Barbara Czarniawska and Guje Sevon : the Northern Lights—Organization Theory in Scandinavia - eds - Book Review

2003, Copenhagen: Liber.Abstract.Copenhagen Business School Press, 471 pages

Within this edited collection of diverse papers on the contribution of a 'distinctly Scandinavian way of understanding, reasoning and talking' (Erhard Friedberg, on rear sleeve note), Czarniawska and Sevon provide an invaluable contribution to the growing richness and diversity of organization theory. As they state at the outset of their introduction (p. 9), '[t]here are two theoretical movements that run counter to each other in organization research', one in search of universal truths while the other seeks explanations and inferences that are entirely contextual. They claim that, within the overall field, there remains a 'dominance of the universalistic--read North American--approach to organization studies' (p. 10), in support of 'searches for generic truths about organization and organizing' (p. 9). However, they see a breakdown of this universality, even within North American organization research, and a growing interest in a knowing that is 'more bound to a local way of working, organizing and thinking' (p. 9).

The contributions that are brought together in this volume are, as the title suggests, drawn entirely from the community of Scandinavian organization theorists. As such, they are grounded in a socio-political context that, according to Byrkjeflot, does not align with the dominant western narrative of rational knowledge. In this context, the concept of 'organization' is often taken to refer to trade unions and political organizations, in contrast with 'normal' usage, particularly in the USA, where organization refers to the profit-seeking firm or enterprise. The historical context of the Nordic approach to organization theory is set out in Part 1: History Lives, in which the reader is provided with background to its roots in early industrialization and the growth of the labour movement in Scandinavia. Here, we are introduced to what Byrkjeflot terms the 'Nordic model of compromise', an approach that is based not upon conflict and confrontation, but on compromise between management and democracy, and on the compromise between extremes rather than selection of oppositional positions. This compromise approach has not been developed without struggle, and the historical texts here are critically reflective on the development process. As Westenholz states (p. 41), we should not 'romanticize the beginning of industrialization in Scandinavia, for, as in the rest of Europe, strikes and struggles for better wages characterized the period'.

While this first part sets out the historical context and the bounded geographical context of the contributions, it also sets them into the much broader range of contexts of transdisciplinary organization theory, 'with its roots in economics and engineering, but also with strong links to sociology, psychology, and anthropology' (p. 13). Within the remaining three parts of the volume, we are treated to a wide-ranging set of discourses that draw upon history, philosophy, and empirical study in order to engage with the complexities and ambiguities of organization and organizing. The individual contributions are varied in their content and approach, but are grouped under thematic titles of Re-phrasing Organization Theory, Coming to Grips with Current Phenomena, and Contemplating the Discipline. With no introductory explanation from the editors, the interpretation of these divisions is left largely to the reader, being less clearly defined by content alone than Part 1, and with most of the contributions being informed by critical engagement, not only with the history outlined in Part 1, but also with a wide range of philosophical, epistemological and ontological traditions from across the world.

In developing the critical discussion within a global body of knowledge, there is engagement with, amongst others, the US model of 'professional management', the German model of 'disciplinary management', the critical theory of the Frankfurt School, the writings of top US management scholars including Mintzberg, Peters and Porter, and with the philosophies of Nietzsche, Habermas, Rorty, and others. In all cases, this engagement provides richness to the explanations and reasoning of the Scandinavian theory, critical comparison with other traditions, and contribution to what Alvesson (p. 151) terms the 'broad and increasing diversity' of organization theory. While the collection in total contributes to this breadth and diversity, each of the discourses has a depth that is uniquely challenging and provoking, and that makes it impossible for me to do justice to each and every one, either in my representation in this short text or within the limits of my own understanding and interpretation. Within this overall richness, I have personal preferences as to which approaches and which writers have appeal within my own context of thinking/acting, and I will outline a couple of these.

Within his chapter on 'Making Organization Research Matter', Flyvbjerg argues for a phronetic approach to organization research: an approach that is concerned both with understanding and explaining phenomena, one that engages with values and interests within the pragmatic context of thinking/ acting of the research subjects within organizations. This approach is in contrast with the dualism of epistemological and technological understandings, that respectively preference universalistic scientific knowledge, and pragmatic instrumental knowledge. Flyvbjerg's phronetic approach is one that embraces this dichotomy without reduction or selection. It is grounded in Aristotelian philosophy, refers to the philosophies of Nietzsche, Foucault, Rorty and others, and builds upon his own previous work on the nature of power and knowledge. The phronetic understanding of organization, according to Flyvbjerg, is one that embraces dialogue 'with a polyphony of voices' (p. 378) 'in an attempt to transcend the dualisms of agency/structure, hermeneutics/structuralism, and voluntarism/determinism ... focus[ing] on both actors and structures, and on the relationship between the two' (p. 376).

The non-exclusive approach is also embraced by Guillet de Monthoux and Sjostrand, who discuss the duality of 'a conventional topdown [sic] and an unconventional upsidedown (sic) asymmetric relationship between leaders and followers' (p. 333) in everyday organizational life. For Robert Wilson, a US-born manager working in Europe as a multimedia producer, 'aspir[ing] to be part of a highbrow culture while simultaneously making use of vulgar calculative business techniques' (p. 322), managing is seen to involve both approaches simultaneously, without conflict and without synthesis. Along with presentation of the illustrative example of this post-dualist management, Guillet de Monthoux and Sjostrand provide a philosophical foundation for their discussion of its significance by reference to Rothenberg's concept of Janusian thinking and to the philosophy of Gadamer, in both of which human beings are seen to be capable of holding seemingly opposing ideas as simultaneously valid, without conflict, reduction or synthesis. The authors argue that, in the organizational context of genuine uncertainty, the 'Janusian rationality' that embraces both 'traditional, instrumental, calculative rationality' and an 'aesthetic rationality' 'acknowledges reason in the shape of multirationality and it represents an opportunity--a context--for the emergence of the philosophy firm' (p. 333).

Notions of multidimensionality, and the embracing of complexity and ambiguity without resort to reduction, exclusion and false simplification appear consistently, but in many guises throughout the book. Brunsson develops the concept of 'organized hypocrisy' as a way of 'mak[ing] it easier to maintain the legitimacy of organizations, even when they are subjected to conflicting demands' (p. 206). Hernes, while discussing 'organization as evolution of space', sets a broader context that relates to other contributors in describing how they 'offer alternatives to such long-standing social science dichotomies as subject-object and process-structure' (p. 267), within what he terms '"third-pole" theories (that) emanate principally from European sociologists such as Latour, Luhmann, Giddens, Bourdieu and Elias' (p. 267). However, they are also shown as being grounded in a much broader philosophical tradition across time, and in a much wider geographical context that embraces contemporary organization theorists in Europe, North America and elsewhere.

In the final Part 4: Contemplating the Discipline, the last two contributions, by Jonsson and Engwall, specifically address the theme of Scandinavian organization research and theory in relation to the wider context of global, in particular US research and publication. Engwall concludes that Scandinavian organization theory 'has close finks with management and with social science in general [but] has a low degree of integration [with non-Scandinavian theory], a circumstance which is not necessarily a weakness' (p. 411). I would agree, and would concur with Jonsson's notion of organization theory as a 'fragmented adhocracy'.

On reflection, I do not read this book in its totality as a set of integrated, or integrative readings on a 'distinctly Scandinavian' organization theory, and I see that as no weakness. Rather, I read it as a set of diverse contributions to a variety of streams of organization theory that exist at a global level and as a very valuable addition to the critical literature.

George Cairns University of Strathclyde, UK

COPYRIGHT 2003 Sage Publications, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group