Postmodern Management Study

Postmodern organization and management study is one of the the focus of the management academic fieled in the past thirty years. Peter Drucker and other management consulants are the first group to study postmodern management. They believe a postmodern society is coming, and thus organization must change to cope with this chanllenge. Alough they often use the "postmodern" term, but most of the management researchers thought these consulants'theory ought to be labeled as "post-modern management", "late-modern management" or "neo-modern management", because their preference of the epoch transformation.All of the researchers mentioned above share the same idea:there are postmodern organizations and management. But the atuhors who put the post-structural philosophy into organization and management research field usually are skeptical of the being of postmodern organizations and management. There are three facts contribute to the emergence of the post-structural philosophy in the organization and management study fields. The first is that from its birth, post-structural philosophy become powerful instruments for many other society science discipline to analysis their research objects. The sencond is that from 1970s and 1980s, entreprise culture theory became the main concen of organizations and management fields, researchers have to learn and use the knowledge from disciplines like culture and anthropology, and in these disciplines, post-structural philosophy was already the basic knowledge. The third fact is that from 1970s and 1980s, some management researchers began to break the rule of the functionism paradigm, they call for multi-paradigms, thus post-structural philosophy was a resouce for their theory building.From the late 1980s and the early 1990s, the researchers belongs to school of critical management study in Britain began to seek the potential of the marriage of critcal theory and post-structural philosophy. Because of their emphasis on the positivity of the critical theory, they are not afraid of the critics of the researchers who hold a modern position. In summary, there are some different schools of postmodern organization and management studies in England and north America. Some characters can be conclude:First, there are a group of scholars that engage in the study of this area, and some top journals welcom and published papers that related to the postmodern management study. David Boje, Martin Kilduff, Marta B Calas, Linda Smricich in north America, Robert Cooper, Mats Alvesson, Hugh Willmott, Martin Parker in Britain and Stewart Clegg in Australia are the main figures in this field. Top journals such as Organization Studies, Organization Science and Academy of Management Review, have published some papers that use the post-structural philosophy. Many scholars have formed their own style. David Boje, the authority in storytelling management research, have published a series of papers that use this study method to do postmodern management research. Clegg focus on the management mode that beyond the Britain and north America and on the issues of power. His study on Japanese management mode contribute to break the central position of the organization and management studies in the Britain and north America. He use Marx Webber's conception of power to begin his study, and embrace Foucault's opinion of micro-power, but he always keep distance with these ideas. Hugh Willmott seek to the marriage of critical theory and post-structural philosophy in organization and management research fields, and contribute a lot to the emergence of critical postmodern management theory.There are few research about postmodern organization and management in China. Compare to their foreign colleagues, the work of domestic scholars have some characters: First, Few scholars engaged in postmodern organization and management studies except Luomin. Second, most of the papers are occupied with the basic conception of postmodern organization and management, there is a lack of deepth. Third, there are no efforts made to use post-structual philosophy to analysis the organization and management in the context of China.The framework of this paper is arranged as followings:In the first chapter, a review of the related papers of postmdern organization and management study in foreign and domestic academic field is given.The main purpose of chaper two is to deconstruct the scientific management theory. In this chapter, the difference between taylor's works and taylorism was discussed. The cancellation of the concept of mental revolutionary from the taylor's work to construct taylorism, reflect the struggle between the the rational paradigm and humanist paradigm in the management study field.In chapter three, post-modern management theory were discussed.The main works of the researchers who believe that a post-capitalism society, post-industry society or knowledge society that is different from the modern society is coming were reviewd. Peter Drucker, who creat the conceptions such as post-capitalism society, knowledge worker,and Tom Peters, who was granted as uber-guru, Ur-gure, are the main figures in this area. Stewart Clegg's Modern organizations:organizations studies in the postmodern world that was labeled as post-management theory are the most cited writings in academic fields.In chapter four, the contributions of the post-structural philosophy bring to the management and organization studies have been discussed. The first section analysis the instrumental ration and its relation to modern management and organization. Then the influence of "the linguistic turn" bring to management and organization studies has been discussed. In addition, the thoughts of Michael Focault and its relation to management and organization analysis have been discussed.In chapter five, the critics that made by the scholars who hold modern positon have been reviewed. The marriage of critical theory and post-structural philosophy in management and organization studies have also been discussed.In chapter six, the author disscuss the meanings of postmodern management research in Chinese context. First, the coincidence of Hehe spirit and postmodern management thoughts was discussed. Second, the management constitution of Anshan steel factory have been discussed from the critic and emancipation perspectives..The possible contribution of this paper maybe as followings:First, the coincidence of Hehe spirit and postmodern management thoughts was discussed. Both the Hexie spirit and postmdoern management thoughts agree with that we should study organization and management from different, processive, dynamic and paradoxical perspetive, and call for diversity,recognize difference, encourage people to show their creativities.Second,inspired by Derrida's thoughts, from the perscpetives of the human nature, metholody, the different views between scientific management communitys and the shortcomings of the conception of mental revolution, this paper analysis how taylorism cancel the conception of mental revolution from Taylor's text, and become the theme of Taylor's text. The cancellation of mental revolution reflect the struggle between the the rational paradigm and humanist paradigm in the contemporary management study field.Third, the management constitution of Anshan steel factory have been discussed from the critic and emancipation perspectives.. The technology competition between workers was the mixture of taylorism, self-taylorize and post-taylorism. Production integration competition share some characters of self-organization management. Technology research teams function samely with work teams. Employee representative congress was an kind of democratic management institution. All of the above management technologies have the emancipation potential, and this is the distinctive characters of the management constitution of Anshan steel factory.