{"title":"妇女在工作中的 \"神话\",中断:来自《哈佛商业评论》和《西部大学季刊》的女性主义起源反叙述,第一部分","authors":"Stefanie Ruel","doi":"10.1108/jmh-04-2023-0034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The author aims to walk beside the singular privileged class of White women’s suffrage feminist origin story to (re)construct plausible feminist fragmented threads as antenarratives in the context of business management education. To accomplish this (re)assembling of threads, the author examined two North American business trade publications created and used within two business schools, Harvard University’s Harvard Business Review (HBR), established in 1922, and Western University’s The Quarterly Review of Commerce (The Quarterly), established in 1933.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>The author carefully reviewed almost 4,000 articles from HBR and The Quarterly, focusing on 308 articles that addressed the experiences of complex women. With this subset of collected articles, the author highlighted overlooked details, accidents and errors, generating interest and curiosity about the emergence of these fragmented and paradoxical origins that align with Foucault's histories of errors. By grouping these narrative fragments into themes and conducting a critical discourse analysis that incorporated influences from the external environment, the author reconstructed plural feminist origins antenarratives.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The themes discovered, including women as consumers, explicit working women concerns, women as authors/coauthors, diversity and social justice initiatives, and women in higher education/training, are not merely descriptive observations. They are the building blocks for identifying and analyzing the power relations circulating among feminist origins antenarratives within management education circles. These antenarratives include shedding light on women working in capitalist contexts, the educational needs of business women, and men and naming (but not breaking) the “mythologies” of women at work. These findings are transformative to the understanding of plural feminist origins.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>The uniqueness of this work lies in its threefold contributions: moving away from the notion of a singular feminist origin story and instead embracing the complexity of multiple, paradoxical and incomplete origins; shedding light on the spectrum of power relations – ranging from productive to oppressive – that shaped the experiences of women in two management educational circles during the first half of the 20th century; and introducing the concept of inflection points, which underscores the fluidity of knowledge.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":45819,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management History","volume":"215 5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The “mythologies” of women at work, interrupted: feminist origins antenarratives from Harvard Business Review and Western University’s The Quarterly, Part I\",\"authors\":\"Stefanie Ruel\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jmh-04-2023-0034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>The author aims to walk beside the singular privileged class of White women’s suffrage feminist origin story to (re)construct plausible feminist fragmented threads as antenarratives in the context of business management education. To accomplish this (re)assembling of threads, the author examined two North American business trade publications created and used within two business schools, Harvard University’s Harvard Business Review (HBR), established in 1922, and Western University’s The Quarterly Review of Commerce (The Quarterly), established in 1933.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>The author carefully reviewed almost 4,000 articles from HBR and The Quarterly, focusing on 308 articles that addressed the experiences of complex women. With this subset of collected articles, the author highlighted overlooked details, accidents and errors, generating interest and curiosity about the emergence of these fragmented and paradoxical origins that align with Foucault's histories of errors. By grouping these narrative fragments into themes and conducting a critical discourse analysis that incorporated influences from the external environment, the author reconstructed plural feminist origins antenarratives.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>The themes discovered, including women as consumers, explicit working women concerns, women as authors/coauthors, diversity and social justice initiatives, and women in higher education/training, are not merely descriptive observations. They are the building blocks for identifying and analyzing the power relations circulating among feminist origins antenarratives within management education circles. These antenarratives include shedding light on women working in capitalist contexts, the educational needs of business women, and men and naming (but not breaking) the “mythologies” of women at work. These findings are transformative to the understanding of plural feminist origins.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>The uniqueness of this work lies in its threefold contributions: moving away from the notion of a singular feminist origin story and instead embracing the complexity of multiple, paradoxical and incomplete origins; shedding light on the spectrum of power relations – ranging from productive to oppressive – that shaped the experiences of women in two management educational circles during the first half of the 20th century; and introducing the concept of inflection points, which underscores the fluidity of knowledge.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":45819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Management History\",\"volume\":\"215 5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Management History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jmh-04-2023-0034\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jmh-04-2023-0034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的作者旨在从白人妇女选举权女权主义起源故事的独特特权阶层旁边走过,以(重新)构建合理的女权主义零散线索,作为商业管理教育背景下的反叙事。为了完成这一线索的(重新)组合,作者研究了北美两家商学院创办和使用的两份商业贸易出版物,即哈佛大学创办于1922年的《哈佛商业评论》(HBR)和西部大学创办于1933年的《商业季刊评论》(The Quarterly Review of Commerce)。通过收集到的这部分文章,作者强调了被忽视的细节、意外和错误,引起了人们对这些碎片化和自相矛盾的起源的兴趣和好奇心,这与福柯的错误历史不谋而合。通过将这些叙事片段归类为主题,并结合外部环境的影响进行批判性话语分析,作者重建了多元女性主义起源的反叙事。研究结果所发现的主题,包括作为消费者的女性、职业女性的明确关切、作为作者/合作者的女性、多样性和社会正义倡议,以及高等教育/培训中的女性,不仅仅是描述性的观察。它们是识别和分析管理教育界女权主义起源反叙述之间权力关系的基石。这些反论述包括揭示在资本主义背景下工作的女性、商业女性和男性的教育需求,以及命名(但不是打破)女性在工作中的 "神话"。原创性/价值这部作品的独特之处在于其三重贡献:摒弃了单一的女权主义起源故事的概念,转而接受了多重、矛盾和不完整起源的复杂性;揭示了权力关系的范围--从生产性到压迫性--这些权力关系在 20 世纪上半叶塑造了两个管理教育圈中女性的经历;引入了拐点的概念,强调了知识的流动性。
The “mythologies” of women at work, interrupted: feminist origins antenarratives from Harvard Business Review and Western University’s The Quarterly, Part I
Purpose
The author aims to walk beside the singular privileged class of White women’s suffrage feminist origin story to (re)construct plausible feminist fragmented threads as antenarratives in the context of business management education. To accomplish this (re)assembling of threads, the author examined two North American business trade publications created and used within two business schools, Harvard University’s Harvard Business Review (HBR), established in 1922, and Western University’s The Quarterly Review of Commerce (The Quarterly), established in 1933.
Design/methodology/approach
The author carefully reviewed almost 4,000 articles from HBR and The Quarterly, focusing on 308 articles that addressed the experiences of complex women. With this subset of collected articles, the author highlighted overlooked details, accidents and errors, generating interest and curiosity about the emergence of these fragmented and paradoxical origins that align with Foucault's histories of errors. By grouping these narrative fragments into themes and conducting a critical discourse analysis that incorporated influences from the external environment, the author reconstructed plural feminist origins antenarratives.
Findings
The themes discovered, including women as consumers, explicit working women concerns, women as authors/coauthors, diversity and social justice initiatives, and women in higher education/training, are not merely descriptive observations. They are the building blocks for identifying and analyzing the power relations circulating among feminist origins antenarratives within management education circles. These antenarratives include shedding light on women working in capitalist contexts, the educational needs of business women, and men and naming (but not breaking) the “mythologies” of women at work. These findings are transformative to the understanding of plural feminist origins.
Originality/value
The uniqueness of this work lies in its threefold contributions: moving away from the notion of a singular feminist origin story and instead embracing the complexity of multiple, paradoxical and incomplete origins; shedding light on the spectrum of power relations – ranging from productive to oppressive – that shaped the experiences of women in two management educational circles during the first half of the 20th century; and introducing the concept of inflection points, which underscores the fluidity of knowledge.