Ethnography in Organization Research

Classic organizational theory was built on ethnographic studies. These studies, which rely on immersion in everyday organizational life, adopting the native’s perspective, and an openness to emergent phenomena, have helped illuminate the complexities and nuances of organizations that were otherwise invisible to outsiders. Today, organizational scholarship boasts of drawing on a wide range of theoretical traditions and diverse methodologies, particularly in quantitative methods that lend generalizability and scientific precision to organizational theory. As such, the role of ethnography has also evolved over the years; its validity has been criticized and defended, its ontological and epistemological foundations reflected on, and its place among other traditions clarified. Besides its critical role in establishing organizational study as a discipline in its own right, ethnographic work is now generally recognized and appreciated in the scholarly community, in what has been termed its Golden Age, for its contributions to new intellectual territories across multiple subfields of organizational theory.

A comprehensive conceptual and bibliometric study of person-centered methodologies

Person-centered approaches, such as latent profile analysis (LPA) and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), have gained in popularity in organizational scholarship because of their ability to provide insight into how interrelations between a group of conditions can lead to a particular outcome. Despite the growing acceptance of person-centered approaches in social science research, traditional variable-centered approaches continue to prevail, although their dominance is increasingly questioned. This paper offers in-depth analysis of the current state of QCA and LPA from both a conceptual and a bibliometric perspective. This study thus aims to contextualize the role of person-centered methodologies in organizational scholarship. This aim is important, given the significance of exploring novel approaches to advance knowledge in organizational research. This paper provides scholars with quantifiable and readily comparable information on the use of these emerging but promising methods in organizational studies. Ultimately, this scientific contribution sheds light on the current and prospective applications of person-centered methods in research. Moreover, it offers scholars who are considering applying these methods objective analysis of the scientific production in this area thus far.

Difference, Intersectionality, and Organizing

In organizational scholarship, difference is broadly conceptualized as the ways in which individuals differ from each other along the lines of socially significant identities and characteristics. As such, difference encompasses social identities related to gender, race, class, sexuality, ability, and national origin. In addition to social identities, difference also encompasses individual characteristics, such as education level, family type, and health conditions. Organizational scholarship increasingly considers difference to be a constitutive feature of organizing. As such, difference is not merely one aspect of organizing that is only relevant in some circumstances, but a defining feature of organizing processes to which it is always important to attend because dominant discourses and value systems privilege certain differences over others. Central to difference scholarship is the concept of intersectionality, which holds that various identities intersect with each other to shape social and organizational experiences in ways that are intertwined with privilege and/or disadvantage. Scholarship on difference, intersectionality, and organizing has drawn from multiple critical theoretical frameworks, such as critical race theory, standpoint feminism, postmodern feminism, queer theory, and postcolonial theory. A growing amount of scholarship on difference, intersectionality, and organizing is also empirical and sheds light on how overlapping, intersectional identities matter in organizational settings and how they are embedded in power relations.

Feeling Positive, Negative, or Both? Examining the Self-Regulatory Benefits of Emotional Ambivalence

According to self-regulation theories, affect plays a crucial role in driving goal-directed behaviors throughout employees’ work lives. Yet past work presents inconsistent results regarding the effects of positive and negative affect with theory heavily relying on understanding the separate, unique effects of each affective experience. In the current research, we integrate tenets of emotional ambivalence with self-regulation theories to examine how the conjoint experience of positive and negative affect yields benefits for behavioral regulation. We test these ideas within a self-regulatory context that has frequently studied the benefits of affect and has implications for all employees at one point in their careers: the job search. Adopting a person-centered (i.e., profile-based) perspective across two within-person investigations, we explore how emotional ambivalence relates to job search success (i.e., interview invitations, job offers) via job search self-regulatory processes (i.e., metacognitive strategies, effort). Results illustrate that the subsequent week (i.e., at time t + 1; Study 1) and month (Study 2) after job seekers experience emotional ambivalence (i.e., positive and negative affect experienced jointly at similar levels at time t), they receive more job offers via increased job search effort and interview invitations. Theoretical and practical implications for studying emotional ambivalence in organizational scholarship are discussed.

Positive School Leadership Behaviors

To introduce and define the core behaviors of positive school leadership (PSL), we explore six positively anchored sets of work (supporting, developing relationships, establishing values, acting authentically, modeling, and enabling or empowering) that move us beyond the deeply ingrained negative and deficit roots that have defined schooling for over a century. The exploration of research primarily on positive organizational scholarship (POS) accomplishes this, showing that POS attends to the growth of others and helps grow and reinforce relationships that focus on personalization, trust, and caring. Additionally, PSL produces important outcomes, enhancing the cultural climate in schools in particular; however, it is also important to note that the current structure and culture of schooling create significant barriers to the implementation of PSL.

High-performance connections: Digital holism and communicative capitalism at HappyAppy

The current study examines the ways in which new age organizations use digital culture to promote “holistic” visions of personal and social well-being. Concepts of holism are common in contemporary and new age management settings, but are largely undertheorized by organizational scholars; moreover, the relations between holism and techno-culture, increasingly recognized by digital sociologists, are largely missing from organizational scholarship. Using the lens of “communicative capitalism,” we carry out a case study of “HappyAppy,” a French techno-startup association concerned with well-being related applications, to understand how holistic ideas are deployed and shaped within this association. We find that that holism is marked, on the one hand, by “autarkic” fantasies, involving subjective integration and immersion, and on the other, by “relational” fantasies, involving interpersonal connection and participation. Moreover, each of these versions of holism is associated with distinct critical possibilities. We use these results to theorize the role of digital holism at the intersection of new age management and digital culture, outlining an agenda for future research.

Toward a pedagogy of connection: A critical view of being relational in listening

Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS) perspectives define interpersonal work experiences such as positive work relationships and high-quality connections by the mutual growth and empowerment experienced by relationship or connection partners. Listening has been implicated as a key mechanism for building such positive interpersonal work experiences, but it is unclear how listening spurs on mutual, rather than one-sided growth, in relationship and connection partners. In this paper, we argue that management education currently focuses on the intrapersonal capability of listeners to execute key verbal and non-verbal behaviors. Less emphasis is placed on the mutual experience co-created between speaker and listener and, thus, on the potential for mutual growth and empowerment. We articulate what “being relational” in the listening experience means, and use experiential learning theory to articulate how educators might create learning spaces for “being relational” through conversations between listener and speaker. Throughout the paper we contend with issues of individual and structural power asymmetries inherent in understanding listening as a relational process.

Non-naïve organizational positivity through a generative paradox pedagogy

Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS), with positivity as a core conceptual component, is a major innovation in recent decades in management and organizational studies. Just as organization is an inherently paradox laden process, so too, we argue, is positivity. Yet in classrooms and in practice, POS is mostly taught in a manner that accepts only one side of the paradox, that which, at first glance, appears positive. Against such linear approaches we propose another possibility: teaching positivity through a pedagogy of generative paradoxes emergent from creatively harmonizing the energy of competing and interdependent positive and negative tensions. In the process we extend the notion of generative paradox as discussed in paradox literature by embracing the notion of generativity as discussed in POS theorizing where it is associated with organizational processes that facilitate outcomes of collective flourishing, abundance, wellbeing, and virtue. Our proposed three-part generative paradox pedagogy contributes to the literature on POS, organizational paradox, and management learning.

Organizations, Social Problems, and System Change: Invigorating the Third Mandate of Organizational Research

Organizations across sectors appear to be shifting their ambitions from solving social problems to changing entire social systems. This phenomenon offers a timely opportunity to revisit what came to be known as the third mandate of organizational theory. In this paper we interrogate how organizational scholarship can productively explore and theorize the relationship between organizations and social systems in organized system change – an effort by organizations to alter the conditions that generate the characteristics of social problems and their dynamics of change. As a basis for theorizing organized system change, we develop an analytical scaffold that helps researchers to attend to fundamental aspects of the phenomenon and to achieve parsimony without blanking out complexity. Grounded in realist metatheory and principles, the scaffold reduces ambiguity, provides a backbone for empirical analysis, and favours mechanism-based explanation. We suggest that generating theoretically interesting and practically adequate knowledge on organized system change requires attention to three system realms: First, the subjectively constructed problem realm of systems concerned with processes of evaluating and problematizing situations. Second, the objectively constituted situational realm that attends to factual characteristics of situations and their dynamics of change. And third, the realm of causality understood as the mechanisms that generate both the objective characteristics of situations and the subjective criteria by which situations are evaluated as problems. In concluding, we reflect on the topics of boundaries and power as two promising areas for theorizing organized system change.

Teaching multiple approaches to management to facilitate prosocial and environmental well-being

Friedman’s maxim “The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits” (p. 32) has shaped what managers consider effective management. This Financial Bottom Line approach to management has been challenged by both Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS) and Critical Management Studies (CMS). POS highlights how enhancing prosocial and other nonfinancial considerations can increase profits, consistent with the current dominant Triple Bottom Line approach. In contrast, CMS tends to critique any approach that seeks to maximize profits by creating dysfunctional power symmetries and marginalization. This study introduces a third option, the Social and Ecological Thought approach, which promotes maximizing social and ecological well-being while remaining financially viable. A longitudinal pre-post intervention in a sample of undergraduate management students showed that teaching multiple approaches to management—Financial Bottom Line, Triple Bottom Line, and Social and Ecological Thought—resulted in learners becoming less likely to espouse profit-related goals (e.g. to maximize efficiency, productivity, profitability) and more likely to identify nonfinancial ones (e.g. extra-organizational prosociality and reduction of marginalization) when characterizing effective management. However, the results did not support predictions regarding intra-organizational prosociality and marginalization, or power asymmetries. We discuss implications for pedagogy and the future development of POS and CMS.