1

‘StorytellingOrganization’isBeingTransformedintoDiscourseof‘DigitalOrganization’

DavidM.Boje

ToappearinM@n@gingJournal

AbstractStorytellingorganizationistransforming.Epicstoriesoflivedexperiencearenolongercommunicableincorporation,schools,orgovernmentonlydiscoursematters.Ittookalongtime.Slowlytheinventionoftheprintingpressgavebirthtothenovelandnewspaper,whichconveydiscourseastextwithhardlyanyepicstorywisdomatall.Nowwewitnesstheproliferationofdigitaldiscourseinventions(texting,email,digitalmeasures)thatradicallydisplacing‘storytellingorganization’with‘virtualorganization’discursivelyexplicatingeverythingwithoutanygroundinginlivedexperiencewisdom.Managingandorganizinghavechanged,asthe‘storytellingorganization’becamethe‘virtualorganization.’Inthisessay,IintegratethestorytellingtheoriesofMikhailBakhtin,GertrudeStein,WalterBenjamin,andtheKaupapaMāoriworkofLindaSmithandGrahamSmith.Iconcludethatwiththedecayofthestorytellingorganization,without‘truestorytelling’wedescendintofakenews,fakediscourse,andmeaninglessness.Webecomelikethewisdomlesslemmingsfollowingoneanotheroverthecliff.Keywords:Storytelling,discourse,narrative,livingstory,antenarrativeIntroduction Whatishappeningtothestorytellingorganization?Ifoundsomeexamplesof

‘storytellingorganization’inasalesmencompany(Boje1991)andinDisney-as-

Tamara-land(Boje,1995),wherepeopledoingsensemakingarechasingstories

fromroomtoroom,butcannotbeinallroomsofthecorporationatonce.Now

storytellingorganizationhascompletelymorphed,transformedsensemakinginto

the‘virtualorganization’?Whathappened?ToanswerthisquestionIwillexplore

thelonghistoricalrelationshipbetweenstorytellinganddiscourse.Theshort

answeristhatdiscoursehasdisplacedstorytelling,especiallyinourdigitalage.

Mypurposethereforeistocallfortheoryandresearchintotherelationship

between‘storytellingorganization’anddiscourseof‘digitalorganization.’Iwantto

explorehowtheyareeach/bothconstitutiveoforganizing/organization

(managing/management).Todoso,Iwillexploresevenproblematicsoftherelation

ofstorytellinganddiscourse,assummarizedinFigure1.

2

Figure1:SevenProblematicsinRelationofStorytellingandDiscourse

MikhailBakhtin(1993,originalwritinginnotebooks1919-1921),Gertrude

Stein(1935),WalterBenjamin(1936),andtherecent‘KaupapaMāori’writingof

LindaSmith(2017)andGrahamSmith(2017)areeachtellingaboutthedeclineof

storytellingandwaystoinsureitssurvivanceintherushtodiscourse.Benjamin

(1936/2007:83-84),forexample,declares”storytellingiscomingtoanend”andthe

“abilitytoexchangeexperience”disintegratesas“experiencehasfalleninvalue”.He

alsoobservesthattheepicstoryformsofproseliteratureoncegroundedinoral

tradition(fairytale,thelegend,myth)havealsobeentransformed.Withthe

inventionoftheprintingpress,Bakhtin(1993,in1919-1921;1981),Stein(1935)

andBenjamin(1936)assertthatfolkloricstorytellingbegantodecline,becoming

somethingarchaic.Everythingbecomesjusttext.Inplaceofepicstory,thenovels,

thenewspaper,becomediscoursedisconnectedfromlivedexperience.Nowyou

andIarewitnesstodigitalization,andthefinaldeclineofepicstorygroundedlived

experienceisgivingwaytoinformation,aseverythingbecomesdigitalized,andwe

arealienatedfromexperience.Wehavegrown“poorerincommunicable

experience”as‘storytellingorganization’metamorphosedinto‘digitalorganization.’

3

MikhailBakhtin(1993,writinginnotebooks1919-1921)givesusadditional

insightintohowtoovercometheLemmingEffectinwhichmostpeoplearenot

ethicallyanswerabletointerveneinobviouslyriskyanddangerousorganizational

situations.Storytellingcanbeseenasan“aestheticintuiting”thatcangetcutoffby

Lemmingeffectfromtheopenevent-nessofonce-occurrentBeing.TheLemming

Effectaccomplishesthreeseverances(splitting’s):(1)splittingcontentorsenseout

ofagivensituatedact/activity,(2)splithistoricalactualityfromthesituation,and

(3)splitonce-occurrentanswerabilityfromexperiencingsituation.Thesethree

severance(orseparations)removeself-determination(self-empowerment),prevent

ensembleleadershipformation,andanswerabilitytoactualbecomingnessofthe

situation.

Figure2:TheThreeSeveranceofLemmingsEffect

Lemmingsdonothaveself-empowerment,arenotanswerabletointervene

inonce-occurrentBeing,andcannotdevelopwhatRosile,Boje,andClaw(2016)call

ensembleleadershipstorytelling.Lemmingsdonothavecommunionwiththewhole

alivenessofthesituation,andthereforlackself-answerabilitytoengageinactsor

deedsthatdraintheswamp.ItiswhatBakhtin(1993:1-2)proposesisaboth/and

relationtoovercometheduality(severance)betweencontentorsenseofBingin

4

openeventnessandthelivingstoryexperiencingofthesituationinitsprocessof

becoming.Intheboth/andtheought-to-beanswerabilitytointerveneinthe“unity

ofmyonce-occurrentanswerable”situationbecomespossible(Bakhtin,1993:5).

“Thecompellentactualityoftheworldwillinevitablebegintodecompose,itwill

disintegrateintoabstractlyuniversal,merelypossiblemomentsandretentions

severedtothepossibility”(Bakhtin,1993:58).Inotherwords,thenyoudrainthe

PhrogSwamp,thesituationrevertstoalostcommunionwithBeingandself-

interestednesstakesover.

AccordingtoLindaTuhiwaiSmith(2017:11),‘westernwaysofknowing’

(WWOK)privilegewrittendiscourseoveroralstorytellingandpayscantattention

tountoldstories.‘Indigenouswaysofknowing’(IWOK)privilege‘livingstory’in

place,intime,andincontextoverWesterndiscourse(&narrative),andtheways

andformsoftheirtellingarequitedifferent(Boje,2001;Rosile,2016).Learning

takesplacemoreinthespokeninteractioninrelationalnetworks,ratherthaninthe

writtentextsandwrittenrulesandproceduresofbureaucratichierarchy.IWOK

takesonacriticaltheorystandpointinKaupapaMāori(Hoskins&Jones,2017;LT

Smith,1999/2008&2017;GHSmith2003&2017;Denzin,Lincoln,,&Smith,2008).

Storytellingaddressesthe‘why-question’,‘therequestforcausalexplanation,

givinganaccountofcause.Discourseanalysis,bycontrast,isgenerallydefinedas

‘texts’thatarewritten,spoken,ormulti-mediatextsoftelevisionandInternet.

Foucault(1984)limitsdiscoursetorecurrentandrelativelystable(durable)

discoursesintexts.Othersincludenarrative,rhetoric,metaphor,semantics,

grammar,andvocabularyinlinguisticanalyses.ForFoucault,discoursesare

elementsofsocialpractices.Dowewanttolocate‘littled’withinthemacro-level(or

metaorgrand)‘bigD’discourses?Aswewillexplorethisdualityisproblematic

becauseitdoesnotallowanymediatororintermediaryrelationalprocess.Dennis

Mumby(2011)challengesAlvessonandKärreman’s(2001)‘varietiesofdiscourse

essayasamisplaced,reductionistconceptionoftheinterdisciplinaryfieldof

communication/organizationstudiesandofthe‘linguisticturn.’

SevenProblematicsintheRelationofStorytellingandDiscourse

5

Isstorytellingadomainofdiscourse,orconstitutedbydiscoursethatisa

domainofcommunication,oralinguistictranslationofoneintotheother?Are

storytellinganddiscoursemutuallyconstituted?Sevenproblematicsareinvolvedin

theorizingandresearchingtheserelationships.

1DiscourseConstitutedbyStorytellingInthisproblematic,storytelling

drawsuponavarietyofdiscoursestochangerelationsbetweensocialstructures

andsocialpracticesofsociallife.Storytellinginitsfullcorporality(embodiment)

changedtosomethingelse,todigitaldiscourse.Benjaminsaystwotribesof

storytellersexistedandinterpenetrated:(1)storytellerswhotraveledfromfar

awaylands;(2)storytellerswholivedinaplaceandknewthelocaletalesand

traditionsas“residenttillerofthesoil”(1936:#II).“Thestorytellertakeswhathe

tellsfromexperience—hisownorthatreportedbyothers.Andheinturnmakesit

theexperienceofthosewhoarelisteningtohistale.Thenovelisthasisolated

himself”(section5).Inthe‘MiddleAges’,themastercraftspersonandthetraveling

journeypersonexchangedthefolkloreoffarawayplaces,theloreofdistanttime,

andthetalesofaplace.Benjamin’sNikoliaLeskov,Bakhtin’sRabelais,Hans

ChristianAnderson,andtheGrimmbrothersweretravelingstorytellerswhokept

theartofstorytellingalivebytheexchangeofexperience.

Todaystorytellingandstorytellershave“falleninvalue”andwithitour

moralworldhashalted(Benjamin,1936:#I).Bakhtin(1919-1921innotebooks,the

publishedin1986inRussian,and1993inEnglish),Stein(1935),andBenjamin

(1936),eachpointtothebirthofthenovelinantiquity,itsdisseminationbythe

printingpressletinformationprogressandstorytellingregress.ForBakhtin,

discoursebecomesinformationinwaysthatturntheoreticandabstract,andnolong

connectedtoonce-occurrentBeingandbecomingofhistoricalexistence.Benjamin

addsseveralothercontradictionsandreplacementsthatcombinedtobringabout

thedeclineofstorytelling,especiallyafterWWI(1936:#I).

Travelingandstay-in-one-placestorytellersoncegaveagriculturaladvice,

andsomegavescientificaccountsoftheperilsofgaslight.“Allthispointstothe

natureofeveryrealstory”,itcontainsinthe“communicabilityofexperience”

somethinguseful,inonecase,wisdom(amoral,aproverb,ormaxim),andinother

6

cases,scientificinstructioninalienablefromthefabricofreallife(Benjamin,1936:

#IV).Storytelling“hasquitegraduallyremovednarrativefromtherealmofliving

speech”andtheepicstorytellingofhistory(#V).“Thefairytale,thelegend,eventhe

novella”thatcametousfromoraltradition,aswaysoftellingexperienceto

listeners(#V).Thenthewritersofnovels,andthenewspapertookover,andoral

storytellingnolongerconveyedthefullnessoflifeexperienceandhardlyany

wisdom.Insteadhumancommunicationwasreducedtoinformationthat“getsthe

readiesthearing”(#VI).Benjaminobservedthepassingawayofstorytelling,how

indigenoustribesofstorytellers(travelers&stayersinaplace)didnotdomuch

explanation,andleftthehearerandreadertointerpretthingsincontext,something

thatmechanicalreproduction(newspaper,novel)lacks.Storytellingisaboutthe

relationsbetweendiscourseandnon-discursivesocioeconomicandsociomaterial

events,processes,re-configurations,andpracticesthatbringstoriesandnarratives

intobeinginembodiedpracticesoftalking,writing,andacting(Vaara,Sonenshein,

&Boje,2016).‘Storytellingorganizations’(Boje,1991,1995,2008)arepartofthe

interplayofstorytellinganddiscourse.Consequentlystorytellingisconsidered

constitutivemanifestationofdiscourse-and-text,andnon-discursiveandnon-

textualpracticesandprocesses.Micro-leveldiscoursesofleadershipandsmall

businessarelocatedwithinthecontextofmacro-levelsocioeconomiccapitalist

discoursesandsocioecologicalmaterial-discursivesystemsthataremultifractal

configurationsglobally(Boje,2016a).Whenstorytellingnolongerisconstitutiveof

organization,onlydiscourseremains,andthisisnowheretruer,thaninthe‘virtual

organization’becausevirtualstorytellingisnotthesamethingaswhatBenjamin

(1936)‘mouthtomouth’storytelling.

StartingwithAristotle(350BCE)dialogueisoneof,butnottheonlyelement

ofnarrative.Aristotle(350BCE)situateddifferencesandrelationsbetweenlong

courseofhistory,epicstory,andthetheatric-narrativethatwasperformablewithin

afewhours.Fastforwardtocapitalism’saffairs,tomechanicreproductionof

printingpress,andnowthedigitalreproductionofInternet,computer,andcell

phonetexting.Capitalism,itsstorytellingorganization,isnowcompletelydifferent

fromthespicstory,whosegenerativepower,wasgroundedinNature,notinthe

7

digital.Inuniversities,government,corporations,weneverunplugfromdigital

organization.The‘storytellingorganizations’(Boje,2008)arebecomingunraveled,

andthestorytellermorerare,allbutextinct.Aristotlemakesitcleartheways

narrative,story,andhistoryare,orarenot,thesame.Aristotle(350BCE)defined

‘narrative’asconstitutedbysixelementsinthisorder:plot,characters,purpose,

dialogue,rhythm,andspectacle.Burke(1937/1984)retheorizedAristotle’ssix

narrativeelementsintothePentad(model),bycollapsingdialogueandrhythm

together.Historyislargerdiscoursethanstories,andnarrativecanbeenactedas

theaterinafewhours.Historyshapesdiscourse,butdoesdiscourseshapehistory?

Dialogueisakindofdiscourse,andoneelementofnarrative.Inotherwords,

dialogue(definedasconversationand‘discourse’)isthefourthelementofnarrative,

andisneithertheleastormostimportantelement.Nowadays,spectacle(6th

element)ismoreprominentthantheplot.Manynarratologistshavestayedinthe

Aristoteliantradition,fromKennethBurketoBarbaraCzarniawskaandKarlWeick.

Organizationalnarrativeandorganizationalstoryarenotthesame.Weick

(1995)focusesonretrospectivesensemakingnarratives,andtheplothaving

beginning,middle,andend,andspecifyingorganizingcausesandeffects.However,

whatisforgottenaboutAristotleisthathepositionednarrativeinrelationtostory

andhistory.Otherorganizationstorytellingscholarsfocusmoreonstorythan

narrative.Forexample,Gabriel(2008)saysnotallnarrativeisstory,andthatstory

mustarouseemotioninitsperformative,whereasnarrativeismoreanintellectual

appeal.

Itakeadifferenttack,treatingnarrativeandstoryasconstituentsof

storytelling,alongwithantenarrative(connective&transformative)processesof

sensemaking(Weick,2012;Rosileetal.,2013;Haley&Boje,2014;Boje,Haley,&

Saylors,2016;Saylors,Boje,&Mueller,2014).

Antenarrativeisbefore-narrativeanditsmany‘betsonthefuture,in

prospectivesensemaking,ratherthantheusualbackward-looking‘retrospective-

narrative-sensemaking(Boje,2001,2008,2011).Antenarrativeisdefinedasfour

meaningof‘ante’,allofwhichareaboutpreparinginadvancetobringaparticular

futureintobeing.

8

1. AnteisBefore-narrative,apreparinginadvance,bydoingactivitiesthatare

neededbeforeacoherentstrategicnarrativeofscalabilityispossibleto

enact.

2. AnteisBeneath,incommunicativeprocess,languages,symbols,and

mappings—aboutnecessaryinadvanceofarticulatingandscribinga

strategicnarrative.

3. Anteisin-Between,inpreparinginadvanceinfrastructureprocessesthatare

necessarytobringa‘breakout’strategyinadirection,unknowntoany

retrospectivesensemakingnarrative,asWeick(1995)calls.In2012Weick

cameoutinHumanRelations,expressinginterestinantenarrative

prospectivesensemaking.

4. AnteisBetsontheFuture,preparingariskanalysisofhowhotbringabout

differentvaluepropositions.

“Antenarrativeisnotthesameas‘anti’-narrative.Inanti-narrative,the

personcannotnarrateplotorclosure,butisinthepresentmoment”(Boje,2001:3).

Anti-narrativeandantenarrativedosharethisincommon:botharebeyondthe

closurerequiredofnarrativetheory”(Boje,2001:3).“Storyresistsnarrative;story

is…onoccasionevenanti-narrative(arefusaltobecoherent)”(Boje,2001:2).

Riach,Rumens,andTyler(2016)haveresurrectedtheanti-narrativeand

antenarrativerelationintheirrenditionofButlerianorganizationalperformativity

thatdisruptstheapparentlinearity,stabilityandcoherenceoforganizational

narrativeperformancesby‘undoing’theminanti-narrative/antenarrative

processes.AccordingtoJudithButler(2011:140),“thenormativeforteof

performativity—itspowertoestablishwhatqualifiesas‘being’—worksnotonly

throughreiterationbutalsothroughexclusionaswell.”

Thekeydifferencebetweennarrative/storyandantenarrativeisthatinstead

ofone-sidedemphasisonlanguage/semiotics,theantenarrativeprocesstheoryis

focusedonpre-structured(discoursalaswellasnon-discoursal)material-discursive

configurations.Narrative-counternarrativeandlivingstorywebs,therefore,are

partlylinguistic/semioticandearlyconstitutedfrommaterial-discoursalthatare

9

multifractalinlinear,cyclical,spiral,and/orrhizomaticdynamicconfiguration

patterns.

Truestorytellingincludeshistory,(auto)biography,personalreminiscences,

forensics,(multi)fractality,and‘onto-story.’Benjamin(1936/2007:#VII,p.90)

tellsus“whatthenatureoftruestorytellingis”experiencewisdomlayeredinstory

uponstory,worthretellingbylisteners,whereasinformationvalueisonlyinan

instant,withnowisdomwhatsoever.Wecallthisnewpraxis,‘truestorytelling’

(http://truestorytelling.org,Boje,Larsen,Brunn,2017).).TrueStorytellingis

definedasethicalpraxis,amethodology,&antenarrativeprocessofstrategy.Itis

oppositeoffakenews,fakestory,orfakecorporatesocialresponsibilityreporting.

Historyasdiscourseungroundedfromtruestorytellingisoftensuperficial,what

Heidegger(1962)calls‘historicity’,anappealtoaintellectualschema,to

generalizingtheoretically.Idefinehistoricityaswashingawaymostoftheevents

andcharacterstoorderaparticularemplotment.Truestorytellingrelatedwhat

Heidegger(1962)calls‘historicality’amorerevealing,deeperfullerexplorationof

situatedevents.

2StorytellingConstitutedbyDiscourseAvarietyoforganizational

discoursesarepopularinavarietyofways(Alvesson&Kärreman,2000,2011).But

thereareseveralproblems.First,wecananalyzeorganizationaldiscourseproduced

ininterviewsandeverydaylifeas‘sociallyconstructedtexts’(particularlytalkand

livingstoriesempiricalmaterial).But,thatwouldleaveoutmaterialityandreduce

leadershiptotext.ThefirstissueIwanttoraisewithorganizationaldiscourseisits

dualism.Theorganizationaldiscourseisdividedinto(called'littled')discoursethat

isinterpersonal(oftenpsychologicaltraitsofleaders)isestrangefromthemacro

GrandNarratives(called'BigD')Discourseaboutsocieties,globalization,economics,

politics,andecology.

DennisMumby(2011)andMartinFairclough(2005)challengeAlvessonand

Kärreman’s(2001)‘varietiesofdiscourseessayasamisplaced,reductionist

conceptionoftheinterdisciplinaryfieldofcommunication/organizationstudiesand

ofthe‘linguisticturn.’Hismainpointisnottotheydualizethe'littled'discourseas

separatefromthe'BigD'discourse,withoutaddressingtheprocessesthatrelate

10

themtogether,whichMumbybelievesare'dialectical'andnota'dualism'(or

separation).A‘criticalperspective’onthe‘linguisticturn’“hashighlightedtheways

inwhichpoweranddiscourseareinextricablyandconstitutivelylinedinthe

constructionofsocialrealities”(Mumby,2011:1149).ForMumbythelinguisticturn

ismorethanasimpleshifttoafocusononlanguage,talk,texts,discourse,

communication,orwhatIcallstorytelling(narratives-livingstories-antenarratives).

Ratherthelinguisticturnisaboutthewholecontinentalphilosophicaltraditionthat

attemptstotranscendsubject-objectdualisminmuchofmodernistknowledge

production.

Secondproblem,organizationaldiscoursesareconsideredmaterial-

discursivepractices,events,andexperiencesofhistoricalandsociomateriality

trends.Thatmeansdiscourseismorethanpsychology,orin-the-head.Leadershipis

relational.Weknow,thatisimportanttobeparticipatory,tobeconvivial,tonotbea

bully.Giventheuseofnaturalresourcesbyorganizations,theirimpactuponclimate

change,itisalsoimportanttohaveanecologicalconscience,tounderstand

planetaryscience,tobeaboutthelongterm,abouthumanity'ssurvivalinthelong

haul.Thirdorganizationaldiscoursesarewaysofethical,economic,cultural,

ecological,political,andscientificreasoning-discoursesabouttherelationship

betweenthemicro-worldofanorganization,andlarge-scalereasoningofasocietal-

globalworldatagrandnarrativelevelofdiscourse(ormeso-level).

Mostdiscoursestudieseitherdon’tmentionstorytelling,ormarginalizeitto

oneofalonglistofdiscursiveelementsorreduceittotext.Morefundamentally,it

involvessociomaterialityandmaterial-discursivepractices.Norisitdiscursive

versusrealistexaminationsof“intersubjectivecharacterofsocialreality-areality

inwhichboththediscursiveandmaterialareinextricableentwined,butarebyno

meansisomorphicorreducibletoeachother”(Mumby,2011:1149).

Forexample,Grant,Hardy,Oswick,andPutnam(2004:3)define

‘organizationaldiscourse;as“thestructuredcollectionsoftextsembodiedinthe

practicesoftalkingandwriting(aswellasawidevarietyofvisualrepresentations

andculturalartifacts)thatbringorganizationallyrelatedobjectsintobeingasthese

textsareproduced,disseminatedandconsumed.Consequently,thisisthe

11

discourse-as-textapproachwithinasocialconstructivistandlinguisticapproach.

Organizationsarerepletewith‘text’(writtenbudgets&reports&curriculum&

email&digitalmeasuresofperformance,spokeninteractioninmeetings&

convocations&graduations&dissertationdefenses,multi-semiotictelevisedtexton

monitors&screens,Internettraffic,onlineclasses,etc.).Thesevariedtextsarein

relationtosocialpracticesintheirdiscoursalaspect,andtogenresofdiscourses

(theeconomy,politicsofnation,globalization,war&peace).Theagencyofsocial

actors,inthisexample,istheacademicwhowrite,speakread,listen,andinterpret

texts.Thesocialagencyofinstantiatingdiscourses,articulatingthem,novelwaysto

hybidizethem(e.g.thecorporateuniversity,globalizeduniversity).andto

transformthemisintertextualandinterdiscursive.

Storytelling-as-textanddiscourse-as-texttreatsallwriting,allspeechacts,all

dramaturgy,andallstorytellinganddiscourseastextthatissociallyconstructed.In

thisapproachtolinguisticturn,storytellinganddiscoursearetreatedas‘texts’and

asintertextualitiesoutofwhichindividualtextisconstitutedinalongchainoftexts

thattransformothertexts(Grant,HardyOswick,&Putnam,2004:12).Text,

narrative,story,anddiscoursefragment,mergeandemerge(Gabriel,2004:63).

Storytellingisstored,retrieved,boughtandsold,citedandsummarizedin‘texts.’

The‘texturing;ofstorytellingisaspecificmodalityofsocialaction,social

productions,meaning-makingandinstitutionalworkandidentityworkof

organizations.

Whatallthistellsusisthatdiscoursewasontheriseandstorytellingwentto

themargins.BythetimeRolandBarthes(1970/1974:5)entersthelinguisticturn,

storytellingisundersiegebydiscoursethathasa“pluralityofentrances”from“the

infinityoflanguages”reducingthepluralityofstorytelling’sexperienceentrances,to

the“writerlytext”.Ifnothingelse,myprojectistorescuestorytellingfromthe

onslaughtofdiscourseassomenetworkoftextsthathasimpoverishedthe

storytellingBenjamin(1936)mournedinitsdecline.Discourseistextinits

plurality,“acknowledgingthateachonehasitsshareoftruth”butcarryingthe

assertion“nothingexistsoutsidethetext”toofarfromthestorytellingofexperience

(Barthes,1974:6).Idoadmitthatantenarrativeisthemultiplicityofconnotation

12

theplural,antecedenttonarrativeandstorysignificationsystems.Languagethenis

“therawmaterialofdenotation”,whileconnotation-outside-experience,isthe

intertextualnetworkscirclinganyparticulartext(p.7).Barthestreatsconnotation

textually,smittenby“thelawoftheSignified”inwhatIwillcallWesternWayof

Knowing(WWOK)ofthetextualturnwheretexthasno“anterior”sinceall

connotation/denotationisjusttext(p.8),withnothing“anteriortothetext”(p.10).

BarthespicksasingleBalzacstory,reducedtoasingletext,tocodeinfivewaysthe

threadsofmeaning,intertextualconnotations,ina“step-by-stepmethod”(p.12).I

TWONARRATIVECODES:

TheProaireticCode(ACT) ActionsofthenarrativesequencetakenfromAristotelianproairesis(hiselementofdiction)becomesdiscoursethatconnotesactionofwhatwillhappennextinaplotfulfillment

TheSemanticCode(SEM) Signifierssemanticallyconnotedin(seme)unitoftext(word,sentence)bringingordertoanarrativeinapolysemicsystem

THREEDISCOURSECODESTheHermeneuticsCode(HER) Raisesaquestionleadingtoorblocking

asolutionorvoicesoftruthwithsnares,equivocation,orjamming

TheSymbolicCode(SYM) Dialecticaladversaries(A/B),atsomesymboliclevelthethesis-antithesis,andmediations(AB)

TheCulturalCode(REF) Foundationalofthetruth,orculturalcodesofknowledgeorwisdomthatgivediscoursemoralauthority

Table1:SummaryofBarthes’FiveCodes

Storytellingisreducedtotextandintertertextuality.Thefivecodesareall

textualsignifierstotakeapartanystory,breakitupintotwonarrativecodes,and

threediscoursecodesforming“akindofnetwork,atoposthroughwhichtheentire

textpasses”intheprivilegingofwritingandreadingoverorality(p.20).Thefive

codesofdiscourseleadBarthestotwopropositions”.“Thefirstisthatdiscoursehas

13

noresponsibilityvis-à-visthereal:inthemostrealisticnovel,thereferenthasno

‘reality’…whencetheinevitabledestructionofnovels”(p.80).Thesecond

propositionreducestruthtoa“’well-made’sentence”withasubject(theme),a

statement(question),andvarioussubordinateclausesinsome“predicate

(disclosure)”(p.84).Itseemsacontradictiontoreducestorytellingtodiscourse,

anddiscoursetotext,asiftextisallthereis.Thiscontradictionpointstoourtask

here,toexploreproblematicrelationofstorytellinganddiscourseinsituationsof

organization/organizing.Itisquiteshockingandrevolutionary(afterBarthes)to

consideranythingontologicallyexistentoutsidetext.

Storytelling-as-textcanbeseenasproductandasprocess,boughtandsold,

citedandsummarized,storiedandretrieved.Storytelling-as-texthasatimeframe

withinspaces,objects,personsthatbecometextured.Text-as-storytellingisalso

processessituatedinthe‘hereandnow’involvingspecificpersonsinspecificplaces,

specifytimes,andconcretesituations.Storytelling-as-textisoftenthedetailed

analysisofinterviewtexts,archivaltexts,Internettexts(email,socialmedia),

dramaturgicalscripts,andconversationaltexts.Thedownsideisthereductionof

discourseanalysistothesystematicstudyoftextsalsowouldlocatemicro-level

discursiveactioninthecontextofmoremacro-level(metaorgrand)discourse

(IBID.).Ithastheadvantageofincludingthecategoryofthemultiplexof

’intertextualities’inglobalizationandorganizationalresearch.

Criticalrealismisminimallytheclaimthatthereisarealworldexisting

independentofourepistemology(waysofknowing)aboutit(Fairclough,2005:7).

Fairclough(2005:5)challengesGrantandHardy’s(2004)formulationforcollapsing

‘categoriesofdiscourse’and‘text’,andleavingnowaytoanalyzecontingencyof

theseeffects.Isdiscursiveactionequivalenttotexts?Aretextsthemselves

discourses?Isastructuredcollectionoftexts—adiscourse?Ifso,aretextsthe

‘micro-level)andwhatthenisthemacro-levelofdiscourses?Faricloughraises

questionsabouttherelationbetweendiscursiveprocessesandstructures.Hedoes

notwanttoprivilegeoneofthethere.Therefore,forcriticalrealists,ontologymust

bedistinguishedfromepistemology.Thenaturalworldexistsdespitehumanbeings

havinglimitedormistakenknowledgeaboutit.Furtherthemultipleof

14

intertextualitieswouldincluderelationsbetweenactualtextsandactualevents,and

between‘reportedspeech’andprocesses(andevents)andnetworksofpractices

andassociatedordersofdiscourse(interdiscursive)andthelinguistic/semiotic

analysisoftexts(thatarticulatevarietiesofdiscourse).Organizationsaccumulate

pre-structurednetworksofsocialpracticeswhicharearticulatedinstorytelling

modalitiesandordersofdiscourse.Thelevelsofreality,scalars,MELDARAmodel,

andfourplenariesofcriticalrealismissummarizedinthenexttable.

7levelsofrealityofopenlaminatedsystems:

SevenScalars:

MELDARAModel: Four

plenary

Theory:

1Physicallevelmechanisms2Biologicalmechanisms3Psychologicalmechanisms4Psycho-socialmechanisms5Socio-economicmechanisms6Culturalmechanisms7Normativemechanisms

1Sub-individualpsychologicallevel2Individual,biologicallevel3Micro-level(e.g.ethnomethodology)4Meso-level(functionalrolesofcapitalistandworker)5Macro-levelofwholeregionsorwholesocieties6Mega-levelofwholetraditionsofcivilizations,7Planetarylevelofwholeness

1Mfirstmomentfornon-identity2E2ndedgefornegativity3L3rdlevelfortotality4D4thdimensionforhumantransformativepraxis5A5thaspectforreflexivityunderstoodasspirituality6R6threalmfor(re-)enchantment7A7thawakeningstandsfornon-duality.

Plane1materialtransactionswithnaturePlane2-socialinteractionsbetweenhumanbeings,whoareagentsPlane3-socialstructureproper,e.g.formingforeignpolityaboutoilPlane4stratificationsofembodiedpersonalityofagents(somequiteegotistical),e.g.being-for-selfinuseoftechnology

15

resultinginclimatechange.

Table2:SummaryofCriticalRealismtypologies

Criticalrealistontologyistransformationalsince“humanagencyproduces

effectsbydrawinguponexistingstructuresandpracticeswhicharereproduced

and/ortransformedinaction”(Fairclough,2005:8).Organizationshavebeen

treatedasmorestable,whileorganizingisconsideredprecarious,ambiguous,

uncertainprocesscontinuallybeingmadeandremade(Fairclough,2005:Weick,

1979;Mumby&Clair,1997;Mumby&Stohl,1991).Forexample,MumbyandClair

(1997)contrast‘organizing-as-communication-discourses’with‘organization-as-

structures-discourses’.Fairclough(2005)doesnotthinkitsmakessensetotreat

organizationandorganizing(structuresorprocess/agency)asalternatives,bur

rathertolookattheirrelationship.Bothorganizationandorganizinghavecausal

effectsonhoworganizationschange.MumbyandClair,1997:181),forexample,

suggest“organizationsexistonlyinsofarastheirmemberscreatethemthrough

discourse”.

LikeFairclough,Iadoptaversionofstorytellingthatdoesbothkindsof

discourses(linguistic/semioticelementsofsocialeventsofsocialstructures&facets

ofsocialpractices).Webothhaveananalyticdualismbetweennarratives

constitutedoutofdominantdiscoursethatisstableanddurable,andwhatIterm

‘livingstories’inIndigenousWaysofKnowing(IWOK),whichlackthecoherences

andbeginning-middle-endplotstructuresprivilegedinwesternnarrative.Iseea

mediatingroleforantenarrativeprocesses,intherelationshipbetweendominant

(grand/stable)narratives,andwebsoflivingstories,aswellasbetweenthevarious

kindsofdiscoursesthatconstitutesocialeventsofsocialstructureaswellas

becomingfacetsofsocialpractices.InSavall’smodel,storytellingisconstitutein

bothstructuresandbehaviors,andinpracticesthataredysfunctionalorhave

hiddencosts.

Thedialectical-relationalontologyFairclough’s(2005:4)criticalrealistview

ofdiscoursesadvocatesseeingentitiesasemergentproductsofprocessesandpre-

16

structureddiscoursal(&non-discoursal)objects.Criticalrealism(Bhaskar,1986;

Archer,1995).claimsthereisa‘realworld’thatexistsindependentlyofour

sensemakingknowledgeaboutit.Thenaturalworldandthesocialworlddiffer.The

socialworldisdependentonhumanactionforitsexistence,andissociallypre-

constructedforanyhumanbeing(Fairclough,2005:7).Insum,criticalrealists

distinguishontologyfromepistemology,inordertoavoidthe‘epistemicfallacy’of

reducingontologytoepistemology.Thus,in‘stratifiedontology’processes,events,

andstructuresconstitutedifferentstrataofsocialreality.Incriticalrealism(&CDA)

empiricalisthedomainexperiencedbysocialactors.Empiricaldomainispartofthe

actualandrealdomains.Actualisthedomainofeventsandprocesses.Actualispart

oftherealdomain,butisnotastraightforwardreflectionofthe‘real’.Theactualis

constitutedineventsandprocesses.Realisthedomainofstructuresassociatedwith

causalpowers.Realencompassesboththeempiricalandactualdomains.‘Real’

structures,and‘real’socialagents,havecausalpowerstoaffectthe‘actual’.The

mediatingentitiesarethesocialpractices,includingdiscourse,forselectionand

orderingallowancesof(real)socialstructuresactactualizableinsociallifeina

certainplaceandtime.Incriticalrealistontology,institutionsandorganizationsare

‘socialfields;regardedasnetworksofsocialpractices.Humanagencyproduces

effectsbydrawinguponexisting(real)structures)and(actual)processes/events,

andpracticestotransformaction(paraphraseFairclough,2005:8).

Withindiscoursestudies,usuallynarrativesandstoriesaredefinedas

limited‘domainsofdiscourse’(Boje,2012)orasthe‘domainsofconversation

‘(Gergenetal.,2004),justrhetoric(Cheneyetal.,2004),imposed/exposedtropes

[includingmetaphor,synecdoche,metonymy](Oswick,Putnam&Keenoy,2004),as

wellasironythatisintentionalorsituational(Oswick,Putnam,&Keenoy,2004:

120).Otherresearchersarelessinterestedinspecificdomainsofdiscourseand

insteadfocusondiscourse(orcriticaldiscourse,bigDdiscourse,littleddiscourse)

astheirexplicitconsideration(Alvesson&Karreman,2000;Hardyeta.,2004;

Idema,2003;Phillips&Hardy,2002;Putnam&Fairhurst,2001).Theprimaryfocus

isonlanguageandrhetoric.Forexample,inrhetoric“narrativeandstoriesarebut

onedomainofdiscourse,thestudyofwhichallowsustoconsiderhowdiscourse

17

canbeusedinordertoachieveparticularends”(Grant,Hardy,Oswick&Putnam,

2004:6).Couldthisrelationbetween‘bigD’and‘littled’bemediatedby,asyet,

unexploredantenarrativeprocesses?Vaara&Tiernari(2011:370),forexample

studiedantenarrativesas“centraldiscursiveresourcesintimesofchange”.They

drewonantenarrativeanalysis(Boje,2001,2008)tomakesenseofunfolding

mergerprocessinNordicbankorganizations.Antenarrativeanalysismakessenseof

theontologicalprocess,byfocusingonthefragmentsoftext,communicationand

conversationtostructidentitiesandinterests.Whattheydidnotdowaslookat

moremacro(bigD)andmicro(littled)discoursemediationsbyantenarrative

processes.Derrida(1979:94)treatsnarrativeastheclosureofthetextthatcanbe

hegemonic.

Forme,antenarrativemediatestherelationshipsbetweenstorytellingand

discourse.Storytellingincludesnarrative-counternarrative,[living]story-

counterstory,andconnectiveantenarrativeprocesses.Antenarrativehastodowith

processesthatareconstitutiveofnarrativeandstory.Thequestionis,arethese

antenarrativeprocessesmerelydiscourseprocesses,byanothername?

3StorytellingandDiscourseareinDialogicalandDialectical

RelationshipsIftherelationshipbetweendiscourseandstorytellingisco-

constructive,mutual,andentangled,thenwehavetostudythatrelationship.Some

aspectsaredialogicalinmanyways,andothersaredialectical,alsoinmanyways.

Bakhtin(1981,1973)includesbiographyamongtenchronotopes,fourare

adventureandsixarefolkloric.Bakhtin(1981)defineschronotope,afterEinstein,as

therelativityofspaceandtime.WhenwesortBakhtin’schronotopesintothefake

(fictive)andtrue(real)typesofstorytelling,somethinginterestinghappens.The

adventurechronotopesareineither/orduality,butthefolkloricchronotopesare

dialogicallytransformativebetweenfake-andtrue-storytelling.

4ADVENTURECHRONOTOPESFake(Fictive)AdventureChronotopes True(Real)AdventureChronotopes1GreekRomanceAdventure(space&timeinterchangeable;eventsdonotchangetheherotravelingthroughdiverse

2AdventuresofEverydayLife(Mixofadventure-timeandeverydaytimeasheroinspatialcontextdoeschange

18

geographyencounteringcharactersdifferentfromoneself)3(Auto)BiographyAdventure(Historicalspatialandtimeeventsheroiccharacterdiscoveredhiddentraitsilluminatedonthepublicsquare)

hero’sidentityinthetrialsandrevelationonpublicsquare)4ChivalricRomanceofEpicAdventure(Mixof1,2,&3wherechivalriccodeistestedineverydaylife)

6FOLKLORICCHRONOTOPESFake(Fictive)FolkloricChronotopesdialogicwithTrue(Real)Folkloric

Chronotopes5HistoricalReversalofFolkloricRealism(Fullnessofhere-and-nowistransformedbytipistopast/mythicthoughttoconcretizetheephemeralfuture)6Rogue,Clown&FoolFolkloricArchetypes(Outofpre-classstructurethesemedievalmasksmix2,3,4,&5)intotheworldinordertoseefalsenessofeverysituationincludingthefeudal&institutionalhypocrisy)7FolkloricofRabelaisianPurge(Laughterpurgeoftranscendent&renewal,interactedwithallabovechronotopestogettofolkloric‘grotesquerealism’thatwasappropriatedbymodernity)8FolkloricBasisforRabelaisian(timeiscollective/generative/pregnant,partofproductiverough,measuredbylaboreventsinconcretehere-and-now,andprofoundlyspatialinearth,ripeninginit)9IdyllicFolkloric(organiclocalism;timeisagriculturalandcraftable,familygraftedintimeevents,inspatialityofplacelivingorganicallyinfamiliarterritory,andinrhythmsoflife;allofthisdisintegrateswithadvanceofmodernity)10CastleRoomFolkloric(place&timeoftellingsituated,sothatspacetimeofaFastFoodRestaurant,aSalon,aDisneyCastle,aMuseumorTamara-Land,becomeitsownchronotopeinwhich1to9caninterplay

Table1:TenFakeandRealBakhtinianChronotopes(adaptedinnewwaysfromBoje,2008:139)

Historically,inthenovel,theemergingtenformsofchronotopebeginning

withGreek‘RomanticAdventure’,andendingwith‘CastleRoomFolkloric’became

dialogicaltooneanother.WhatIwanttostresshereishowdialogicthe

chronotopesare,notonlyinthehistoryofthenovel,butalsoinorganizations.

Further,itisthesixfolkloricchronotopes,inorganizations,thatplaytransformative

rolesiftingtruestorytellingoutofthefakestorytellinginthedialogicofrealwith

fictivespacetimeaccounts.

19

4StorytellingandDiscourseinQuantumRelationshipThestorytelling

anddiscursivebodyisinseparablefromtheearthecologies.“Quantumstorytelling,

forme,isapragmatist-ontologicalapproachtostorytellingorganizationtheory,

inquiry,andinterventionresearch”(2014:248).Quantumstorytellingisontological,

withBeing-in-the-worldin-spaceandin-timeintheuncertaintaskenvironmentsof

organizations.Wearewalkingclimateecologies,bodiescomposedof32.4trillion

livingcellsinexchangewiththeenvirons.Inposthumanism,humankindisoneof

manyspecies,andlifeislivingdeepintothesubatomicrealm.MyraHird(2009)

looksatthebiologicalconstitutionofthebodyatmolecularlevel.Ifwetakeittoits

conclusionthenquantumstorytellingmeansthatthehumankindislosingcontrolof

material-embodied-compositiontoincreasinglymicro-plastic,petrochemical,med

concoctions,andcyborg-digital-gigabytekindsofimplantedthingsthatarechanging

humanbody.TonyaHendersonandIhavebeenworkingonfractalityasdimension

ofquantumstorytelling(Boje&Henderson,2014;Henderson&Boje,2016;Boje,

2016).Thetheoryisthattherearecombinationsoffractalscalledmultifractalsthat

areentangledincomplexorganizations.Inquantumstorytellingterms,thereare

fractalnarratives,fractallivingstories,andfractalantenarratives.

Didthelinguisticturngotoofor,andmisstherelationshipofmaterialityto

storytellinganddiscourse?WilliamJames’(1907/1909:98)discussionofstory

(telling)anddiscourse,theonenessandmanyness,intocontextofhisoverall

pragmatismprojectincludestheobservation‘thingstellastory’.Inthelinguistic

turn,Weick’s(1995:127-9;ascitedBoje,2008:77)retrospectivesensemaking

narrative,peoplearedoingthetelling.“Peoplethinknarratively”and

“organizationalrealitiesarebasedonnarration”,“theexperienceisfiltered”by

“insight”,“typicallysearchforacausalchain”,“theplotfollows–eitherthesequence

beginning-middle-endorthesequencesituation-transformation-situation”,and

“sequencingisapowerfulheuristicforsensemaking.”

Ifthelinguisticturnwenttoofar,thenwecanbringitbacktoWilliamJames’

observation,notonlypeoplebutalso“Thingstellastory”(James(1907:98inhis

book,Pragmatism).Heisnotonlytalkingaboutthematerialistapproachto

storytelling.Pragmatismsomethingimportanttosayaboutavarietyofdiscourses,

20

andtheirrelationshiptooneoftheearliestconceptionsofsystemsthinkingand

aboutstorytellingmakinganotherturnthatStein(1935)andBenjamin(1936)did

notnotice.Ratherthantakeaneither/orstandpointonthedisputebetween

materialistsandrationalists,orempiricistsandabstractionists,Jamespresentsthe

pragmatistcaseforboth/andpointstoarelationshipbetweenstorytellingand

discourseasboth/and.Theempiricistsandmaterialists,“meaningyourloverof

facts”andtheabstractionistsandrationalists,meaningyourloverofgeneralized

principles,areinvitedinto“theworldofconcretepersonalexperiences”of

story/history/biographyandmanydiscourses(James,1907:20-27).Helaysouthis

interpretationofCharlesSandersPeirce’s(1877,1878,1905)pragmatistmethod.A

completeexplorationofpragmatismisbeyondthescopeofthisessay(seeBoje,

2014).

James(1907:92-98)addressesboththe‘subjectofdiscourse’andthesubject

of‘story’together.James(1907/1909:89)islecturingonthepragmaticmethodsas

its“plungesforwardintotheriverofexperience”andisdoingthisintheancient

philosophyproblemsof‘theoneandthemany.’Forourinterest,theoneandthe

manystorytellings,andtheoneandthemanydiscoursesaresomehowapartof

whatwecallorganizationalsystemsandtheirwaysoforganizing.

“First,theworldisatleastonesubjectofdiscourse”and“itsmanyness”also

“irremediabletopermitnounionwhateverofitspart,notevenourmindscould

‘mean’thewholeofitatonce”(James,1907/1909:92).Ontheonehand,theunity

ofdiscourseisamonologicalspecification,while,ontheotherhand,thevarietiesof

discoursesdeclaresplurality.Jamessaysdiscoursesareinspaceandintime,and

littleworldsofdiscoursechangeother,withinnumerablepathsbetweenthem.The

pluralitiesofdiscoursesin“largerhangings-together,littleworlds,notonlyof

discoursebutofoperation,withinthewideruniverse”,“figureinmanydifferent

systems”whose“definitenetworksactuallyandpracticallyexist”inways“more

envelopingandextensive”(James,1907:92-3).

Besidesdiscourse,Jamesisdiscussingthe“obviousfacttheunityofthings”in

“theirvariety”are“interlocked”andtherationalist-discourseseesonlytheoneness,

andthematerialist-discourse,onlythemultiplicity,themanyness.Heasks

21

pragmaticquestionsabouttherelationshipbetweenonediscourse,manydiscourse,

andonestory,andacollectionofthemthathangtogether,inthe“ensemble”of

“connexionthatspecialthingshavewithotherspecialthings”andare“constituted

bythosefirstlinesofinfluence”in“networkofacquaintanceship”(James1907/1909:

93).Inthiscontext,James(1907/1909:98)declares:

“Thingstellastory.Theirpartshangtogethersoastoworkoutaclimax…Retrospectively,wecanseethatalthonodefinitepurposepresidedoverachainofevents,yettheeventsfeelintoadramaticfor,withastart,amiddle,andafinish.Theworldisfullofpartialstoriesthatrunparalleltooneanother,beginningandendingatoddtimes.Theymutuallyinterlaceandinterfereatpitons,butwecannotunifythemcompletelyinourminds.Infollowingyourlife-history,Imusttemporarilyturnmyattentionfrommyown.Evenabiographeroftwinswouldhavetopressthemalternatelyuponhisreader’sattention.”ButinJames,notonlypeople,but‘thingstellastory’.Ontheonehand,James

(1907/1909:98)observesonestoryofthewholeandontheotherhand,declares

themultiplicity(orplurality)ofstories:“…thatthewholeworldtellsonestory

entersanotherofthosemonisticdogmasthatamanbelievesathisrisk.Itiseasyto

seetheworld’shistorypluralistically,asaropeofwhicheachfibertellsaseparate

tale;buttoconceiveofeachcross-sectionoftheropeastheabsolutelysinglefact,

andtosomethewholelongitudinalseriesintoonebeinglivinganundividedlife,is

harder.”Inotherwords‘thingstellasstory’andpluralistically,amultiplicityof

storiestoldinhumandiscourse,are“moreepicthandramatic”(James,1907/1909:

99).Thestreamofhuman(social)experiencehasitsrhythminthematerialityof

things,anditsoneness/manynessof‘thingstellastory.’

Jamesturnfromretrospectivejudgmentsofthetruth,“towardsconcreteness

offacts,andtowardsthefuture”inthe“verification-experience”inwhichthehalf-

trueofprevioustruthchanges“experiencablereality...everlastinglyinprocessof

mutation-mutation”(James,1907/1909:146).Herewegetaglimmerofananswer

toourquestion:Whatistherelationshipbetweenstorytellinganddiscourse?One

answerisstorytellingisconstitutiveofdiscourse.Askadiscoursetheorist,andthey

willgiveanoppositeanswer:storytellingisconstitutiveofdiscourse.The

22

storytelling-discourserelationshipisnotwelldefinedorstudiedsystematicallyin

thesocialsciences.Whenyoulookattheappliedfieldsoforganizationstorytelling

andorganizationdiscourse,therelationshipisevenmoreobscure.

Addtothisthecomplexityofmanyturns:linguisticturn,material-discursive

turn,ontologicalturn,embodimentturn,andseveraldifferentcriticalturnsof

sociomateriality(criticalrealism,criticaltheory,criticaldiscourseanalysis,agential

realism)andyoubegintodiscerntheproblematicsIamfocusedoninthisessay.In

thelinguisticturn,storytellinganddiscourseareassumedtobeeachconstituted

andsustainedthroughlanguage(Boje,Ford,&Oswick,2004;Cheney,Christensen,

Conrad,&Lair,2004:83).However,inreactiontothelinguisticturngoingtoofar,

andignoringmateriality,andthematerial-discursiverelationship,therehasbeen

increasingtheoryandresearchintothesociomaterialityrelationshipsbetween

storytellinganddiscourse(Barad,2003,2007;Latour,1998;Orlikowski,2007;

Orlikowski&Scott,2008).Inthelinguisticturnandsocialconstructivismtherewas

hope“toreplaceconsciousnesswithlanguageasthefundamentalconstitutive

descriptionfallstothere-psychologicalizationofexperience”(Deetz,2003:425).

Inthesociomaterialturntherewashopetobringmaterialbackintorelationtothe

discursiveandthesocial.

5StorytellingandMaterial-DiscursiveRelationshipSilviaBenso

(1997/2000:12):“asallgoodstorytellershaveknowneversincealongtimeago,

thingstellstories,asmuchastheyarematerialforstories.”Benso(1997/2000:5)

retraces“Heidegger'sdescriptionofthingsasgatheringelementsthatenablea

discourseonthingsintermsoftheiralterity”versus“Levinas'sothernessofthe

otherperson.”Benso(1997/2000:12):“asallgoodstorytellershaveknownever

sincealongtimeago,thingstellstories,asmuchastheyarematerialforstories.”

Alterityhasadoublemeaning,beingotherorinotherness,qualityofbeingdifferent

orothernessindiversity.

Latour(1998)andBarad(2007)assertedthatsocialconstructivismand

linguisticturnhasgonetoofarinexorcising‘material’fromthesocial.Storytelling

analysisisconcernedwiththerelationalinterplaybetweenrelativepermanencesof

narrative-counternarrativeordersofmaterial-discursivepractices,livingstory

23

webs,andpotentialsofantenarrativepre-narrativeandpre-storypracticesthatare

material-discursiveaswellasnon-discoursal.

Areorganizationsandorganizingconstitutedthroughdiscourseinto

coherentsocialrealitythatframessense(Mumby&Clair,1997:181)?Froma

criticalrealistdiscourseperspectiveinstitutionsandorganizationsarematerialand

socialworlds“constitutedthrough,consciousnessorlanguage”thatcomestothe

socialas“previouslystructured”andtherefore“cannotbecollapsedintodiscourse”

(Reed,2004:415,italicsoriginal).Rather‘storytellingorganizations’(Boje,2008)

aregenerativestructures(bureaucratic,hierarchic,capital,&socialstratification)

thatinrealist-basedapproachestoorganizationaldiscoursesarepre-constitutedin

materialconditionsthatconstrain/opposesocial(Fairclough,1992:60).For

Foucault(1998)knowledgeisconstitutedindiscourse,inpowerandresistance

relations,constitutedindiscourses(Clegg,1989;Deetz,1992).Globalization,for

example,indialecticalthinkingcomestobeconstitutedoutoftheflowsand

processestobecomepermanences(things&systems)(Fairclough&Thomas,2004:

381).Storytellingasdiscursivelyconstitutedtracesdiscoursesandtheireffects.For

exampleglobalizationanddiscourseareininterrelationshipsindialecticsof

discoursalandnon-discoursalmomentsthatbecomesreifiedintoprocessesof

globalization(Harvey,1996;ascitedbyFairclough&Thomas,2004:381).

6StorytellingandDiscourseinWWOK/IWOKRelationship.Kaupapa

Māoriisanindigenousparadigm(theory&methodinpraxis)thatresiststhe

westernapproachtoacademicdiscourseandresearch.WWOKhasan“ideologyof

culturalsuperiority”(LTSmith,2017:13).KaupapaMāoriregainscontrolofthe

researchprocessininvestigationsbyindigenousscholarsofMāoripeople’slives

thatincludeIWOK.TheKaupapaMāoriparadigmcontextscriticalpedagogyfor

failingtoenactaliberatoryproject(LTSmith,2017:14).Insum,KaupapaMāoriisa

relationalontology,resistingcolonialimperialismwhilerecognizingthehuman

relationshiptonon-humanagency(Hoskins&Jones,2017:49;LTSmith

1999/2008:119).KaupapaMāoriembedsitsqualitativeresearch(including

storytelling)inthecriticaldiscourseaboutWWOKnarrativesofhistory,politics,

colonization,andimperialism.AssuchKaupapaMāoriisacriticalengagementwith

24

posthumanist‘newmaterialism’howthingsareagential(James,1907).IWOK

involvesastrongelementofparticipatoryandconsultativeinteractionofan

ensemblecommunityanditsspiritualecologyandmaterialconditioninthe“unity

ofspiritandmatter,andtherelationshipofallthingsthroughendless

correspondence”ofmicrocosmwithinmacrocosmoftheNaturalworldofplants,

animals,naturalphenomena,andhumankind(Cajete,2000:33).“Creationstories

andmythsincorporatehumansandanimalsastheyinteractwitheachotherat

variouslevelsandplanesoftheEarthandthecosmosasawhole”tocreate

“ecologicalempathy”(Cajete,2000:40).IWOKisalsoconstitutiveof‘Native

Science”understandingof“natureandsourcesoflife,embeddedinguidingstories

ofapeopleandthelanguageandwaysoflife,that,conveytheirstories”(IBID.p.

74).WWOK,bycontrast,involvesastrongelementofhierarchicandbureaucratic

writtentextsandimposingrulesandprocedurestoworkthroughcontradictions

(Rosile,Boje,&Claw,2016;Rosile,2016).

LiketheEnglish,inEngland,theMāori,inNewZealandlivedlifeevery

minuteofeveryday.ButtheEnglishsettlinginNewZealand,andtheEnglishin

NorthAmerica,hadnodailylifeeveryday,andnothingincommonwiththe

indigenouspeoples.RathertheEnglishcontinuedtoliveinthelifeoftheirhome

island,England,andpaidscantattentiontoacclimatingtoanewislandlife.When

theEnglishinNewZealand(andinNorthAmerica)forbadetheindigenoustohave

anyotherlanguage,exceptEnglish,somethinghappenedtodowiththerelation

betweennarrativeswithinstorytelling.AswithBenjamin,Stein,observesadecline

instorytelling,ariseofprintingtechnology,thenovelandthenewspaper,inthe

officiallanguage,changedtheindigenousculturalwaysofknowingtheirplace,their

soil,theirland.TheIndigenous,forcedtolearnonlyEnglish,couldnolongerengage

instorytelling,andcametohaveadifferentmeaningandadifferentmovement,of

theirlife.Languagematters,colonizingandsettlingthedailyliveofindigenous

people,matters.

Insum,storytellingisdonedifferentlyWWOKandIWOK.Akeydifferenceis

therelationshipbetweentheirwaysofwaysofstorytellinganddiscourse.WWOK

storytellinghasbeenoverrunbywesterndiscoursefocusontheory,abstraction,

25

andwhatBakhtin(1993)calls‘intuitiveaesthetic’.IWOKresiststhecolonizationof

storytellingbywesterndiscourses,andintheKaupapaMāoriparadigmstandsin

oppositiontowesternacademicresearchparadigms.

7StorytellingandDiscourseinEmbodimentRelationshipThisisa

countermoveto#2(Discourseconstitutiveofstorytelling)bymovingoutsidethe

textualreductionismapproaches.Itincludesthelivingstoryasembodimentbeyond

text.Embodiedstorytellingnecessitatesaretheorizingofnarrativetherapyfroma

textualapproachtoanembodiedrestoryingprocess(ERP)approach.Benjamin

(1936/2007:84)iswritinghisobservationstenyearsafterWWI,andnoticesthat

veterans“returnedfromthebattlefieldgrownsilent–notricher,butpoorerin

communicableexperience”.Wenoticethissamephenomenonintheveterans

returningfromVietnam,Gulf,Iraq,andAfghanistanwarzone–grownsilent,unable

tostorytelltheirexperienceofstressandmayhem.Theveteranreturnshomewith

whatLindaHitchin(2014)calls‘untoldstories’.Flora,Boje,Rosile,andHacker

(2016)studyembodiedrestoryingpractices(ERP)totreatpost-deploymentfamily

stress.Theyadoptasociomaterial,translationalapproach.Veteranisunableto

engageincommunicablestorytellingofexperience.However,theirbodyhas

imprintedtraumaexperiencewithinfarawayplaces.Themilitarybureaucracy

disciplinesthesoldiertotellitinthemilitaryway,to‘manup’andkeepsilent.

Innon-militarystorytellingorganizations,onehasto“firsthavetobeableto

tellthestory”byallowingthesituationtospeakabout“thefabricofreallife”

(Benjamin,1936/2007:86-87).Butthisisimpossiblebecause“theartof

storytellingisreachingitsendbecausetheepicsideoftruth,wisdom,isdyingout”.

Thestorytellingorganizationindecayhassomesymptoms.Thenarrativegradually

separatedfromthe“realmoflivingspeech”and“proseliterature–thefairytale,the

legend”becamedevoidofwisdom,incommensurabletothefullnessoflife(p.87).

Andtherearemoredelicatewebsoflivingstoryprocesseswhosetexturingand

organizingaremoreembodiedpracticesoftalking/writing/showingconstitutedby

fragile/unstable/nonlinear/incoherent/terse/partial/ephemeral/unfolding/undon

ewaysoftelling/hearing/seeing/doing/being.Ratherthandivide/dualize

narrativesagranddiscourse(BigDmacro-level)‘Discourse’andlivingstorywebs

26

asmicro-level(littledmicro-ormess-level)‘discourse’categories/texts/Ipreferto

analyzetherelationalitybetweenthem.Idothiswiththe

mediating/dialectical/dialogicalroleofantenarrativeprocessesthatbring

narratives-counternarrativesandstories-counterstoriesintobeing.Storytellingis

partofdiscursive-action,textualizing-action,anddramaturgicallyperformative-

action.

DiscussionandConclusions

Ihavearguedthatthesituationofmodernday‘storytellingorganization’

turned‘digitalstorytelling’separatesfromany‘truestorytelling’ofcommunicable

experienceinthedeclineofany‘truestorytelling’groundedinspace,time,and

matteringofNature,andtheriseofdigitallifeandwork.Somethingprofoundis

happingtothestoryteller’slife,indigitalstorytelling,thenarrativesofeconomic

progressseemwhollyinadequate.Inlivingstories,theepiclayersontopofeach

other,“avarietyofretellings”(Benjamin,1936/2007:93)happenedinthe

‘storytellingorganization.”Nowthestorytellingorganizationisnolongerconnected

toNature,tolivedexperience,butonlyengagesdigitalreproduction.Forexample,

inouruniversities,wedodigitalmeasuresofourwriting,teaching,andservice

performance.Weteachindigitalclassrooms,usingWebCT,Canvasorsomeother

kindofdigitalplatform,anduniversitylibrarieshavemoredigitalandprint

holdings.TheBoardofRegents,ChancellorandProvost,workoutdigitala‘master

plan’,abudgetofspreadsheets,andonlinecurriculumcatalogues.Faculty

keystrokein‘Banner’and‘Canvas’,‘DigitalMeasures’andmakedigitalreportsof

committeeworktoconvocationgatherings.Theencyclopediamemoryofthe

storytellingorganizationhastransitionedformepicstoryworkbystorytellersto

digitalwork,tokeystrokes.Wearenolongerinthewomboftheepicstory,andthe

so-called‘digitalstorytelling’in‘digitalorganization’islifeless.Storytelling

organizationhaschangedthebalancebetweenactsofnarrativedigitalnarration

andthewebofmouthtomouthlivingstoriesoflifeexistence.

MyreadingofBakhtinisthatatruestorytellingasmereaestheticactivityis

powerlesstodraintheswampbecauseitisseparated(orsplitout)fromthe

situatedprocessofbecominginallitshistoricalnessofonce-occurrentevent.What

27

isneededisastorytellingwheretheaestheticsofnarrationisincommunionwith

thelivingstorygroundedintheonce-occurrentevent.“Itisasifraysoflightradiate

fromununiquenessand,pressuringthroughtime…penetratewiththelightofvalue

allpossibletimeandtemporalityitself…myownparticipationuniqueness…in

experiencingtheworld”(Bakhtin,1993:60-1).

Withoutanswerability,peopleinorganizationsseemtobehavemuchlike

lemmings.LemmingarepartofsuperfamilyMuriodeathatincludessmallrodentin

ornearArctic,voles,muskrats,rats,gerbils,andhamsters.Lemmingsjustfollow

alongevenwhenthesituationisdangerous.The‘LemmingEffect’occursinhuman

kindwhenamajorityofourpeersareconditionedtojustgoalongwiththeflowof

thelargergroup,ratherthanriskinganyindependentthoughtoraction.The

LemmingEffectisnamedafterthepopularmythoflemmingsexhibitingherd

behavior,beingunderahypnoticspell,somuchsothattheyfolloweachothereven

whenitleadsthemintosituations,evenoveracliffthatcouldcostthemtheirlives.

Lemmingsmouththeopinionsofherdleaders.Lemminghoodisaninnate

bureaupathologyphenomenon,presentinmostorganizationsandmanagingtakes

advantageofit.First,theTaylorism-Fayolism-Weberian(TFWvirus)asHenriSavall

andcolleagues(Savall&Zardet,2008;Savall,Zardet&Péron,2011;Worley,Zardet,

&Savall,2015)callitisakindofcontagionofcentralplanningoftasks(Taylorism),

administrativeorderingofeverything(Fayolism),andbureaucracysignoffstodo

anything(Weberian).ThethreeforcescombineintotheTFWvirustoproduce

Lemmings.Second,arelatedcontagioniswhatGabriel(2008)callsorganizational

miasma,astateofpollution(material,psychologicalandspiritual)thatafflictsall

whoworkincertainorganizationsthatundergosuddenandtraumatic

transformations.Miasmacontagionresultisdiscardingmanyvaluedmembers

throughdownsizingorretrenchment,withouteitherthenecessaryseparation

ritualsbeingobservednoranypsychologicalmourning.Third,asFoucault(1979)

observedinDisciplineandPunish,apanopticonofmicro-powerdisciplinesand

punishestoproducedocileLemminghood.Fourth,Harvey(1977)inhisclassicstory

of‘organizationsasphrogfarms’basedonthefairy-talethePrincessandtheFrog.In

28

phrogfarms,weletourbossturnusintoaphrog,losingallself-determination.In

theirphroginess,weswatatthefliesinsteadofdrainingtheswamp.

References

ArcherM1995RealistSocialTheory:theMorphogeneticApproach.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Aristotle(350BCE/1954).RhetoricandPoetics.1954IntroductionbyFredrich

Solmsen,RhetoricetranslatedbyW.RhysRoberts,PoeticstranslatedbyIngramBywater.NY:TheModernLibrary(RandomHouse).

Alvesson,M.,&Kärreman,D.(2000).Varietiesofdiscourse:Onthestudyof

organizationsthroughdiscourseanalysis.HumanRelations,53(9),1125-1149.

AlvessonMandKärremanD(2011)Decolonializingdiscourse:Criticalreflections

onorganizationaldiscourseanalysis.HumanRelations,64(9),1121-1146.Bakhtin,M.M.(1993).TowardaPhilosophyoftheAct.Writtenasunpublished

notebookswrittenbetween1919–1921,firstpublishedintheUSSRin1986withthetitleKfilosofiipostupka;1993EnglishV.Liapunov,Trans.;V.Liapunov&M.Holquist,Eds.).Austin,TX:UniversityofTexasPress.

Barad,K.(2003).Posthumanistperformativity:Towardanunderstandingofhowmattercomestomatter.”JournalofWomeninCultureandSociety.Vol.28(3):801-831).Onlineathttp://www.kiraoreilly.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/signsbarad.pdf

Barad,K.(2007).MeetingtheUniverseHalfway:QuantumPhysicsandtheEntanglementofMatterandMeaning.Durham/London:DukeUniversityPress.

Barthes,Roland.(1970/1974).S/Z.TranslatedbyRichardMillerfromtheFrench1970toEnglish1974.PrefacebyRichardHoward.NY:HillandWang(TheNoondayPress).

Benjamin,Walter.(1936/1968).TheStoryteller:ReflectionsontheWorksofNikolai

Leskovwasfirstpublishedin1936(OrienUndOkzident);1968istheEnglishtranslationincludedinHannahArendt(ed.),WalterBenjaminIlluminations(pp.83-109).Inreferencing,Iusesectionnumbers.

Benso,Silvia.(1997/2000).Thefaceofthings.Symposium,I,I(1997),reprintedin

2000,Albany,NY:SateUniversityofNewYork.

29

BhaskarRoy,(1986).ScientificRealismandHumanEmancipation.London:Verso.Boje,DavidM.(1991).Thestorytellingorganization:Astudyofstoryperformance

inanoffice-supplyfirm.AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,106-126.Boje,DavidM.(1995).Storiesofthestorytellingorganization:Apostmodern

analysisofDisneyas“Tamara-Land”.AcademyofManagementJournal,38(4),997-1035.

Boje,DavidM.(2001).NarrativeMethodsforOrganizationandCommunication

Research.London:Sage.Boje,DavidM.(2008).StorytellingOrganizations.London:Sage.Boje,D.M.(2011).StorytellingandtheFutureofOrganizations:An

AntenarrativeHandbook(RoutledgeStudiesinManagement,OrganizationsandSociety).London:Routledge.

Boje,DavidM.(2012).Reflections:Whatdoesquantumphysicsofstorytellingmean

forchangemanagement?JournalofChangeManagement,12(3):253-271.Boje,DavidM.(2014).StorytellingOrganizationalPractices:Managinginthe

quantumage.London:Routledge.Boje,DavidM.(2016).ChangeSolutionstotheChaosofStandardsandNorms

OverwhelmingOrganizations:FourWingsofTetranormalizing.London/NY:Routledge.

Boje,DavidM.;Ford,Jeffrey;Oswick,Cliff.(2004).Languageandorganization:the

doingofdiscourse.AcademyofManagementReview,29.4:571-577.Boje,D.M.,Haley,U.C.,&Saylors,R.(2016).Antenarrativesoforganizational

change:ThemicrostoriaofBurgerKing’sstorytellinginspace,timeandstrategiccontext.HumanRelations,69(2),391-418.

Boje,D.M.,&Henderson,T.L.(Eds.).(2014).Beingquantum:Ontological

storytellingintheageofantenarrative.CambridgeScholarsPublishing.

Boje,D.M.;Larsen,Jens;Brunn,Lena.(2017).‘TrueStorytelling.Howtosucceedwithyourimplementation’,workingpaper.http://oldfriendsindustries.com/?page_id=1048

Boje,D.M.,Svane,M.,&Gergerich,E.M.(2016).Counternarrativeandantenarrativeinquiryintwocross-culturalcontexts.EuropeanJournalofCross-CulturalCompetenceandManagement,4(1),55-84.

30

Burke,Kenneth.(1937/1984).AttitudesTowardHistory:WithaNewAfterword.1stpublished1937EditorialPublications,Inc.1984publishedBerkeley/London:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

Butler,Judith.(2011).Bodiesthatmatter:Onthediscursivelimitsofsex.London:

Routledge.

Cajete,Gregory.(2000).Nativescience:Naturallawsofinterdependence.SantaFe,NM:ClearLightPublishers.

Cheney,George;Christensen,LarsThere;Conrad,Charles;Lair,DanielJ.(2004).Pp.79-104inGrant,D.,Oswick,C.,Hardy,C.,Putnam,L.L.,&Phillips,N.(Eds.)TheSagehandbookoforganizationaldiscourse.London:Sage.

Czarniawska,B.(1997).Narratingtheorganization:Dramasofinstitutional

identity.Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.Czarniawska,B.(2004).Narrativesinsocialscienceresearch.London:Sage.

Denzin,NormanK.;Lincoln,YvonnaS.;Smith,LindaTuhiwai.(2008).HandbookofCriticalandIndigenousMethodologies.LosAngeles/London:SagePublishers,Inc.

Derrida,J.(1979).LivingonBorderlines.Pp.75-176inH.Bloom(ed.),Deconstructionandcriticism.London:ContinuumPublications

FaircloughNorman.(1992)DiscourseandSocialChangeCambridge:PolityPress.Fairclough,N.(2005).Peripheralvision:Discourseanalysisinorganizationstudies:

Thecaseforcriticalrealism.Organizationstudies,26(6),915-939.Fairclough,Norman;Thomas,Pete.(2004).Thediscourseofglobalizationandthe

globalizationofdiscourse.Pp.379-396inDavidGrant,CynthiaHardy,CliffOswick,andLindaPutnam(Eds.)TheSagehandbookoforganizationaldiscourse.London:Sage.

Flora,Jeanne;Boje,D.M.;Rosile,G.A.;Hacker,Kenneth.(2016).Theoreticaland

AppliedReviewofEmbodiedRestoryingforPost-DeploymentFamilyReintegration.JournalofVeteransStudies,Vol1(1)onlineathttp://veteransstudies.org/journal/index.php?journal=jvs&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=7&path%5B%5D=20

Foucault,Michele.(1977/1979).DisciplineandPunish,trans.AlanSheridanfrom

French1971,in1979.NY:Vintage.

31

Foucault,Michele.(1984).Theorderofdiscourse,inMShapiroed.LanguageandPoliticsOxford:Blackwell108-138.

Gabriel,Y.(2000).Storytellinginorganizations:Facts,fictions,andfantasies.

Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Gabriel,Yiannis.(2004).Narratives,storiesandtexts.Pp.61-78inDavidGrant,

CynthiaHardy,CliffOswick,andLindaPutnam(Eds.)TheSagehandbookoforganizationaldiscourse.London:Sage.

Gabriel,Y.(2008).Separation,abjection,lossandmourning:Reflectionsonthe

phenomenonoforganizationalmiasma.InESRCSeminarSeries,UniversityofLeicester(Vol.28,May).AvailableonlineaccessedJuly242018athttps://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/wbs/projects/aaw/presentations/gabriel_paper.pdf

Gergen,K.J.,Gergen,M.M.,&Barrett,F.J.(2004).Dialogue:Lifeanddeathofthe

organization.Pp.39-59inDavidGrant,CynthiaHardy,CliffOswick,andLindaPutnam(Eds.)TheSagehandbookoforganizationaldiscourse.London:Sage.

GrantD&HardyC2004Introduction:struggleswithorganizationaldiscourse,

OrganizationStudies25.120045-13.Grant,D,Keenoy,T.andOswick,C.2001Organizationaldiscourse:key contributionsandchallengesInternationalStudiesofManagement andOrganization,315-24Grant,D.,Oswick,C.,Hardy,C.,Putnam,L.L.,&Phillips,N.(Eds.).(2004).TheSage

handbookoforganizationaldiscourse.London:Sage.Haley,UshaCV,andDavidM.Boje."Storytellingtheinternationalizationofthe

multinationalenterprise."JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies45,no.9(2014):1115-1132.

Hardy,C.andMaguire,S.(2008).Discourse,fieldconfiguringevents,andchangein

organizationsandinstitutionalfields:NarrativesofDDTandtheStockholmConvention.AcademyofManagementJournal,53,1365–1392.

Henderson,TonyaL.;Boje,DavidM.(2016).ManagingFractalOrganizing

Processes.NY/London:Routledge.Hird,MyraJ.(2009).Feministengagementswithmatter.FeministStudies.Vol.35,

No.2(Summer2009),pp.329-346.

32

Hitchin,L.(2014).Methodandstoryfragments:Workingthroughuntoldmethod.InIzak,M.,Hitchin,L.,&Anderson,D.(Eds.)Untoldstoriesinorganizations.Routledge.

Iedema,R.(2007).Onthemulti-modality,materiallyandcontingencyof

organizationdiscourse.OrganizationStudies,28(6),931-946.Iedema,R.2003DiscoursesofPost-BureaucraticOrganizationAmsterdam:John

BenjaminsPublishing.James,William.(1907/1909).PragmatismandfouressaysfromTheMeaningof

Truth.Pragmatismis1907,andMeaningofTruthis1909.NY:AMeridianBook(NewMexicanLibrary)TimesMirror.

Katila,Saija;Laine,Pikka-Maaria;Parkkari,Piritta.(2017).Sociomaterialityand

AffectinInstitutionalwork:ConstructingtheIdentityofStart-UpEntrepreneurs.JournalofManagementInquiry,1-14.

Mumby,DennisK.(2011).What’scookinginorganizationaldiscoursestudies?A

responsetoAlvessonandKärreman.HumanRelations.Vol.64(9):1147-1161.

Mumby,D,andClair,R.(1997).OrganizationaldiscourseInvanDijk,T.A.(ed)

DiscourseasStructureandProcess:DiscourseStudiesVolume2London:Sage.

Mumby,D.K.&Stohl,C.(1991).Poweranddiscourseinorganizational studies:absenceandthedialecticofcontrol.DiscourseandSociety,2,313-

332.Mumby,D.K.&Stohl,C.(1996).Discipliningorganizationalcommunicationstudies

ManagementCommunicationQuarterly10.150-73.Orlikowski,W.J.(2007).Sociomaterialpractices:Exploringtechnologyat

work.OrganizationStudies,28(9),1435-1448.Orlikowski,W.J.,&Scott,S.V.(2008).10sociomateriality:challengingthe

separationoftechnology,workandorganization.AcademyofManagementAnnals,2(1),433-474.

Oswick,Cliff;Putnam,LindaL.;Keenoy,Tom.(2004).Tropes,discourseand

organizingPp.105-128inDavidGrant,CynthiaHardy,CliffOswick,andLindaPutnam(Eds.)TheSagehandbookoforganizationaldiscourse.London:Sage.

Peirce,C.S.(1877).Thefixationofbelief.PopularScienceMonthly,12:1-15.

33

Peirce,C.S.(1878).Howtomakeideasclear.PopularScienceMonthly,12:286-

302.Peirce,C.S.(1905).Whatpragmatismis.TheMonist,15(2),161-181.Putnam,L.andFairhurst,G.(2001.)“Discourseanalysisinorganizations:issuesand

concerns”,inF.M.JablinandL.Putnam(eds.)TheNewHandbookofOrganizationalCommunication:AdvancesinTheory,ResearchandMethodsNewburyPark,CA:Sage235-268.

Riach,K.,Rumens,N.,&Tyler,M.(2016).TowardsaButlerianmethodology:

Undoingorganizationalperformativitythroughanti-narrativeresearch.HumanRelations,69(11),2069-2089.

Reed,Mike.(2004).Gettingrealaboutorganizationaldiscourse.Pp.413-420in

DavidGrant,CynthiaHardy,CliffOswick,andLindaPutnam(Eds.)TheSagehandbookoforganizationaldiscourse.London:Sage.

Reed,M.(2005).Reflectionsonthe‘realistturn’inorganizationandmanagement

studies.JournalofManagementStudies,42(8),1621-1644.Rosile,G.A.(2016).TribalWisdomforBusinessEthics.UK:EmeraldGroup

PublishingLimited.Rosile,G.A.,Boje,D.M.,Carlon,D.M.,Downs,A.,&Saylors,R.(2013).Storytelling

diamond:Anantenarrativeintegrationofthesixfacetsofstorytellinginorganizationresearchdesign.OrganizationalResearchMethods,16(4),557-580.

Rosile,G.A.;Boje,D.M.;Claw,C.M.(2016).Ensembleleadershiptheory:Collectivist,

relational,andheterarchicalrootsfromindigenouscontexts.LeadershipJournal,Vol.14(3)307–328.Availableonline,accessdedJuly252018athttp://davidboje.com/vita/paper_pdfs/Ensemble_Leadership_article.pdf

Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (Eds.). (2008). Mastering hidden costs and socioeconomic performance. IAP.

Savall,H.,Zardet,V.,&Péron,M.(2011).22TheEvolutiveandInteractiveActorPolygonintheTheaterofOrganizations.Pp.366-xxxinD.M.Boje(ed.)Storytellingandthefutureoforganizations:Anantenarrativehandbook.London:Sage.

Saylors,R.,Boje,D.M.,&Mueller,T.J.(2014).EntrepreneurialStorytellingin

MomentsofFriendship:Antenarrativesofbusinessplans,risktaking,and

34

venturecapitalnarratives.TamaraJournalofCriticalOrganisationInquiry,12(4),3-15.

Smith, Graham Hingangaroa. (2003). ‘Indigenous struggle for the transformation of education and schooling.’ Keynote address presented to the Alaskan Federation of Natives (AFN) Convention, Anchorage, Alaska. Accessed Mar 27 2018 at http://www.ankn.uaf.edu/curriculum/Articles/GrahamSmith/index.html

Smith, Graham Hingangaroa. (2017). Kaupapa Māori Theory: Indigenous transforming of education. Pp. 79-94 in inTeKawehauHoskinsandAlisonJones(Eds.)CriticalConversationsinKaupapaMāori.Wellington,Aotearoa,NewZealand:HuiaPublishers.

Smith,LindaTuhiwai.(1999/2008).DecolonizingMethodologies:ResearchandIndigenousPeoples.1999,London:ZedBooks;2008,NY:Palgrave(St.Martin’sPress,LLC).

Smith,LindaTuhiwai.(2017).Towardsdevelopingindigenousmethodologies:KaupapaMāoriResearch.Pp.11-28inTeKawehauHoskinsandAlisonJones(Eds.)CriticalConversationsinKaupapaMāori.Wellington,Aotearoa,NewZealand:HuiaPublishers.

Vaara,E.,Sonenshein,S.,&Boje,D.(2016).Narrativesassourcesofstabilityand

changeinorganizations:Approachesanddirectionsforfutureresearch.TheAcademyofManagementAnnals,10(1),495-560.

Vaara,E.,&Tienari,J.(2011).Onthenarrativeconstructionofmultinational

corporations:Anantenarrativeanalysisoflegitimationandresistanceinacross-bordermerger.OrganizationScience,22(2),370-390.

WeickKarlE.(1979).TheSocialPsychologyofOrganizing,2nded.Boston:

Addison-Wesley.Weick,KarlE.(1995).Sensemakinginorganizations.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.

Weick,KarlE.(2012).Organizedsensemaking:Acommentaryonprocessesofinterpretivework.HumanRelations65.1:141-153.

Worley,C.G.,Zardet,V.,Bonnet,M.,&Savall,A.(2015).Becomingagile:Howthe

SEAMapproachtomanagementbuildsadaptability.NY:JohnWiley&Sons.