The case presented here shows how a set of Lacanian concepts can be useful for analysing the behaviour of employees’ representatives in a factory belonging to a large globalized and financialised corporation and threatened with closure. We identify a central characteristic of this organization (the obliteration of symbolic authority) to identify the psychic processes the employees’ representatives go through as a result of this characteristic and the impact in terms of their difficulties in exerting resistance. We rest our analysis on the distinction Lacan makes between utterance and enunciation and make use of the concepts of master signifier, symbolic authority, fantasy and superego. We show that in this case the absence of symbolic authority leads the staff representatives to be taken over by the fantasy of a tyrannical and unbarred Other that has the absolute power to close down the factory at any time, and to feel guilty that they never do enough, a typical sense of guilt resulting from the superego’s unfulfillable demands. This theory is also relevant for understanding the paradoxes of resistance: the staff representatives will need to reintroduce a symbolic authority so as to be able to start resisting and no longer be overwhelmed by the fantasy of an unbarred Other. We emphasize the benefits of using a Lacanian approach for understanding how discursive, psychic and emotional processes are joined in the power relations characteristic of a global capitalist corporation, and reflect on the structural conditions in which resistance is possible in contemporary organizations.
Agence France Presse (2010). Gabon workers free ‘bossnapped’ French managers. 13April.
2.
ArnaudG. (2012). The contribution of psychoanalysis to organization studies and management: An overview. Organization Studies, 33, 1121–1135.
3.
BrownA. D.HumphreysM. (2006). Organizational identity and place: A discursive exploration of hegemony and resistance. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 231–257.
4.
CederströmC.HoedemaekersC. (Eds.) (2010). Lacan and organization. London: Mayfly Books.
5.
CollinsonD. (2002). Managing humour. Journal of Management Studies, 39, 269–288.
6.
ContuA. (2002). A political answer to questions of struggle. Ephemera, 2(2), 160–173.
7.
ContuA. (2008). Decaf resistance: On misbehavior, cynicism, and desire in liberal workplaces. Management Communication Quarterly, 21, 364–379.
CostasJ.TaheriA. (2012). ‘The return of the primal father’ in postmodernity? A Lacanian analysis of authentic leadership. Organization Studies, 33, 1195–1216.
10.
DelbridgeR. (1995). Surviving JIT: Control and resistance in a Japanese transplant. Journal of Management Studies, 32, 803–817.
11.
Dow Jones International News (2009). Three Alstom managers detained by workers at plant near Rome. 6October.
12.
Du GayP. (1996). Consumption and identity at work. London: SAGE Publications.
13.
ErkamaN.VaaraE. (2010). Struggles over legitimacy in global organizational restructuring: A rhetorical perspective on legitimation strategies and dynamics in a shutdown case. Organization Studies, 31, 813–839.
14.
EzzamelM.WillmottH.WorthingtonF. (2001). Power, control and resistance in ‘the factory that time forgot’. Journal of Management Studies, 38, 1053–1079.
15.
EzzamelM.WillmottH.WorthingtonF. (2004). Accounting and management–labour relations: The politics of production in the ‘factory with a problem’. Accounting, Organization and Society, 29, 269–302.
16.
FaircloughN. (2003). Analysing discourse: textual analysis for social research. London: Longman.
17.
FaircloughN.WodakR. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In Van DijkT. (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction (pp. 258–284). London: SAGE Publications.
18.
FlemingP. (2010). You are where you are not: Lacan and ideology in contemporary workplaces. In CerderströmC.HoedmaekersC. (Eds.), Lacan and organization (pp. 169–186). London: MayFly.
19.
FlemingP.SewellG. (2002). Looking for ‘the good soldier, Švejk’: Alternative modalities of resistance in the contemporary workplace. Sociology, 36, 857–873.
20.
FlemingP.SpicerA. (2003). Working at a cynical distance: Implications for power, subjectivity, and resistance. Organization, 10, 157–179.
21.
FotakiM.LongS.SchwartzH. S. (2012). What can psychoanalysis offer organization studies today? Taking stock of current developments and thinking about future directions. Organization Studies, 33, 1105–1120.
22.
FoucaultM. (1994). Histoire de la sexualité, tome 1 : La Volonté de savoir. Paris: Gallimard.
23.
FoucaultM. (2004). Naissance de la biopolitique: Cours au collège de France (1978–1979). Paris: Seuil.
24.
FreudS. (1969 [1919]). On bat un enfant. Paris: Theraplix.
25.
GabrielY. (1999). Beyond happy families: A critical reevaluation of the control-resistance-identity triangle. Human Relations, 52, 179–203.
26.
GabrielY. (2012). Organizations in a state of darkness: Towards a theory of organizational miasma. Organization Studies, 33, 1137–1152.
27.
GlynosJ. (2008). Ideological fantasy at work. Journal of Political Ideologies, 13, 275–296.
28.
GlynosJ. (2010). Lacan at work. In CederströmC.HoedemaekersC. (Eds.), Lacan and organization (pp. 13–58). London: Mayfly Books.
29.
GlynosJ.StavrakakisY. (2008). Lacan and political subjectivity. Subjectivity: International Journal of Critical Psychology, 24, 256–274.
HirschP. M.DeSouceyM. (2006). Organizational restructuring and its consequences: Rhetorical and structural. Annual Review of Sociology, 32, 171–189.
32.
JonesC.SpicerA. (2005). The sublime object of entrepreneurship, Organization, 12, 223–246.
33.
KennyK. (2012). ‘Someone big and important’: Identification and affect in an international development organization. Organization Studies, 33, 1175–1193.
34.
Kets de VriesM.BalazsK. (1997). The downside of downsizing. Human Relations, 50, 11–50.
LacanJ. (1966). Le stade du miroir comme formateur de la fonction du “Je” telle qu’elle nous est révélée dans l’expérience psychanalytique. In Ecrits. Paris: Seuil. [Ecrits: A selection. London: Tavistock.]
LacanJ. (1990). Les quatre concepts fondamentaux de la psychanalyse, Le séminaire XI. Paris: Seuil.
39.
LacanJ. (1999). Encore, Le Séminaire XX. Paris: Seuil.
40.
LacanJ. (2007). D’un discours qui ne serait pas du semblant, Le Séminaire XVIII. Paris: Seuil.
41.
LaclauE.MouffeC. (1985). Hegemony and socialist strategy. London: Verso.
42.
LaineP-M.VaaraE. (2007). Struggling over subjectivity: A discursive analysis of strategic development in an engineering group. Human Relations, 60, 29–58.
43.
LebrunJ-P. (2009 [1997]). Un monde sans limite. Toulouse: Erès.
44.
LokJ.WillmottH. (2014). Identities and identifications in organizations: Dynamics of antipathy, deadlock, and alliance. Journal of Management Inquiry, 23, 215–230.
45.
McGowanT. (2003). The end of dissatisfaction: Jacques Lacan and the emerging society of enjoyment. New York: State University of New York Press.
46.
MelmanC. (2002). L’Homme sans gravité. Jouir à tout prix. Paris: Denoël.
47.
MilesM.HubermanM. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: a source book of new methods. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications.
48.
MumbyD. K. (2005). Theorizing resistance in organization studies: A dialectical approach. Management Communication Quarterly, 19(1), 19–44.
49.
New Zealand Herald (2009). Locked out call-centre staff lock managers in. 14April.
50.
Pavón-CuéllarD. (2010). From the conscious interior to an exterior unconscious – Lacan, discourse analysis and social psychology. London: Karnac.
51.
Pavón-CuéllarD.ParkerI. (2014). Introduction: Lacanian theory, discourse analysis and the question of the ‘event’. In ParkerI.Pavón-CuéllarD. (Eds.), Lacan, discourse and event: psychoanalytic approaches to textual indeterminacy (pp. 1–14). Hove, UK: Routledge.
RobertsJ. (2005). The power of the imaginary in disciplinary processes. Organization, 12, 621–645.
54.
SaleclR. (1998). (Per)versions of love and hate. London: Verso.
55.
SpicerA.BöhmS. (2007). Theorizing struggles against the hegemony of management. Organization Studies, 28, 1667–1698.
56.
SpicerA.FlemingP. (2007). Intervening in the inevitable: Contesting globalization in a public sector organization. Organization, 14, 517–541.
57.
StavrakakisY. (2008). Subjectivity and the organized other: between symbolic authority and fantasmatic enjoyment. Organization Studies, 29, 1037–1059.
58.
StavrakakisY. (2010). Symbolic authority, fantasmatic enjoyment and the spirits of capitalism. In CederströmC.HoedemaekersC. (Eds.), Lacan and organization (pp. 59–100). London: Mayfly Books.
59.
VaaraE.TienariJ. (2008). A discursive perspective on legitimation strategies in MNCs. Academy of Management Review, 33, 985–993.
60.
VerhaegheP. (2000). The collapse of the function of the father and its effect on gender roles. In SaleclR. (Ed.), Sexuation (pp. 131–154). Durham, NC; London: Duke University Press.
61.
VinceR. (2002). The politics of imagined stability: A psychodynamic understanding of change at Hyder plc. Human Relations, 55, 1189–1208.
62.
YinR. K. (1984). Case study research: design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications.
63.
ŽižekS. (1989) The sublime object of ideology. London: Verso.
64.
ŽižekS. (2002). Revolution at the gates: selected writings of Lenin from 1917. London: Verso.
65.
ŽižekS. (2007). Le sujet qui fâche. Paris: Flammarion.
