infonet-economy

Introduction
Social relations in organizations are predominantly discussed as either bonds between individuals or, alternatively as team-based matters. Moreover, social relations are often viewed as the objects to be improved by means of training and education, a view that is heavily influenced by the humanist ideal of personal development and growth. Neglected in these ideas on social relations are often the structures and discourses the organization itself produces. The co-dependence of the organizational and the social discourse is the main target of this study.

Objective and Method
To gain an understanding of the relation between organizational discourses and how those effectuate relations within the organization, an in-depth study encompassing two large organizations was carried out. The objective was to investigate both the organizational as well as the social discourses in the organization, whereby taking a special interest in the interrelation of the two. Based on problem-centred interviews and group discussions with over hundred participants within the organizations, a discourse analysis was carried out.

Results
This study shows how the level of organizational discourse interrelates with the social discourse of the organizations. Surprisingly, the results show that rather traditional discourse of the organizations such as Taylorism formed the pivotal reference point for the organizational discourse. This was posed in a sharp contrast with discourses of social relations, as those were very much inspired by humanist ideals. As the organizational discourse influencing the social was never discussed within the organizations, frictions between the two levels were carried out on individual level. Both the gap and the wider implications between constructions of organizational realities relying on pre-Human Relations concepts of organizations and claims on the social discourse very much based on just those humanist ideals became explicit through this study.

Conclusion
Inquiries of organizational discourses have a long tradition in the field of Organizational Psychology as is evident, in the debate on Taylorism or the Human Relations. Equally prominent in Organizational Psychology is the discussion of people's relational competencies in organizations. This study shows how organizational discourse en- and disables certain qualities of relations in organizations, thus bringing two traditionally separated fields of Organizational Psychology together. Implications for an integrative approach that focuses on both relational and organizational levels are discussed on the basis of empirical and theoretical arguments.

The management consulting sector exhibits a remarkable homogeneity when it comes to its prevailing paradigm and, related therewith, its preferred subjectivity (i.e. being). In concrete terms, the consulting sector largely depends on a rationalistic model which fosters, among other things, the view that the world can be subdivided into workable data; that those data are to be viewed as objective, stable facts; that those facts can be analyzed in an unbiased manner; and that they can subsequently be used to support the decision making of management.
The aim of the present contribution is two-fold: first, to critically reflect the prevailing management consulting literature against the backdrop of (poststructuralist) organization theory. The second and related objective is to find ways to render the respective insights amenable to practice. The argument will reveal along the following three steps. In the first step, the rationalistic heritage of consulting is brought to light, which holds, for instance, that consulting forms a linear process based on sound planning, implementation and monitoring. Second, in an attempt to transcend the individualist, realist and rationalist grounding of management consulting, reference will be made to poststructural organization theory which is supposed to decouple consulting from its rationalist, progressive presumption. The third part is devoted to reflect on the practical application of a non-realist approach. Systemic consulting approaches will therefore be summoned and blended with the tenets of poststructural thinking. Potential synergies between the two streams of thought will be discussed on the basis of a consulting project carried out in a large non-profit organization.

Within the increasing fashion of “training soft skills” in organizations, the individualistic agency isn’t questioned. This study shows how the individualistic discourse hinders rather than facilitates change in organizations.
The study is grounded in a social constructionist approach (Gergen, 1994), using discourse analysis as methodology (Grant et al., 2004). For gathering text, 21 problem-centred interviews (Witzel, 2000) and 13 group discussions (Steyaert and Bouwen, 2004) with altogether 106 participants were carried out in two large retail-organizations.
The following analysis showed, that one of the main discourses constructing social relations is, that only one person renders responsible for the quality of the social relation, thus ignoring the feature of the ‘in between’ of the social situation.
Here soft skills get constructed as part of a person’s ‘character’ rather than his or her ‘abilities’. This ‘character’ is seen as originating in upbringing and school. When the person enters the organizations (s)he is constructed as ‘finished’, thus the organization hardly gets any agency to train or change the social realities.
Consequences of these results for organizations are to closely consider how they stage their training and education regarding ‘soft skills’ or ‘team building’. In a second step discourses from the study which de-focus from the individual and thus offer a more flexible approach for changing realities of social relations within organizations will be offered.
Key words: Soft skills,

Jahresbericht