ORCID Profile
0000-0003-1610-7577
Current Organisation
The University of Edinburgh
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Emerald
Date: 05-2020
DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-10-2019-4223
Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to report the outcome of an interdisciplinary discussion on the concepts of profit and profitability and various ways in which we could potentially problematize these concepts. It is our hope that a much greater attention or reconsideration of the problematization of profit and related accounting numbers will be fostered in part by the exchanges we include here. This paper adopts an interdisciplinary discussion approach and brings into conversation ideas and views of several scholars on problematizing profit and profitability in various contexts and explores potential implications of such problematization. Profit and profitability measures make invisible the collective endeavour of people who work hard (backstage) to achieve a desired profit level for a ision and/or an organization. Profit tends to preclude the social process of debate around contradictions among the ends and means of collective activity. An inherent message that we can discern from our contributors is the typical failure of managers to appreciate the value of critical theory and interpretive research for them. Practitioners and positivist researchers seem to be so influenced by neo-liberal economic ideas that organizations are distrusted and at times reviled in their attachment to profit. Problematizing opens-up the potential for interesting and significant theoretical insights. A much greater pragmatic and theoretical reconsideration of profit and profitability will be fostered by the exchanges we include here. In setting out a future research agenda, this paper fosters theoretical and methodological pluralism in the research community focussing on problematizing profit and profitability in various settings. The discussion perspectives offered in this paper provides not only a basis for further research in this critical area of discourse and regulation on the role and status of profit and profitability but also emancipatory potential for practitioners (to be reflective of their practices and their undesired consequences of such practices) whose overarching focus is on these accounting numbers.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2010
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 03-2006
Abstract: Over the past decades there have been persistent radical critiques of management. Previously the goal was to apply forms of Marxian analysis to the world of management and organizations, usually seeing it as a sphere of false consciousness, distorted and unreflective practices, and three-dimensional power or hegemony. Surprisingly, even after the Marxist scaffoldings that supported such claims have been deconstructed—both practically and theoretically—there are still current contributions to management thought that seek to resuscitate the same critiques, often under the rubric of Critical Management Studies. These representations seem increasingly bizarre, given the theoretical currents emanating from post-structuralist and postmodern thought that have been emergent in recent years, associated ideas such as polyphony, difference, deconstruction and translation. In this article we draw on these sources to produce a different representation of management—one that we would argue acts as an effective counter-factual to that which provides support to some of the central tendencies manifest in critical approaches to management. Rather than seeing modern management as necessarily a totalitarian practice, one that should necessarily be subject to a negative critique, we would argue that, at its best, it enables polyphony rather than tyranny, and the possibility to be both critical and for management.
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 29-06-2011
Abstract: There is little existing research on how managers within the ‘Big Four’ professional services firms (PSFs) respond to the increasing normative pressures and performative cultures that characterize contemporary PSFs. It is primarily managers within PSFs that enact the new managerial roles, systems and ethos that differentiate ‘managed professional businesses’ (MPBs) from the P2 archetype. It is managers who in their own estimation need to ensure that both organization and employees perform to the required standard. This article reports from an empirical study into one of the Big Four accounting firms. The focus is on how a specific group of employees, namely female managers, make sense of career and performance in their particular organization. The respondents’ career is being shaped by their real and perceived willingness to be ‘bothered to be playing the game’ as well as providing a good client service and participating in the ongoing rationalization of professional practices. Thus, the self is ided: on the one hand, ambitious, committed and loyal to the firm and to the notion of performing. On the other hand, there is also distancing and disenchantment with the existing practices and reluctant acknowledgement that the reality is characterized by a culture of visibility and exposure the need to network, play politics and be playing-the-game, none of which are gender-neutral.
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Chris Carter.