Although hybridity has a rich conceptual and empirical history in the study of public organisation and management, some dissatisfaction with the concept has emerged in more recent work due to the changing conditions being described in relation to continuing and deepening discourses of new/post new public management and corresponding shifts in professional and managerial work, identities, and ethos. Where a central tenet of the concept of hybridity is an epistemic tension between competing world views, vis-à-vis ‘the manager’ and ‘the professional’ the question is increasingly posed as to whether such tensions are not experienced at the individual level in such a conflicted manner. Put another way, this might suggest that professionals have been successfully enrolled in managerial discourses and practices. This paper examines these questions in light of longitudinal qualitative data generated with participants in a national medical leadership project. By situating the programme and the experiences of participants within a historical account of the changing character of the medical profession in the UK since around the 1970s, we show the intermediary work undertaken by agents in making sense of, internalising and resolving the conflicts experienced in relation to their hybridity. In discussion we consider the conceptual implications of this situation, which counters conventional understandings of professional power and jurisdiction. We conclude by considering the conceptual and practical ramifications of being ‘beyond’ hybridity, and what this might mean for our understanding of resistance and enrolment in professional organisations.
|Publication status||Published - 11 Aug 2018|
|Event||Academy of Management Conference - Chicago, United States|
Duration: 10 Aug 2018 → 14 Aug 2018
|Conference||Academy of Management Conference|
|Period||10/08/18 → 14/08/18|