The word and the world: a critique of representationalism in management research

Representationalism is the belief that our knowledge represents the world as it is. The purpose of this paper is to explore the representational epistemology that has historically underlain most management research, and submit it to critical scrutiny. It is argued that we can never show whether our knowledge corresponds to the facts; truth is a property of sentences, not of the world. To talk about an object of study is to talk about a set of beliefs having a place in a language game. Social objects of study, especially, are practices and, as such, are constituted by self-understandings expressed as sets of background distinctions actors share. Our models of social reality, therefore, are internally related to practices so that the particular assumptions underlying a model of knowledge shape the background distinctions embodied in a practice. Concerning management studies, it is argued that far from merely representing organizational reality as it allegedly is, a representational epistemology is closely linked with a particular kind of action, viz. instrumental action, and a particular kind of organization, viz. bureaucratic organization. On the antirepresentational view of knowledge put forward here, it is suggested that our theories are tools for acting in the world rather than mirrors for reflecting it. As tools, questions concerning the purpose served by an inquiry are preferable to questions concerning methodology. The implications of an antirepresentational model of knowledge for management (both as an object of study and as a practice) are explored.