Governmental politics in China continue to be a male-dominated arena such that Chinese women political leaders often carefully perform contested gender and occupational identities to negotiate a work-body (mis)alignment. Turning to sociomateriality, this study examines how gender and organizational paradox comes to matter as Chinese women negotiate the occupational identity of political leaders. The study simultaneously explores the types of identity work women leaders perform and the nonhuman actors they routinely encounter while working to make boundaries that outline the identity of political leaders. A thematic narrative analysis reveals the following: Suzhi work(s), guanxi work(s), and abject body work(s). Participants perform identity work constitutive of the masculine shapes/bodies of political suzhi and guanxi, while forming the abject body of a symbolic woman. Meanwhile, these bodies serve as working actors that move and touch participants in paradoxical ways.
AlvessonM.AshcraftK. L.ThomasR. (2008). Identity matters: Reflections on the construction of identity scholarship in organization studies. Organization, 15(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508407084426
2.
AlvessonM.WillmottH. (2002). Identity regulation as organizational control: Producing the appropriate individual. Journal of Management Studies, 39(5), 619–644. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00305
3.
AshcraftK. L. (2013). The glass slipper: “Incorporating” occupational identity in management studies. The Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 6–31. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23416300
4.
AshcraftK. L. (2021). Communication as constitutive transmission? An encounter with affect. Communication Theory, 31(4), 571–592. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtz027
5.
BaradK. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–830. https://doi.org/10.1086/345321
6.
BaradK. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.
7.
BrownA. D. (2015). Identities and identity work in organizations. British Journal of Management, 17(1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12035
8.
ButlerJ. (1999). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.
9.
BuzzanellP. M. (2020). Gender and feminist theory. In NicoteraA. M. (Ed.), Origins and traditions of organizational communication: A comprehensive introduction to the field (pp. 250–269). Routledge.
10.
CarliL. L.EaglyA. H. (2011). Gender and leadership. In BrymanA. (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 103–117). Sage.
11.
ChaoC. C.HaL. (2020). Introduction to Asian women leadership. In ChaoC.C.HaL. (Eds.), Asian women leadership: A cross-national and cross-sector comparison (pp. 1–5). Routledge.
12.
CollinsP. H. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Routledge.
13.
ConnellC. (2010). Doing, undoing, or redoing gender? Learning from the workplace experiences of transpeople. Gender and Society, 24(1), 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243209356429
CruzJ. M.LindabaryJ. R. (2021). Legacies, present, and future: Introduction to the special issue on feminist organizational communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 35(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318920975210
16.
EdwardsL. (2007). Strategizing for politics: Chinese women’s participation the one-party state. Women’s Studies International Forum, 30(5), 380–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2007.07.005
17.
FountaineS. (2017). What’s not to like?: A qualitative study of young women politicians’ self-framing on Twitter. Journal of Public Relations Research, 29(5), 219–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2017.1388239
18.
FuG.WeiJ.ShiY.YanY.LiY.ZhanJ.WangJ. (2018). Examining discrimination against women, non-Han minorities, intellectuals, and non-Communist members among the current China’s provincial political elites. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 39(2), 177–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554477X.2018.1449526
HarrisK. L. (2015). Feminist dilemmatic theorizing: New materialism in communication studies. Communication Theory, 26(2), 150–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12083
21.
HowellJ. (2002). Women’s political participation in China: Struggling to hold up half the sky. Parliamentary Affairs, 55(1), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/parlij/55.1.43
22.
HuangJ.AaltioI. (2014). Guanxi and social capital: Networking among women managers in China and Finland. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 39, 22–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.09.002
JammaersE.ZanoniP. (2021). The identity regulation of disabled employees: Unveiling the ‘varieties of ableism’ in employers’ socio-ideological control. Organization Studies, 42(3), 429–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840619900292
25.
JonesK.CliftonJ. (2018). Rendering sexism invisible in workplace narratives. A narrative analysis of female entrepreneurs’ stories of not being talked to by men. Gender, Work & Organization, 25(5), 557–574. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12216
26.
KrizA.GummessonE.QuaziA. (2014). Methodology meets culture: Relational and Guanxi-oriented research in China. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 14(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470595813493265
27.
LongZ.BuzzanellP. M. (2021). Constituting intersectional politics of reinscription: Women entrepreneurs’ resistance practices in China, Denmark, and the United States. Management Communication Quarterly. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189211030246
28.
MavinS.GrandyG. (2016). A theory of Abject Appearance: Women elite leaders’ intra-gender ‘management’ of bodies and appearance. Human Relations, 69(5), 1095–1120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726715609107
29.
MeisenbachR. J. (2008). Working with tensions: Materiality, discourse, and (dis)empowerment in occupational identity negotiation among higher education fund-raisers. Management Communication Quarterly, 22(2), 258–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318908323150
30.
OrlikowskiW. J.ScottS. V. (2015). Exploring material-discursive practices. Journal of Management Studies, 52(5), 697–705. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12114
31.
PullenA.VachhaniS. (2021). Feminist ethics and women leaders: From difference to intercorporeality. Journal of Business Ethics, 173(2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04526-0
32.
PutnamL. L.AshcraftK. L. (2017). Gender and organizational paradox. In SmithW. K.LewisM. W.JarzabkowskiP.LangleyA. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox (pp. 333–352). Oxford University Press
33.
PutnamL. L.FairhurstG. T.BanghartS. (2016). Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 65–171. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2016.1162421
34.
RhotonL. (2011). Distancing as a gendered barrier: Understanding women scientists’ gendered practices. Gender & Society, 25(6), 696–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243211422717
35.
RiessmanC. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Sage.
RosenleeL. L. (2006). Confucianism and women: A philosophical interpretation. State University of New York Press.
38.
SmartA. L.HsuC. (2007). Corruption or social capital? Tact and the performance of guanxi in market socialist China. In NuijtenM.AndersG (Eds.), Corruption and the secret of law a legal anthropological perspective (pp. 167–189). Routledge.
39.
SmithA. N.WatkinsM. B.CarltonP. (2019). Making the invisible visible: Paradoxical effects of intersectional invisibility on the career experiences of executive black women. Academy of Management Journal, 62(6), 1705–1734. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.1513
40.
SuF. (2006). Gender inequality in Chinese politics: An empirical analysis of provincial elites. Politics & Gender, 2(2), 143–163. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X06060077
41.
SzetoR.WrightP.C.ChengE. (2006). Business networking in the Chinese context: Its role in the formation of guanxi, social capital and ethical foundations. Management Research News, 29(7), 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170610690880
42.
TianZ.BushH. (2020). Half the sky: Interwoven resilience processes of women political leaders in China. Journal of Applied Communication, 48(1), 70–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2019.1704829
43.
TracyS. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. http://qix.sagepub.com/content/16/10/837
TsangA.ChanP.ZhangL. (2011). Reconciling conflicts: The “accidental” women leaders in contemporary China. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 26(3), 314–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109911418441
WangY.HuaL. (2020). Birth influence future: Examining discrimination against Chinese deputy mayors with grassroots administration origins. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 7(23), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00572-1
49.
WangG.LamonD.WormV.GaoW.YangS. (2014). Understanding the indigenous Chinese concept of suzhi (素质) form an HRM perspective: A conceptual analysis. Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management, 5(2), 98–114. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHRM-08-2014-0027
50.
WatsonT. J. (2008). Managing identity: Identity work, personal predicaments and structural circumstances, Organization, 15(1), 121–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508407084488
51.
YepG. A. (2016). Toward thick(er) intersectionalities: Theorizing, researching, and activating the complexities of communication and identities. In SorrellsK.SekimotoS. (Eds.), Globalizing intercultural communication: A reader (pp. 86–94). Sage.
