This item is non-discoverable
Dörte Resch
Former Member
3 results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Training Soft Skills in Retail OrganizationsWithin the increasing fashion of “training soft skills” in organizations, the individualistic agency isn’t questioned. This study shows how the individualistic discourse hinders rather than facilitates change in organizations. The study is grounded in a social constructionist approach (Gergen, 1994), using discourse analysis as methodology (Grant et al., 2004). For gathering text, 21 problem-centred interviews (Witzel, 2000) and 13 group discussions (Steyaert and Bouwen, 2004) with altogether 106 participants were carried out in two large retail-organizations. The following analysis showed, that one of the main discourses constructing social relations is, that only one person renders responsible for the quality of the social relation, thus ignoring the feature of the ‘in between’ of the social situation. Here soft skills get constructed as part of a person’s ‘character’ rather than his or her ‘abilities’. This ‘character’ is seen as originating in upbringing and school. When the person enters the organizations (s)he is constructed as ‘finished’, thus the organization hardly gets any agency to train or change the social realities. Consequences of these results for organizations are to closely consider how they stage their training and education regarding ‘soft skills’ or ‘team building’. In a second step discourses from the study which de-focus from the individual and thus offer a more flexible approach for changing realities of social relations within organizations will be offered. Key words: Soft skills,Type:conference paperJournal:International Journal of Management Cases (IJMC) - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Organizational Discourse as Determination of Social Relations in OrganizationsIntroduction Social relations in organizations are predominantly discussed as either bonds between individuals or, alternatively as team-based matters. Moreover, social relations are often viewed as the objects to be improved by means of training and education, a view that is heavily influenced by the humanist ideal of personal development and growth. Neglected in these ideas on social relations are often the structures and discourses the organization itself produces. The co-dependence of the organizational and the social discourse is the main target of this study. Objective and Method To gain an understanding of the relation between organizational discourses and how those effectuate relations within the organization, an in-depth study encompassing two large organizations was carried out. The objective was to investigate both the organizational as well as the social discourses in the organization, whereby taking a special interest in the interrelation of the two. Based on problem-centred interviews and group discussions with over hundred participants within the organizations, a discourse analysis was carried out. Results This study shows how the level of organizational discourse interrelates with the social discourse of the organizations. Surprisingly, the results show that rather traditional discourse of the organizations such as Taylorism formed the pivotal reference point for the organizational discourse. This was posed in a sharp contrast with discourses of social relations, as those were very much inspired by humanist ideals. As the organizational discourse influencing the social was never discussed within the organizations, frictions between the two levels were carried out on individual level. Both the gap and the wider implications between constructions of organizational realities relying on pre-Human Relations concepts of organizations and claims on the social discourse very much based on just those humanist ideals became explicit through this study. Conclusion Inquiries of organizational discourses have a long tradition in the field of Organizational Psychology as is evident, in the debate on Taylorism or the Human Relations. Equally prominent in Organizational Psychology is the discussion of people's relational competencies in organizations. This study shows how organizational discourse en- and disables certain qualities of relations in organizations, thus bringing two traditionally separated fields of Organizational Psychology together. Implications for an integrative approach that focuses on both relational and organizational levels are discussed on the basis of empirical and theoretical arguments.Type:conference paper - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Training Soft Skills in Organizations - Constructions of Individual Agency as Barriers to Change?(2007-05-10)The purpose of this paper is to illustrate, how applying individualistic discourses to social relations in organizations rather hinders than facilitates change in organizations. The initial idea was to find out how social relations are constructed in organizations, thus de-focussing from the increasing popularity of concepts such as 'soft skills' or 'social competences'. However, when the study was carried out, one of the main discourses of constructing social relations in organizations was the individualistic. This paper will show the functions and consequences of the individualistic discourse on social relations in organizations. The research is grounded in a social constructionist approach (Gergen, 1994), using discourse analysis as methodology (Grant, Hardy, Oswick, & Putnam, 2004). For gathering texts, 21 problem-centred interviews (Witzel, 2000) and 13 group discussions (Steyaert & Bouwen, 2004) with altogether 106 participants were carried out in two large Swiss organizations. The following analysis showed, that one of the main discourses constructing social relations is, that only one person renders responsible for the quality of the social relation, thus ignoring the feature of the 'in between' of the social situation. Investigating the functions and variations, stabilizing interpretive repertoires (Potter & Wetherell, 1987) are described. One repertoire is that soft skills are part of a persons 'character' rather than his or her 'abilities'. This 'character' gets constructed as originating in upbringing and school. When the person then enters the organizations (s)he is constructed as 'finished', thus the organization hardly gets any agency to train or change the social realities. Consequences of these results for organizations are to closely consider how they stage their training and education regarding 'soft skills' or 'team building'. In a second step discourses from the study which de-focus from the individual and thus offer a more flexible approach for changing realities of social relations within organizations will be offered.Type:conference paper