Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorYousfi, Hèla*
dc.date.accessioned2013-12-12T08:55:32Z
dc.date.available2013-12-12T08:55:32Z
dc.date.issued2014-03
dc.identifier.urihttps://basepub.dauphine.fr/handle/123456789/12277
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectCase studyen
dc.subjectCritical management studiesen
dc.subjectCross-cultural studiesen
dc.subjectDiscursive analysisen
dc.subject.ddc658.4en
dc.subject.classificationjelM.M1.M14en
dc.subject.classificationjelM.M5.M54en
dc.subject.classificationjelM.M1.M12en
dc.titleRethinking Hybridity in Postcolonial Contexts: What Changes and What Persists? The Tunisian case of Poulina’s managersen
dc.typeArticle accepté pour publication ou publié
dc.description.abstractenDrawing on postcolonial studies of management, this article highlights the importance of adopting a contextualized approach to hybridization processes that, first, takes into account the importance of the historical and cultural contexts from which hybridity emerges and, second, helps to identify the elements that change as well as those that persist when western management practices are imported into developing countries. Using a discursive analysis, this article shows the ambivalent nature of the accounts given by managers (trained in western traditions) of the Tunisian company Poulina as they explain how they modernized their company through the implementation of a US management model. The managers' ambivalence takes on two distinct forms. First, while they seem to have internalized the rhetoric of modernization in insisting on how they used the US management model to overcome the 'dysfunctional' family-based organizational system, they simultaneously express resistance by detaching themselves from the French colonial organizational model. Second, when they describe the implementation of the US management practices and how workers resisted them, it seems that they have implicitly negotiated and reinterpreted these practices via a local cultural framework of meaning. Based on these findings, I argue that hybridity is best understood as an interweaving of two elements - the transformation of practices and cultural continuity - in which identity construction, local power dynamics and cultural frameworks of meaning jointly shape the hybridization process of management practices.en
dc.relation.isversionofjnlnameOrganization Studies
dc.relation.isversionofjnlvol35
dc.relation.isversionofjnlissue3
dc.relation.isversionofjnldate2014-03
dc.relation.isversionofjnlpages393-421
dc.relation.isversionofdoi10.1177/0170840613499751en
dc.relation.isversionofjnlpublisherSAGE Publicationsen
dc.subject.ddclabelDirection d'entrepriseen
dc.relation.forthcomingnonen
dc.relation.forthcomingprintnonen
dc.description.halcandidateoui
dc.description.readershiprecherche
dc.description.audienceInternational
hal.person.labIds1032*
hal.faultCode{"duplicate-entry":{"halshs-00917059":{"doi":"1.0"}}}


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record