essential-guide-to-qualitative-in-organizational-research

204 –––––––––– QUALITATIVE METHODS IN ORGANIZATION STUDIES ––––––––––––––––––judgements’ (Foucault, 1977). That is, discourses prescribe appropriate behaviours and attributesacross a whole range of social domains. In different epochs, certain domains of behaviourcome under the scrutiny of the authorities of that period because they are deemed to beproblematic for various reasons. It is when domains are scrutinized that discourses thatconstruct these domains are both identified and produced. An example from Foucault’s ownwork should help make these ideas easier to understand.In his analysis of sexuality, Foucault (1981, 1988, 1990) argues that the Victorian era sawthe attempt to regulate the sexual activity of the population by various authorities includingthe government and the medical profession. The aim was to confine sexual activity to thelegitimate heterosexual couple, in response to a number of problems, including the health ofthe population, the capacity of the population to engage in economically productive work,and a general concern at the time with moral and physical hygiene. However scrutinizing thepopulation to examine its sexual practices (in the form, for example, of medical andpsychiatric interviews) resulted in an explosion of discourses on sexuality produced as a directconsequence of this scrutiny. Thus, far from successfully regulating the sexual activity of thepopulation, the production of a plethora of discourses on sexuality meant that theestablishment of ‘norms’ was impossible.As this example should make clear, the production of discourse in any social domain isalways uncontrollable and unpredictable. The upshot of this is that discourse is never unitary(there are never just one set of norms governing any area of social practice). Because of thisnon-unitary nature of discourse, disciplinary power never secures complete compliance – thereare always alternative discourses available that enable different individuals and groups to resistthe regulatory norms in any specific social domain.Discourses effectively produce different versions of what counts as ‘normal’ social practice.Thus, at the present time, there are very many discourses that construct the social domain of‘employment’, constructing norms of behaviour that are targeted at employees. Any individualemployee will come to understand his or her own behaviour as an employee through thediscourses that construct that domain. That is, discourses not only construct objects in thesocial domain – employees in general, but also produce subjects in that domain – I, theemployee. Foucault is anti-essentialist. He does not believe that individuals possess innatecharacteristics. Instead he suggests that discourses make available ‘positions’ that we can takeup in response to our own personal circumstances. Thus for example, being unemployed isa term that someone might use about themselves if they are not in paid employment. This‘positioning’ has distinct effects on how the individual views him or her self, as well as howthey feel and act. However, the position ‘unemployed’ is only available through discourses inwhich employment is constructed as contributing directly to the economic activity of society(Grint, 1998). In the feudal epoch, this discourse was far less dominant, and therefore theposition ‘unemployed’ with its attendant effects on the identity of the individual was availableto relatively few people, and certainly would not have had the meaning (nor effects) that ithas today.THE PRINCIPLES OF CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––Utilizing Foucault’s ideas, described above, Fairclough (1992) has developed an extensive andelaborate system of critical discourse analysis. The method set out in this chapter is based on