Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-784d4fb959-nsmbk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-16T06:35:00.629Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Critical approaches: Michel Foucault's conceptions of discourse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

Loizos Heracleous
Loizos Heracleous
Affiliation:
National University of Singapore
Get access

Summary

As discussed in chapter 1, critical approaches view discursive social reality construction as imbued with power and interest considerations, where dominant groups attempt to shape reality, social practices, and even subjects' identities in ways that perpetuate these groups' own interests. Far from being neutral, language-based constructs, discourses are seen as the sites of polyphonic struggles as domains of power–knowledge relations that can dominate subjectivity in favor of the already powerful. The politically motivated task of critical discourse analysis is thus to demystify and expose the processes involved and ideally weaken their grip.

Michel Foucault has been a key figure providing inspiration, concepts, and analytical frameworks for critical discourse scholars. This chapter traces the development of Foucault's concept(s) of discourse from the Archaeological to the Genealogical periods, significantly drawing from Foucault's own texts. Second, it offers a critique of Archaeological conceptions of discourse, focusing on the discourse–subject relationship, and on Foucault's related conceptions of change, choice, and rules of discursive formations. Third, it traces Foucault's conceptual shifts and concerns in his Genealogical period, in particular his views on power, discourse as a manifestation of the will to power, and a tacit acceptance of the importance of agency. Finally, implications for organizational discourse analysis are discussed.

Critiques of Foucault's discussions of discourse have received much attention in philosophy (Frank, 1992; Habermas, 1987), literature (Kermode, 1973; Said, 1974), sociology (Brown and Cousins, 1994; Freundlieb, 1994), and organization studies (Newton, 1994, 1998; Reed, 1998).

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Discourse, Interpretation, Organization , pp. 79 - 107
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Berger, P. and Luckmann, T. 1966. The social construction of reality. London: Penguin.
Blumer, H. 1969. Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Bourdieu, P. 1992. Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, MA: Polity.
Brown, B. and Cousins, M. 1994. The linguistic fault: The case of Foucault's Archaeology. In Smart, B. (ed.), Michel Foucault: Critical assessments: 186–208. London: Routledge.
Burrell, G. 1988. Modernism, post modernism and organizational analysis 2: The contribution of Michel Foucault. Organization Studies, 9 (2): 221–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, A. 2000. Redirecting critique in postmodern organization studies: The perspective of Foucault. Organization Studies, 21 (6): 1059–1075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cicourel, A. V. 1981. Three models of discourse analysis: The role of social structure. Discourse Processes, 3: 101–131.Google Scholar
Dijk, T. A. 1993. Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse and Society, 4: 249–283.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, H. L. and Rabinow, P. 1983. Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and text: Linguistic and intertextual analysis within discourse analysis'. Discourse & Society, 3: 193–217.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1972. The archaeology of knowledge. London: Routledge.
Foucault, M. 1977a. History of systems of thought [1970]. In Bouchard, D. (ed.), Language, counter-memory, practice: Selected essays and interviews by Michel Foucault: 199–204. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Foucault, M. 1977b. Intellectuals and power [1972]. In Bouchard, D. (ed.), Language, counter-memory, practice: Selected essays and interviews by Michel Foucault: 205–217. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Foucault, M. 1977c. Discipline and punish. London: Penguin.
Foucault, M. 1980a. Two lectures [1977]. In Gordon, C. (ed.), Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977: 78–108. New York, NY: Pantheon.
Foucault, M, 1980b. Truth and power [1977]. In Gordon, C. (ed.), Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977: 109–133. New York, NY: Pantheon.
Foucault, M. 1980c. The confession of the flesh [1977]. In Gordon, C. (ed.), Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977: 194–228. New York, NY: Pantheon.
Foucault, M. 1983. The subject and power [1982]. In Dreyfus, H. L. and Rabinow, P. (eds.), Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics: 208–226. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Foucault, M. 1991a. Politics and the study of discourse [1968]. In Burchell, G., Gordon, C., and Miller, P. (eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality: 53–72. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Foucault, M. 1991b. Questions of method [1980]. In Burchell, G., Gordon, C., and Miller, P. (eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality: 73–86. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Foucault, M. 1991c. Governmentality [1978]. In Burchell, G., Gordon, C., and Miller, P. (eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality: 87–104. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Frank, M.1992. On Foucault's concept of discourse. Michel Foucault: Philosopher. Armstrong, T. (trans.): 99–116. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Freundlieb, D. 1994. Foucault's theory of discourse and human agency. In Jones, C. and Porter, R. (eds.), Reassessing Foucault: Power, medicine and the body: 152–180. London: Routledge.
Giddens, A. 1984. The constitution of society. Cambridge, MA: Polity.
Giddens, A. 1987. Social theory and modern sociology. Cambridge, MA: Polity.
Habermas, J. 1987. The philosophical discourse of modernity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heracleous, L. 2000. Reflections on Foucault's conceptions of discourse. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Organizational Discourse, King's College London, July 26–28.
Heracleous, L. and Chan, A. 2005. Foucault's conceptions of discourse in the Archaeological and Genealogical periods. An interpretation, critique, and analytical implications. Working paper.
Heracleous, L. and Hendry, J. 2000. Discourse and the study of organization: Toward a structurational perspective. Human Relations, 53: 1251–1286.Google Scholar
Hopwood, A. 1987. The archaeology of accounting systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12 (3): 207–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoskin, K. and Macve, R. 1986. Accounting and the examination: A genealogy of disciplinary power. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 11 (2): 105–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, C. and Heracleous, L. 2001. Seeing without being seen: Towards an archaeology of controlling science. International Studies of Management and Organization, 31 (3): 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kermode, F. 1973. Crisis critic: Review of the archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language. New York Review of Books, 17 (May): 36–39.Google Scholar
Kilduff, M. 1993. Deconstructing organizations. Academy of Management Review, 18: 13–27.Google Scholar
Knights, D. and Morgan, G. 1991. Corporate strategy, organizations and subjectivity: A critique. Organization Studies, 12 (2): 251–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knights, D. and Morgan, G. 1995. Strategy under the microscope: Strategic management and IT in financial services. Journal of Management Studies, 32 (2): 191–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knights, D. and Willmott, H. 1989. Power and subjectivity at work: From degradation to subjugation in social relations. Sociology, 23 (4): 535–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinlay, A. and Starkey, K. (eds.), 1998. Foucault, management and organization theory: From panopticon to technologies of self. London: Sage.
Mumby, D. and Stohl, C. 1991. Power and discourse in organization studies: Absence and the dialectic of control. Discourse and Society, 2 (3): 313–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, T. 1994. Discourse and agency: The example of personnel psychology and assessment centres. Organization Studies, 15 (6): 879–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, T. 1998. Theorizing subjectivity in organizations: The failure of Foucauldian studies? Organization Studies, 19 (3): 415–447.Google Scholar
Palmer, R. 1969. Hermeneutics. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Phillips, N. and Hardy, C. 1997. Managing multiple identities: Discourse, legitimacy and resources in the UK refugee system. Organization, 4: 159–186.Google Scholar
Phillips, N. and Hardy, C. 2002. Discourse analysis: Investigating processes of social construction. London: Sage.
Reed, M. 1998. Organizational analysis as discourse analysis: A critique. In Grant, D., Keenoy, T., and Oswick, C. (eds.), Discourse and organization: 193–213. London: Sage.
Ricoeur, P. 1991. From text to action. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Rouleau, L. and Seguin, F. 1995. Strategy and organization theories: Common forms of discourse. Journal of Management Studies, 32: 101–117.Google Scholar
Said, E. 1974. An ethics of language: Review of Michel Foucault's the archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language. Diacritics, 4: 28–37.Google Scholar
Saussure, F. 1983. Course in general linguistics. London: Duckworth.
Townley, B. 1993a. Foucault, power/knowledge, and its relevance for human resource management. Academy of Management Review, 18 (3): 518–545.Google Scholar
Townley, B. 1993b. Performance appraisal and the emergence of management. Journal of Management Studies, 30 (2): 221–238.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×