This paper examines whether the concept of learning organizations is a myth and if it is possible to intertwine workplace democracy with profitability. Theoretically, learning organizations have the capacity to achieve the goals of socialists, i.e., worker participa- tion, employee empowerment, and full profit sharing amongst members at all levels of the organization. This paper draws upon various power discourses present in manage- ment and social sciences literature and empirical data gathered from two case studies of professional accounting firms to examine whether the notion of democratic knowledge generating environments is realistic. According to Lukes' and Gramsci (1971), it is possible to shape the cognitions, perceptions, and preferences of individuals to shape and control the interests of one group over the others. Foucault (1977) discusses the various mechanisms through which such form of power can be implemented. He also develops Bentham's panopticon, the examination process, and the system of time-tables followed in schools as modern surveillance techniques like meetings, training programmes, induction schemes, culture programmes, and performance appraisal systems. This paper uses a critical methodology with its elements of “critical perspective” and “deconstruction” to analyse the interview data gathered from two professional accounting firms. The analysis reveals the following: The learning organizations adopt the concepts of learning environments and workplace democracies and egalitarian and cooperatively minded firms to seek the cooperation and support of their employees so that the firms are able to innovate and create learning continuously to survive and meet the demands of today's business environments. The organizations believe that by linking the fulfilment of the self-actualized needs of the organizational employees with the objectives of the management, a common unified direction could be achieved. The management in these contemporary knowledge companies focus on creating such conditions which enable organizations to achieve their own objectives. The control is exercised through various surveillance techniques like meetings, training schemes, hierarchical structure, etc., under the external pretence of employee democracy and empowerment. However, the manage- ment fails to successfully mould the subjectivity of its employees. Even though the employees are aware of the management's corporate regime and its unfairness, they do not overtly resist or attack the management because they realize that their long-term career growth is linked to the survival of the management's regime. Therefore, they overtly support the management's policies, goals, and objectives and consciously uphold the banner of “socialistic models” and “employees' paradises.” In other words, it is a sort of compromise between management and its workers relegating knowledge creating companies as pseudo democracies.
Fool's Gold? The Value of Business Awards to Small Businesses
