Democratic Pluralism and the Modern Organization: Joseph K. to Jack Reacher

• In Event: Orienting to Others

Abstract

Over the last century literary commentaries have emphasized a retreat from the principle of pluralism in both public and private organizations. This has occurred despite significant changes in the structure of organizations. This paper has two objectives: first to understand the process of organizational change, and second, to understand why both public and private organizations have diminished the role of pluralism. The paper will cite academic research as well as examples from modern literature.

Literature in the early 20th Century, particularly the works of Kafka and Koestler emphasized that that the “enlightenment man” who was considered to be an autonomous, rights bearing, rational being, was replaced by a new human type. This human type is subordinate to organizations which assume purposes, goals and a morality distinct from the individuals who comprise the organization. As Rubashov, Koestler’s protagonist explains, “I plead guilty of having place the idea of man above the idea of mankind.” The bureau, in Weberian terms, was not only “technically” superior to other forms of organization, it was essential to the maintenance of a capitalist economy.

Even though by mid-century the organization was seen more as a shifting coalition among diverse groups as noted by the academic literature (Cyert and March, The Behavioral Theory of the Firm) and popular literature, such as Catch-22, by the end of the century a new concept of organization was developing. Herbert Simon, at this Conference in 2000, lectured about the growth in business and government organizations, and suggested that organizations, central to a market economy, were rapidly changing and that the internet opened new possibilities. As it turns out, these new possibilities include yet a new human type, “network man.” As organizations are increasingly committed to connecting individuals by digital technology, the possibilities for spontaneity and collective action are diminished by new levels of surveillance and organizational compliance through internalized procedures such as “best practices.”

Democratic pluralism offers the possibility for collective action by individuals and groups with diverse political values. With possibilities for spontaneity within the organization diminished, a new type of anti-hero has emerged in popular literature. Michael Connelley’s Harry Bosch and Lee Child’s Jack Reacher are characters that operate outside the network. In fact, they often show disdain for the digital networks that characterize their own organizations. Although these protagonists are caricatures, they are able to organize collective action to solve problems. Thus, we must wonder if democratic pluralism is possible within the modern organization. The analysis also suggests that diversity in organizations does not necessarily lead to democratic pluralism. The organization may find it in their interest to encourage diversity, but not necessarily opposing points of view. As David Graeber has observed, “creativity has been marshalled to the service of the organization.”

Author

• Donald J. Matthewson