Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Organization
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jones, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Theory after the Postmodern Condition

Campbell Jones

University of Leicester, UK, c.jones{at}le.ac.uk

In the context of an apparent crisis of grand narratives and continuing reference to the postmodern condition, this article considers aspects of the development of theory in organization studies over the past decade and offers some reflections on prospects for the future. These issues are presented via a reading of Jean-François Lyotard's The Postmodern Condition and the way that this book has been received in organization studies. This `paralogical' reading contests a number of widespread assumptions in organization studies about Lyotard and French theory, and provides the opening for a discussion of the future of theory in organization studies. This involves asking questions about (1) the consumption of theory in organization studies; (2) the concepts in currency in organization studies today; and (3) the shifting divisions of organization studies.

Key Words: agonistics • critical/critique • ethics • judgement/judging • knowledge • legitimation • morality • paralogy • performativity

Organization, Vol. 10, No. 3, 503-525 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/13505084030103009
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
A. Spicer, M. Alvesson, and D. Karreman
Critical performativity: The unfinished business of critical management studies
Human Relations, April 1, 2009; 62(4): 537 - 560.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Management LearningHome page
S. R. Clegg, M. Kornberger, C. Carter, and C. Rhodes
For Management?
Management Learning, March 1, 2006; 37(1): 7 - 27.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Management InquiryHome page
C. De Cock and E. L. Jeanes
Questioning Consensus, Cultivating Conflict
Journal of Management Inquiry, March 1, 2006; 15(1): 18 - 30.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 OrganizationHome page
C. Rhodes and A. D. Brown
Writing Responsibly: Narrative Fiction and Organization Studies
Organization, July 1, 2005; 12(4): 467 - 491.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 OrganizationHome page
C. Conrad
Organizational Discourse Analysis: Avoiding the Determinism- Voluntarism Trap
Organization, May 1, 2004; 11(3): 427 - 439.
[Abstract] [PDF]