See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281336544

Re-Imagining Images of Organization: A Conversation With Gareth Morgan

Article  in  Journal of Management Inquiry · June 2015

DOI: 10.1177/1056492615591854

CITATIONS READS
6 2,603

2 authors:

Cliff Oswick David Grant

City, University of London Griffith University
80 PUBLICATIONS   2,926 CITATIONS    82 PUBLICATIONS   3,404 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Cliff Oswick on 05 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

591854
research-article2015
JMIXXX10.1177/1056492615591854Journal of Management InquiryOswick and Grant

Article

Journal of Management Inquiry

Re-Imagining Images of Organization:

1­–6
© The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
A Conversation With Gareth Morgan sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1056492615591854
jmi.sagepub.com

Cliff Oswick1 and David Grant2

Abstract
In this article, we review the metaphors presented by Morgan in Images of Organization and highlight how they simultaneously
act as “relatively static reflections” (i.e., they provide a history of organization theory) and “relatively dynamic projections”
(i.e., stimulating the formulation of further organizational images). We also discuss the potential for new organizational
metaphors and consider two specific metaphors (i.e., the “global brain” and “organization as media”). We also challenge the
established punctuated metaphorical process (i.e., a transfer from a metaphorical source domain to an organizational target
domain), propose a dynamic perspective of interchange (i.e., source domain to target domain to source domain and so on),
and develop the notion of multidirectionality (i.e., two-way projections between target and source domains).

Keywords
organizational behavior, organizational design, organization theory

Introduction any new and significant metaphors are emerging within the
field. Given that we have known Professor Morgan for more
In his best-selling book, Images of Organization, Gareth than 20 years, and having written extensively on metaphor
Morgan (1986) set out what has subsequently become known ourselves (see, for example, Grant & Oswick, 1996; Oswick
as “the eight metaphors” (Morgan, 2011), namely, organiza- & Jones, 2006; Oswick et al., 2002), the interaction pre-
tions as machines, organisms, brains, cultures, political sys- sented here unfolded as an emergent conversation rather than
tems, psychic prisons, systems of change and flux, and as a structured interview.
instruments of domination. In subsequent work, he has also
considered organizations and organizing by reference to spi-
der plants, termites, and blobs out of water (Morgan, 1993). The “Eight Metaphors” and Beyond
His body of work on organizational metaphors (see, for Following an initial discussion of parameters and defini-
example, Morgan, 1980, 1981, 1983, 1986, 1993, 1996, tional issues, our conversation offered some reflections on
2011) has had a significant impact on management thinking established organizational metaphors before going on to con-
and the study of organizations (Grant & Oswick, 1996; sider new ones. More specifically, we reviewed the status of
Oswick, Keenoy, & Grant, 2002). It has informed and the eight metaphors contained in Images of Organization and
inspired literally thousands of academics, managers, and stu- then we briefly explored the emergence of two new contem-
dents over the past three decades.1 Moreover, it has also porary metaphors.
stimulated the production of a vast array of metaphorical
images, including thinking of organizations and organizing
as analogous to, for example, theaters (Mangham & Foundational Images or Illustrative Starting
Overington, 1987), jazz improvisation (Zack, 2000), conver- Points?
sations (Broekstra, 1998), personalities (Oswick, Lowe, &
Cliff:  Okay. Did you want to talk about . . . we could
Jones, 1996), identities (Cornelissen, 2002), polyphonies
talk about metaphors themselves. I’d be really
(Hazen, 1993), human entities (Kumra, 1996), military bat-
tlegrounds (Dunford & Palmer, 1996), and soap bubbles
(Tsoukas, 1993). 1
City University London, UK
Rather than offering a broad discussion of the role and 2
UNSW Business School, Sydney, Australia
status of metaphorical thinking in organizational analysis,
Corresponding Author:
this contribution focuses on Gareth Morgan’s perspective on Cliff Oswick, Cass Business School, City University London, 106 Bunhill
metaphor and considers which particular metaphors have Row, London EC1Y 8TZ, UK.
had significant purchase, which have endured, and whether Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from jmi.sagepub.com by guest on September 24, 2015

2 Journal of Management Inquiry 

interested in having a little chat about them. You example of that and then there is “big data.” Big
previously mentioned the phrase, “the eight data in this world, that’s hugely important.
metaphors.”2 We ought to talk about how the Think about the Foucauldian metaphor, the pan-
metaphors have changed, whether the original opticon and the whole idea of discipline and
metaphors still have purchase. So do you still self-discipline, punishment, surveillance. Link
think they’re relevant? that now to big data, look at what all the big tech
Gareth:  Oh, absolutely. They’re relevant historically, companies are doing . . .
right? If you want to understand organization Cliff:  Yes, but it seems to me that it’s one of those
and where it’s come from and how organization metaphors that has been a bit of a slow burn
theory has developed, then obviously the eight metaphor, to use a metaphor to talk about meta-
metaphors are actually relevant to that. In many phors, that when I talked to managers and stu-
respects Images of Organization is an analysis dents, 10, 15, 20, 25 years ago about the idea of
of the history of organization through metaphor, surveillance and disciplinary power, a lot of
right? And that’s where I always start. But, the them just couldn’t get that idea at all. I think it’s
point is now that metaphors have different sig- one of those metaphors that’s come of age with
nificance, it’s going back to the idea we have the increase in the actual prevalence of surveil-
previously talked about in terms of context and lance in society [e.g., the proliferation of video
the importance of metaphor in a context, so cameras in public spaces] and greater awareness
building upon what you’ve just said, it’s clear of the power of institutions.
that organizations are shifting from hierarchical Gareth:  Exactly.
structures to flat networks. Basically, new meta- David:  Well I think it’s freed up, it’s left it shackles
phors are needed for understanding this. Sure behind, if you like, of . . . it was mixed up in
you can get some degree of understanding net- discussions about Neo-Marxism and control in
works through the images of the brain or of cul- the workplace, which is a different thing. It’s
ture or of the organism, but, obviously new that ideological bent that’s got left behind, so
metaphors are forcing themselves into our atten- that when you’re talking about surveillance
tion. So that metaphor [i.e., the “flat network”] now, you’re talking about surveillance in so-
in particular is one that’s obviously very called free world . . . we’re supposedly never . .
relevant. . have never been as free as we are in many
David:  Do you see them as new root metaphors, or met- ways, but are actually constrained.
aphors that may emanate out of the original Gareth:  Yes, I agree with that. But, it’s interesting
eight? because there are two elements to this. It seems
Gareth:  Well, that becomes a little bit of a game really of to me, it’s external surveillance, which we can
whether you want to make the eight work, which all see, but in the Foucauldian model as well, it’s
you can to a huge degree. But, it would be stupid how this becomes self-surveillance and so the
for me to defend just eight metaphors when the way in which we are looking . . .
whole purpose of images of organization is to Cliff:  Self-discipline, yeah . . .
say . . . to talk about the way of thinking and Gareth:  . . . self-disciplining, right, which is incredibly
how, if you accept that the way of thinking is powerful in terms of the way things are working
metaphorical, then why would you limit your- out and also I think we have to recognize how
self, okay, and so I’ve always said that they’re big data and how the big companies like Google
illustrative. So it becomes clear that we’ve got and the like, and the collection of data, are basi-
to add to them and different people are doing cally another form of surveillance in the sense
that and legitimately. that they’re understanding . . .
Cliff:  How people behave.
Gareth:  . . . how they behave, what their interests are,
Big Data and Big Brother what they do, what they buy, etc. etc. etc. And,
David:  Any examples [of metaphors that have been what they’re actually doing in many respects is
added to] that really work for you? That appeal not feeding back the differences, what you don’t
to you personally? think or what you don’t like, they’re feeding
Gareth:  
Yeah, well obviously the idea of the global back stuff that reinforces your point of view. So
brain, which is a variation, if you want, on the if you want to take this on it becomes . . . we’re
brain metaphor, but it’s not really, it goes way in a self-affirming bubble, where the external
beyond it, but clearly the Internet as a simple reality that we’re encountering all the time is

Downloaded from jmi.sagepub.com by guest on September 24, 2015

Oswick and Grant 3

reinforcing whatever patterns that we’ve got. So much more of a source of provocation and all
there are very, very interesting implications of the rest of it. Anyway, it fits very well with my
this, so clearly this becomes a major line of type of thinking and the whole idea that we have
development. a society that historically has been built up on
Cliff:  Yeah. I also think, and you may not agree with the concept of literacy and so the written word
me here, but the power of some of the meta- and taking the bureaucracy as the embodiment
phors is when they’re juxtaposed. I don’t mean of the written approach to organizing through
blended or multiple lenses, but they are just held the rules, etc. etc. and all of the conventional
in tension. So the kind of, the machine metaphor science and perspective based thinking and the
and the organism metaphor are best understood linearity that comes with that. The whole idea of
in relation to each other and when we start to fixed objective reality, all connected with this
talk about the panopticon, I wonder about the world of literacy and the digital revolution and
kind of emergence of social movements and the the shift in to electronic-mediated, multi-sen-
whole idea of activism as a response to some of sory modes of understanding to a degree that
the disciplinary power issues and the panopti- we’ve never experienced before, has got to be a
con. So in other words, just as you have a play force, not in a technologically determined way,
between the organic metaphor and the mecha- but has to be a force that demands a completely
nistic one, that you have this sort of . . . these new mode of thinking in how we understand the
things almost grow in relation to each other as world that’s going on around us and McLuhan
ways of thinking, so I wonder whether the kind came up with the notion of the global village as
of . . . a very, very early metaphorical understanding of
Gareth:  Symbiotic, almost? To use a metaphor, but yes. what’s going on, but there are many, many more
Cliff:  Symbiotic, yes. Possibly, because I do think . . . ways of thinking about this and of capturing this
I kind of introduced it there but, I don’t know movement which is as important as the trend to
how you think or what you think the kind of . . . media-ization, and so if you start to see this as
the social networks, activism, mobilization, all part of the ground which is in motion here, all
these kinds of . . . they seem to be very pertinent those metaphors that are going to be needed to
ways of thinking about a new form of organiza- capture this, it’s just phenomenal.
tional metaphor. Cliff:  Yeah, and I can see that, and I think it’s always
Gareth:  Yes, linking into the concept of self-organiza- interesting to then sort of look at the second
tion, right, of emergent organization and com- order metaphors. So, for example, the “organi-
plex adaptive systems thinking has got a lot to zation as family” metaphor encourages us to
contribute to this, but here you get into, where’s look at second order comparisons such as pater-
the driving metaphor? Where’s the root meta- nalism, the maternal figure, family feuds, and
phor in it all? I think that’s hugely important to family values. Following through on that orga-
understand those social movements and what nization as media take, companies used to talk
the driving metaphors behind them are. It’s about mission statements, the written. Now it’s
utterly fascinating. So clearly new metaphors about brands and a brand isn’t an . . .
are being developed and rightly so. Gareth:  It’s an image. . . .
Cliff:  . . . it’s an image, and do you know what, brands
are consumed as much by employees as they are
Images of Media-ization? by external agents these days. So it kind of plays
Gareth:  There’s one other metaphor I’ve got to put on to the idea that if there’s media metaphors tak-
the table, because you asked me what metaphors ing . . . really taking hold, then we find some of
that I think are important and I said, the global these artifacts that are around that move away
brain . . . and we discussed the panopticon. The from mission statements to, what’s our brand?
other one is this notion of organization as media. And our brand is something you can’t easily
David:  Oh, yes. capture in just a written form, and a mission
Gareth:  Which is one that I’ve floated around, because statement is exactly that. It’s a statement that’s
I’ve been very . . . not very involved, I’ve been written and it’s that literacy thing and the media
flirting, I guess, with Marshall McLuhan3 for thing really does play into things like, as I say,
the best part of 20, 30 years. I don’t know if you brand.
can do much more than flirt with the ideas David:  I think the thing that you’re capturing there is
because the whole notion is that there’s . . . it’s that we’re moving towards a much more

Downloaded from jmi.sagepub.com by guest on September 24, 2015

4 Journal of Management Inquiry 

sensory approach to understanding, which is going forward as a basis for generating further insights and
interesting in itself, because it may be almost a ways of thinking. In this regard, his metaphors simultane-
full circle, going back to what we were talking ously work as “relatively static reflections” (i.e., they cap-
about earlier. So without the literal [written ture the essence of the history of organization theory) and
word approach], we’re much more reliant on our “relatively dynamic projections” (i.e., offering a reference
five senses. . . . And that either . . . I’m not quite point and/or trigger for further metaphorical entailments
sure, but it either creates the potential for new and developments).
metaphors or it takes us back to some of the A further interesting aspect of our conversation was that it
original real basic metaphors that we’re founded highlighted two new organizational metaphors that resonate
on and reinterpreting those, coming up with dif- with contemporary organization life, namely, “the global
ferent metonymical outcomes, if you like. brain” and “organization as media.” The “global brain” met-
Gareth:  No, it’s fascinating, because it will potentially aphor draws attention to the neural-like interconnectedness
revolutionize the whole of science and the whole of a digital world combined with the increasing significance
scientific thinking and the notion of research of “big data.” This metaphor also reveals the dark side of
and . . . “big data,” in the Foucauldian sense of disciplinary power
Cliff:   Have you heard of these things called and surveillance, as ever more intrusive phenomena for indi-
“emojis”? viduals as employees, consumers, and citizens. The “organi-
Gareth:  Emojis? zation as media” metaphor draws from Marshall McLuhan’s
Cliff:  Right. Emojis are symbols that you use in text work—especially the idea that “the medium is the message”
messages. Teenagers use them on their mobile (McLuhan, 1964)—to provoke a consideration of the demise
phones—smiley face, sad face, heart, etc. There of the written word as a cornerstone of organizing (e.g., job
are hundreds of them on phones. You can repre- descriptions, rules, mission statements, etc.) and a shift
sent happiness, sadness, love, anger . . . toward what Morgan describes as “electronic-mediated,
Gareth:  Nothing written. multi-sensory modes of understanding.”
Cliff:  No, and as I understand it kids are sending com- If we reflect upon the characteristics of the “global brain”
plete text messages, which have no words and and “media” metaphors, it appears that they are very differ-
consist only of a string of images. ent to Morgan’s “eight metaphors.” The earlier metaphors
Gareth:  I love that. You see it’s just a little illustration of seem to be far more bounded insofar as it is possible to con-
how this is all unfolding in a way that we can’t ceive of an individual organization as a discrete metaphorical
possibly appreciate. So it’s clear that Images of entity (e.g., as a machine, organism, culture, or brain). By
Organization is not about the eight metaphors, contrast, it is hard to envisage a single organization as a
but it’s about that type of thinking that can help “global brain” or “media.” Instead, they are more easily
us get into this . . . deal with this world a bit depicted as synonymous with organizations at an aggregated
faster than we might otherwise would, particu- level. Moreover, these new metaphors can be appropriately
larly as academics. positioned as “images of society and social life” as much as
“images of organization and organizational life.” Somewhat
ironically, this perhaps, at least to a certain extent, is in itself
Concluding Thoughts a reflection of living within a digitally connected world with
There are several main inferences that can be derived from increasingly blurred boundaries between organizations (and
the interaction presented in this article. The first concerns between business and society more generally). Hence, we
Gareth Morgan’s reflections regarding the production and posit that new organizational metaphors are not organiza-
consumption of the eight metaphors contained in Images of tion-specific and that they are largely driven by wider social
Organization. It is clear that his metaphors continue to be and technological changes rather than organization-centric
popular and relevant (e.g. Human Relations have a special imperatives.
issue planned that is devoted to Morgan’s eight metaphors). When we reviewed the transcript of our meeting, we
For Morgan, the continued allure of his metaphors is their noticed that the discourse concerning established meta-
historical relevance as a collection of insights that help to phors (i.e., the machine and the organism) and the new
make sense of how organization theory has developed. He metaphors did not entirely adhere to the conventional wis-
states in our discussion that “. . . in many respects Images dom on metaphor-use where the process is presented as
of Organization is an analysis of the history of organiza- involving the projection of a relatively concrete “source
tion through metaphor.” Although the eight metaphors domain” (i.e., a specific metaphor) onto a relatively
have an enduring historical significance, it is also apparent abstract “target domain” (i.e., an organization) to generate
that Morgan wants them to be seen as illustrative rather insights or new ways thinking (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980;
than exhaustive images and, as such, that they are deployed Morgan, 1980, 1986). More specifically, it appeared that

Downloaded from jmi.sagepub.com by guest on September 24, 2015

Oswick and Grant 5

the process of elaborating upon, and projecting a metaphor References

typically required the concurrent articulation of an inverse Broekstra, G. (1998). An organization is a conversation. In D.
or opposite metaphorical image. So, for example, the dis- Grant, T. Keenoy, & C. Oswick (Eds.), Discourse and organi-
cussion of machine metaphor incorporated the concomi- zation (pp. 152-176). London, England: Sage.
tant use of the organism metaphor. Equally, the discussion Cornelissen, J. P. (2002). On the organizational identity metaphor.
of “big data” (i.e., “the global brain”—control and surveil- British Journal of Management, 13, 259-268.
lance) was accompanied by a discussion of “big brother” Dunford, R., & Palmer, I. (1996). Metaphors in popular man-
(i.e., “social movements”—autonomy and resistance). agement discourse: The case of corporate restructuring. In
And, the discussion of “organization as media” based on D. Grant & C. Oswick (Eds.), Metaphor and organizations
(pp. 95-109). London, England: Sage.
“electronic-mediated, multi-sensory modes of understand-
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual
ing” (e.g., images, sounds, feelings) was juxtaposed with blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York, NY:
“the literal” (i.e., the written). This might suggest that Basic Books.
rather than seeing the metaphorical process as a two-part Grant, D., & Oswick, C. (Eds.). (1996). Metaphor and organiza-
projection (i.e., from “source domain” to “target domain”), tions. London, England: Sage.
we might further explore the metaphorical process as a Hazen, M. A. (1993). Towards polyphonic organization. Journal of
form of tripartite correspondence (an interplay between a Organizational Change Management, 6(5), 15-26.
“source domain,” a “shadow source domain,” and a “target Kumra, S. (1996). The organization as a human entity. In C. Oswick
domain”). & D. Grant (Eds.), Organisation development: Metaphorical
Finally, this last point leads us to a final closing provoca- explorations (pp. 35-53). London, England: Pitman.
tion: If, as Morgan has indicated, the metaphors produced in Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
Images of Organization should be utilized to generate further
Mangham, I. L., & Overington, M. A. (1987). Organizations as the-
ways of thinking, we could further rethink the established atre: A social psychology of dramatic appearances. Chichester,
metaphorical process (i.e., a transfer from a metaphorical UK: Wiley.
source domain to an organizational target domain) in terms McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of
of the extent to which it can be thought of as being fixed and man. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
relatively discrete. By adopting a dynamic perspective of Morgan, G. (1980). Paradigms, metaphors, and puzzle solving in orga-
movement from one metaphor to another (i.e., source domain nization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 605-622.
to target domain to source domain and so on) and embracing Morgan, G. (1981). The schismatic metaphor and its implications
the notion of multi-directionality4 (i.e., target domains can for organizational analysis. Organization Studies, 2, 23-44.
also project onto source domains), we can create more play- Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot con-
ful and less constrained ways of using metaphors that are trol tropes in administrative science. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 28, 601-607.
likely to produce more innovative ways of thinking and cre-
Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Beverly Hills, CA:
ate new images of organization. Sage.
Morgan, G. (1993). Imaginization: The art of creative management.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect Morgan, G. (1996). Is there anything more to be said about meta-
to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. phor? In D. Grant & C. Oswick (Eds.), Metaphor and organi-
zations (pp. 227-240). London, England: Sage.
Funding Morgan, G. (2011). Reflections on Images of Organization and its
implications for organization and environment. Organization
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, author-
& Environment, 24, 459-478.
ship, and/or publication of this article.
Oswick, C., & Jones, P. (2006). Beyond correspondence? Metaphor
in organization theory. Academy of Management Review, 31,
Notes 483-485.
1. For example, the first edition of Images of Organization sold Oswick, C., Keenoy, T., & Grant, D. (2002). Metaphor and ana-
just under 250,000 copies. logical reasoning in organization theory: Beyond orthodoxy.
2. The eight metaphors refer to those contained in Images of Academy of Management Review, 27, 294-303.
Organization (Morgan, 1986). Oswick, C., Lowe, S., & Jones, P. (1996). Organisational culture
3. Marshall McLuhan formed the notions of the “medium is the as personality: Lessons from psychology? In C. Oswick & D.
message” and the “global village” and is credited with predict- Grant (Eds.), Organization development: Metaphorical explo-
ing the advent of the Internet (see McLuhan, 1964). rations (pp. 106-117). London, England: Pitman.
4. A multi-directional view of metaphor has been developed Tsoukas, H. (1993). Organizations as soap bubbles: An evolutionary
within cognitive linguistics (Fauconnier & Turner, 2002) but perspective on organization design. Systems Practice, 6, 501-515.
has not really permeated through to management and organi- Zack, M. H. (2000). Jazz improvisation and organizing: Once more
zation theory. from the top. Organization Science, 11, 227-234.

Downloaded from jmi.sagepub.com by guest on September 24, 2015

6 Journal of Management Inquiry 

Author Biographies David Grant is a professor of organizational studies and senior

deputy dean at UNSW Business School, Sydney, Australia. His
Cliff Oswick is professor of organization theory and deputy dean at research focuses on how language and other symbolic media influ-
Cass Business School, City University London, UK. His research ence the practice of leadership and organization-wide, group- and
interests focus on the application of aspects of discourse, drama- individual-level change. He has published on these topics in a range
turgy, tropes, narrative and rhetoric to the study of management, of peer-reviewed and practitioner journals as well as numerous
organizations, organizing processes, and organizational change. He handbooks and edited volumes. He is also co-editor of the Sage
has published more than 140 academic articles and contributions to Handbook of Organizational Discourse (2004, with Cynthia Hardy,
edited volumes. He is the European editor for Journal of Cliff Oswick, and Linda Putnam), Metaphor and Organizations
Organizational Change Management and associate editor for (1996, with Cliff Oswick), and Organization Development:
Journal of Change Management. He is also a member of the Metaphorical Explorations (1996, with Cliff Oswick). He is a
National Training Laboratory, a trustee of the Tavistock Institute of member of the National Training Laboratory and a founding mem-
Human Relations, and co-director of the International Centre for ber of the International Centre for Organizational Discourse
Research on Organizational Discourse, Strategy and Change. Strategy and Change.

Downloaded from jmi.sagepub.com by guest on September 24, 2015

View publication stats