Why invisible boundaries matter: imagined institutions and power

Q4 Arts and Humanities Prometheus (Italy) Pub Date : 2017-10-02 DOI:10.1080/08109028.2018.1522131
T. Ray
{"title":"Why invisible boundaries matter: imagined institutions and power","authors":"T. Ray","doi":"10.1080/08109028.2018.1522131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper develops an alternative to Erin Meyer’s influential argument that national culture determines how people in a nation behave, thereby creating invisible boundaries that divide nations according to behavioural stereotypes. Whereas Meyer makes the implicit assumption that we could observe national culture and its effect on behaviour as if from a God’s Eye point of view, we might do better to begin with an Insider’s Eye perspective on whom we could trust to do what. If we take too much for granted, we may miss invisible boundaries that matter; which might have happened when the English executive, Michael Woodford, became president and CEO of Japan’s Olympus Corporation, only to find himself fearing for his life after exposing fraud that his Japanese colleagues thought wise to hide. Woodford’s startling story is used here to consider three conceptual questions. First, how might power mediated by what people imagine influence the evolution of institutional ecologies, together with invisible boundaries that divide insiders from outsiders? Second, why should management theorists move from an objective God’s Eye perspective to Insider’s Eye reflections on power mediated by imagined institutions? And third, if we want to avoid falling foul of invisible boundaries, what should we do?","PeriodicalId":38494,"journal":{"name":"Prometheus (Italy)","volume":"5 1","pages":"305 - 323"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prometheus (Italy)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2018.1522131","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper develops an alternative to Erin Meyer’s influential argument that national culture determines how people in a nation behave, thereby creating invisible boundaries that divide nations according to behavioural stereotypes. Whereas Meyer makes the implicit assumption that we could observe national culture and its effect on behaviour as if from a God’s Eye point of view, we might do better to begin with an Insider’s Eye perspective on whom we could trust to do what. If we take too much for granted, we may miss invisible boundaries that matter; which might have happened when the English executive, Michael Woodford, became president and CEO of Japan’s Olympus Corporation, only to find himself fearing for his life after exposing fraud that his Japanese colleagues thought wise to hide. Woodford’s startling story is used here to consider three conceptual questions. First, how might power mediated by what people imagine influence the evolution of institutional ecologies, together with invisible boundaries that divide insiders from outsiders? Second, why should management theorists move from an objective God’s Eye perspective to Insider’s Eye reflections on power mediated by imagined institutions? And third, if we want to avoid falling foul of invisible boundaries, what should we do?
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为什么无形的界限很重要:想象中的制度和权力
本文对艾琳·迈耶(Erin Meyer)颇具影响力的观点提出了另一种观点,即民族文化决定了一个国家的人民如何行为,从而创造了无形的界限,根据行为刻板印象将国家划分开来。尽管Meyer含蓄地假设我们可以从上帝之眼的角度观察民族文化及其对行为的影响,但我们最好从局内人的角度开始,看看我们可以信任谁去做什么。如果我们把太多事情视为理所当然,我们可能会错过重要的无形界限;当英国高管迈克尔•伍德福德(Michael Woodford)成为日本奥林巴斯公司(Olympus Corporation)的总裁兼首席执行官时,他可能会发现自己在揭露了日本同事认为明智之举的欺诈行为后,担心自己的生命安全。这里用伍德福德的惊人故事来思考三个概念性问题。首先,人们想象中的权力如何影响制度生态的演变,以及区分局内人与局外人的无形界限?其次,为什么管理理论家要从客观的“上帝之眼”视角转向“局内人之眼”对权力的反思?第三,如果我们想避免触犯无形的界限,我们应该怎么做?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Prometheus (Italy)
Prometheus (Italy) Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Graham Dutfield, That High Design of Purest Gold: A Critical History of the Pharmaceutical Industry S. Scott Graham, The Doctor and the Algorithm. Promise, Peril, and the Future of Health AI Larry A. DiMatteo, Cristina Poncibò and Michel Cannarsa (eds) Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence: Global Perspectives on Law and Ethics S. Voeneky, P. Kellmeyer, O. Mueller and W. Burgard (eds) Cambridge Handbook of Responsible Artificial Intelligence: Interdisciplinary Perspectives Learning research: theory building and theory testing in educational technology innovation and beyond
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1