacan, J. (1998). On feminine sexuality: The limits of love and knowledge. WW Norton & Company.
[15] Fleming, P. 2005. The Pleasure of Abandonment. Wuerzburg: Verlag Koenigshausen & Neumann GmbH.
[16] Child, J. 1973. “Strategies of Control and Organizational Behaviour”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 1-17.
[17] Selznick, P. (1996). Institutionalism" old" and" new". Administrative science quarterly, 270-277.
[18] Chia, R. 1994 “Decision: A deconstructive analysis”, Journal of Management Studies, 31(6), 781–806.
[19] Harding, N. 2007. “On Lacan and the “Becoming-ness” of Organizations/Selves”, Organization Studies, 28(11): 1761-1773.
[20] Lacan, J. 2006. Ecrits. London: WW Norton & Company.
[21] Kristeva, J. (1996) Strangers to Ourselves, London: Verso.
[22] Dean, T. 2008. Unlimited Intimacy: Reflections on the Subculture of Barebacking, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
[23] Chiesa, L. (2007). Subjectivity and otherness: A philosophical reading of Lacan. MIT press.
[24] Stavrakakis, Y. 2008. “Subjectivity and Organized Other: Between the Symbolic Authority and Fantasmatic Enjoyment”, Organization Studies, 29(7), 1037-1057.
[25] Howarth, D., & Stavrakakis, Y. (2000). ’Introducing discourse theory and political analysis’ in Howarth, D. R., Norval, A. J., & Stavrakakis, Y. (Eds.). Discourse theory and political analysis: Identities, hegemonies and social change. Manchester University Press.
[26] Žižek, S. 2000. The Ticklish Subject, London: Verso.
[27] Parsons, G. D. and Pascale, R. T. 2007. “Crisis at the summit”, Harvard Business Review, 3: 80-89.
[28] Wilde, O. (2014). Lady Windermere's fan. A&C Black.
[29] Boothby, R. 2001. Freud as Philosopher: Metapsychology after Lacan, London: Routledge.