1) Bullis and Stout (2000) explored organizational socialization from a feminist perspective and argued that a feminist standpoint approach to research offers three areas of inquiry: “(a) socialization scholarship should be expanded so that the absent referents, outsiders within, and marginalized people, processes, outcomes, and contexts are considered; (b) scholarship should incorporate the located contextualized positions of scholars and those studied through approaches, methods, and analyses that develop and reveal standpoints; and (c) research should examine both institutions and processes beyond contained organizations and continue critical analyses of our collective scholarly work” (p. 73).
- What are the consequences of the traditional assumptions of organizational socialization?
- How is organizational socialization a potentially marginalizing, exclusionary process?
- How can feminist approaches, such as feminist standpoint theory, produce transformative understandings of organizational socialization?
2) Myers (2005) explored members’ assimilation into a fire department via Myers and Oetzel’s (2003) six-dimensional model of organizational assimilation into a high-reliability organization (HRO), while DiSanza (1995) explored contradictory assimilation messages in a banking organization. These different perspectives on organizational socialization illustrate the ways in which a specific subject can be studied from multiple perspectives and, in my opinion, demonstrated that multiple readings of a given topic provide us with a better, more thorough, and meaningful understanding of it.
- How might your own research interests be better understood when explored from multiple perspectives?
- If you were to do three readings (from the integration, differentiation, and fragmentation perspective) on the topic on which you are writing your final paper, what would each one look like?
No comments:
Post a Comment