Organizational scholars have examined how social movements generate institutional change through contentious politics. However, little attention has been given to the role of prefigurative politics. The latter collapses expressive and strategic politics so as to enact the desired future society in the present and disrupt the reproduction of institutionalized structures that sustain deep-seated inequalities. The paper presents an ethnographic study of Occupy London and protesters’ encounter with people living homeless to examine how prefigurative politics is organized in the face of entrenched inequalities. Findings show how the macro-level inequalities that protesters set out to fight resurfaced in the day-to-day living in the camp itself. Initially, the creation of an exceptional space and communal space helped participants align expressive and strategic politics and imbued them with the emotional energy needed to confront challenges. But over time these deeply entrenched institutional inequalities frustrated participants’ attempts to maintain an exceptional and communal space, triggering a spiral of decline. The dilemma faced by Occupy invites us to reflect on how everyday constraints may be suspended so as to open up imagination for novel and more equal ways of organizing.
AgambenG. (2005). State of exception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
AnsariS.WijenF.GrayB. (2013). Constructing a climate change logic: An institutional perspective on the ‘tragedy of the commons’. Organization Science, 24, 1014–1040.
3.
ArmstrongE. A.BernsteinM. (2008). Culture, power, and institutions: A multi-institutional politics approach to social movements. Sociological Theory, 26, 74–99.
4.
BeyH. (1991). The temporary autonomous zone. New York: Autonomedia.
5.
BhattacharyyaA. (2012). 3 Dimensions of Occupy. The Occupied Times #12, pp. 20–21.
6.
BoggsC. (1977). Marxism, prefigurative communism, and the problem of workers’ control. Radical America, 11, 99–122.
7.
BreinesW. (1982). Community and organization in the New Left, 1962–1968: The great refusal. New York: Praeger.
8.
BriscoeF.GuptaA. (2016). Social activism in and around organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 10, 671–727.
9.
BromleyP.PowellW. W. (2012). From smoke and mirrors to walking the talk: Decoupling in the contemporary world. Academy of Management Annals, 1–48.
10.
CalhounC. (2013). Occupy Wall Street in perspective. British Journal of Sociology, 64, 26–38.
11.
Castro-RojasN. (2012). The great debate: Time to downsize?The Occupied Times #8, p. 4.
12.
CollinsR. (2001). Social movements and the focus of emotional attention. Passionate Politics: Emotions and Social Movements, 27–44.
13.
CourpassonD.DanyF.DelbridgeR. (2017). Politics of place: The meaningfulness of resisting places. Human Relations, 70, 237–259.
14.
CreedW. E. D.ScullyM. A.AustinJ. R. (2002). Clothes make the person? The tailoring of legitimating accounts and the social construction of identity. Organization Science, 13, 475–496.
de BakkerF. G.den HondF.KingB.WeberK. (2013). Social movements, civil society and corporations: Taking stock and looking ahead. Organization Studies, 34, 573–593.
17.
den HondF.de BakkerF. G. A. (2007). Ideologically motivated activism: How activist groups influence corporate social change activities. Academy of Management Review, 32, 901–924.
18.
EpsteinB. (1991). Political protest and cultural revolution: Nonviolent direct action in the 1970s and 1980s. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
FranksB. (2003). Direct action ethic. Anarchist Studies, 13–41.
21.
GiriS. (2013). Communism, Occupy and the question of form. Ephemera, 13, 577–601.
22.
GlaserB.StraussA. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.
23.
GraeberD. (2002). The new anarchists. New Left Review, 13, 61–73.
24.
GraeberD. (2004). Fragments of an anarchist anthropology. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm.
25.
GraeberD. (2013). The democracy project: A history, a crisis, a movement. New York: Random House.
26.
GreenwoodR.HiningsC. R.SuddabyR. (2002). Theorizing change: The role of professional associations in the transformation of institutionalized fields. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 58–80.
27.
HallettT. (2010). The myth incarnate: Recoupling processes, turmoil, and inhabited institutions in an urban elementary school. American Sociological Review, 75, 52–74.
28.
HallettT.VentrescaM. J. (2006). Inhabited institutions: social interactions and organizational forms in Gouldner’s patterns of industrial bureaucracy. Theory and Society, 35, 213–236.
29.
HaugC. (2013). Organizing spaces: Meeting arenas as a social movement infrastructure between organization, network, and institution. Organization Studies, 34, 705–732.
30.
HedströmP.SwedbergR. (1998). Social mechanisms: An analytical approach to social theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31.
JurisJ. S. (2008). Performing politics: Image, embodiment, and affective solidarity during anti-corporate globalization protests. Ethnography, 9, 61–97.
32.
KhanF. R.MunirK. A.WillmottH. (2007). A dark side of institutional entrepreneurship: Soccer balls, child labour and postcolonial impoverishment. Organization Studies, 28, 1055–1077.
33.
KingB. G.PearceN. A. (2010). The contentiousness of markets: Politics, social movements, and institutional change in markets. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 249–267.
34.
KingM. D.HavemanH. A. (2008). Antislavery in America: The press, the pulpit, and the rise of antislavery societies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53, 492–528.
35.
KnottS. (2011). While you were sleeping. The Occupied Times #4, p. 4.
36.
KokkinidisG. (2015). Spaces of possibilities: Workers’ self-management in Greece. Organization, 22, 847–871.
37.
LawrenceT. B. (2008). Power, institutions and organizations. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.Sahlin-AnderssonK.SuddabyR. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 170–197). London: SAGE Publications.
38.
LawrenceT. B.DoverG. (2015). Place and institutional work: Creating housing for the hard-to-house. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60, 371–410.
39.
LawsonR. J. (2012). On the soapbox. Reverend James Lawson wonders if Occupy has presented a last chance for Christianity. The Occupied Times #10, p. 16.
40.
LounsburyM.CrumleyE. T. (2007). New practice creation: An institutional perspective on innovation. Organization Studies, 28, 993–1012.
41.
MaeckelberghM. (2011a). Doing is believing: Prefiguration as strategic practice in the Alterglobalization movement. Social Movement Studies, 10, 1–20.
42.
MaeckelberghM. (2011b). The road to democracy: The political legacy of ‘1968’. International Review of Social History, 56, 301–332.
43.
MartíI.FernándezP. (2013). The institutional work of oppression and resistance: Learning from the Holocaust. Organization Studies, 34, 1195–1223.
44.
McAdamD. (1982). Political processes and the development of Black insurgency. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
45.
McAdamD.TarrowS. G.TillyC. (2001). Dynamics of contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46.
MunirK. A. (2015). A loss of power in institutional theory. Journal of Management Inquiry, 24, 90–92.
ParkerM.CheneyG.FournierV.LandC. (2014). The Routledge companion to alternative organization. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
49.
PerkmannM.SpicerA. (2014). How emerging organizations take form: The role of imprinting and values in organizational bricolage. Organization Science, 25, 1785–1806.
50.
PollettaF. (1999). ‘Free spaces’ in collective action. Theory and Society, 28, 1–38.
51.
PollettaF. (2002). Freedom is an endless meeting: Democracy in American social movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
52.
PollettaF.JasperJ. M. (2001). Collective identity and social movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 283–305.
53.
PowellW. W.ColyvasJ. A. (2008). Microfoundations of institutional theory. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.SahlinK.SuddabyR. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 276–298). London: SAGE Publications.
54.
RojasF. (2010). Power through institutional work: Acquiring academic authority in the 1968 Third World Strike. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 1263–1280.
SchneibergM.LounsburyM. (2008). Social movements and institutional analysis. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.Sahlin-AnderssonK.SuddabyR. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 648–669). London: SAGE Publications.
57.
ShoreL. (2012). The great debate: Revolution or reform?The Occupied Times #9, p. 16.
58.
SmetsM.MorrisT. I. M.GreenwoodR. (2012). From practice to field: A multilevel model of practice-driven institutional change. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 877–904.
59.
SnowD. A. (2001). Extending and broadening Blumer’s conceptualization of symbolic interactionism. Symbolic Interaction, 24, 367–377.
60.
SnowD. A.AndersonL. (1993). Down on their luck: A study of homeless street people. Berkeley: University of California Press.
61.
SouleS. A. (2012). Social movements and markets, industries, and firms. Organization Studies, 33, 1715–1733.
62.
SutherlandN.LandC.BöhmS. (2014). Anti-leaders(hip) in social movement organizations: The case of autonomous grassroots groups. Organization, 21, 759–781.
Van de SandeM. (2013). The prefigurative politics of Tahrir Square: An alternative perspective on the 2011 revolutions. Res Publica, 19, 223–239.
65.
Van de VenA. H.JohnsonP. E. (2006). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31, 802–821.
66.
WeberK.KingB. (2014). Social movement theory and organization studies. In AdlerP.du GayP.MorganG.ReedM. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of sociology, social theory, and organization studies: contemporary currents. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
67.
YatesL. (2015). Rethinking prefiguration: Alternatives, micropolitics and goals in social movements. Social Movement Studies, 14, 1–21.
