Abstract

Abstract In this article, we elucidate that exploring managerial talk through the lens of metaphor might offer an opportunity to bridge the often acclaimed gap between rigour and relevance in management research and education. Building on an interpretative research approach and a qualitative field study among managers from the Netherlands, Poland and the United States, we reveal that managers view their day-to-day interactions in relationships with suppliers and clients as if they perform acts, play games and fight battles. These findings corroborate extant research, but they also show that combining (a) the use of metaphor as an analytical tool with (b) a focus on managers' perceptions of their own and others' micro-level behaviours offers substantial potential for synthesising theory with practice. More specifically, we argue that the layered nature of metaphors -on a primary level helping us imbue meaning to raw observations, and on a theoretical level drawing our attention to potentially interesting constructs -propels confrontation and symbiosis between research and practice. Simultaneously, a focus on micro-level behaviours enhances recognisability for practitioners, while facilitating the emergence of fine-mazed patterns underlying emerging constructs on a theoretical level. Keywords Discourse, interpretative research, managerial talk, metaphor, relevance, rigour Introduction Although the debate on tensions between rigour and relevance in management research and education is longstanding In this article, we present such an integrative approach, suggesting that scholars may simultaneously attain rigour and relevance when they combine the use of metaphor as an analytical tool with a focus on how managers talk about their own and other practitioners' micro-level behaviours. Consistent with In what follows, we first outline our understanding of the term 'relevance' and the rigour-relevance debate, after which we introduce 'metaphor' as an analytical research tool. Subsequently, we present the results of our empirical work, which involved a six year qualitative study across three countries and a diverse range of industries. Subsequently, we discuss how an interpretive metaphorical analysis of managers' accounts of their everyday realities presents both a meaningful and methodologically sound instrument to advance our understanding of business management. More specifically, we elucidate how our analysis may help researchers to establish valid associations between theory development and managerial practice, and how it can be informative of the behavioural tactics that managers use to navigate their organisations. Relevance and rigour Thus far, few attempts have been made 'to define what relevance actually means ' (Paton et al., 2013: 2). In fact, some researchers have argued that the term itself is inherently problematic (Learmonth et al., 2012: 36) because among other reasons, the term is relational -relevant or irrelevant to whom and about what? -and contingent on issues of temporality and power Latusek and Vlaar 3 Following this definition of relevance, one of the most pressing and acute questions in the management literature involves whether and how research can simultaneously be scientifically sound (i.e. rigorous) and practically useful (i.e. relevant). The traditional argument claims that there is a trade-off between rigour and relevance because fundamental knowledge (gained from scholarship) and experiential knowledge (gained from practice) are essentially different In this study, we subscribe to the latter view, but we present a more encompassing route towards enhancing the alignment between rigour and relevance, which consists of two elements. First, addressing Metaphors for managerial behaviour Metaphors constitute the outcome of a cognitive process in which the literal meaning of a phrase or word is applied to a new context in a figurative sense Over the last decades, the important role of metaphors has increasingly been recognised by management and organisation scholars We are aware that this approach comes with some limitations, the most serious one most likely being that metaphor is presented unproblematically, as a convenient conceptual window in a 'literal' sense Study method To explore practitioners' views on managerial behaviour, we adopted an interpretative research approach Data collection Our interviewees exhibited considerable geographic and cultural diversity. As an example, Because our project was originally about the development, maintenance and repair of trust in interorganisational relations, the idea to conduct a metaphorical analysis only arose after we had collected our data. In the data collection stage, we never elicited responses to the terms 'drama', 'game' or 'fight'. Most of the time, our conversations evolved around governance issues in interorganisational relations and the processes that make up those relations. The guideline dispositions that we used during the interviews are presented in Appendix 1. All of the interviews were conducted in the native language of the interviewees (i.e. Dutch, English and Polish). For us, this was a natural setup: one of us is Polish and the other is Dutch, but we both have lived and worked in English-speaking environments. Furthermore, English is the lingua franca both for academics We conducted the primary analysis of the interview data on the original (ad verbatim) transcripts, 3 after which selected passages were translated into English. It is important to note that we Latusek and Vlaar 7 observed metaphors or their constituent parts in their original languages first. Only then did the translation into English take place. In many academic publications, the issue of translation remains undiscussed and is not problematised Data analysis Data analysis occurred in two stages. The first stage comprised our individual work with ad verbatim transcripts Management Learning of interviews, and after having been struck by the observation that the prevalence of metaphorical language was abundant, we reanalysed all of the interviews, which brought other questions into play: What language is this person using? What metaphors are being referred to by the interviewee? Which patterns can be identified in managers' stories about their own and others' behaviours? At this stage, each of the coded interview fragments was translated into English with the assistance of a professional language editor. In cases of doubt, we further consulted with native English-speaking professionals. We then proceeded with the second stage of the analysis: exchanging tables with coded materials and analysing them together in a reflexive manner Findings In presenting our results, we aim to continuously strike a balance between 'showing versus telling' by making extensive use of excerpts from the interviews, while also offering explanations of the more general patterns represented by these quotes First metaphor -performing drama/theatre Management and organisation theorists have often relied on the metaphor of drama and theatre to explore how people understand and interpret others' behaviour 10 Management Learning Examples of this metaphor abound in our study. Some 'actors' pointed to executives who deployed sophisticated 'scripts' when presenting their company to external stakeholders, negotiating important deals or giving speeches to their employees, that is, their 'audiences'. These persons are told to excel at aptly switching 'roles' when confronted with changing scenes or audiences, and they are believed to know how to 'perform' in various 'genres', skilfully applying elements from comedy, tragedy and other forms of theatre, depending on the situation. This is consistent with the idea that skilful managers are 'masters of drama ' (Hatch et al., 2005: 48; for some fundamental studies on theatre and drama see also Furthermore, actors in Silicon Valley tend to adhere to particular dress codes; they typically do not dress up for business meetings, and shirts and flip-flops generally constitute acceptable work attire. Our interviewees further referred to keywords resembling spells. At the time of our study, these included, among others, concepts such as 'biotechnology' and 'open source'. Tim explained, What kills the deal is not the technology […]. It is the perception of an investor. Consequently, entrepreneurs need to make the right impression and provide their audience with This heightens the chance that the 'audiences' of these entrepreneurs will become interested and agree to meet -that is, it increases the likelihood that they will 'come to the show'. We observed similar theatrical elements in our study of account managers in the Netherlands. Consider the following remark: Sometimes you don't have a choice, and you need to perform an act for thirty minutes, even if you can't stand the other person. Asking how the weekend was, whether they take the bike to work or not … (Bill) Several interviewees further referred to how they rehearse performances, stressing the importance of subtle details: There might be over five million aspects that we are not aware of and that could have an effect: Do you shave in the morning? How do you do your hair? When a client gives his or her business card, do you look at it, or do you directly put it into your agenda? (Ally) Overall, our interviews support the idea that business people often behave as actors, producers and directors of plays (also see Second metaphor -playing games In addition to drama, our interviewees referred to 'playing games' and 'viewing work and business as consisting of games'. A game is a mechanism of integration between an actor and a system, in which each actor pursues his or her own interest but also shares an overall interest with other participants -that is, to keep the system going For example, just as tennis is played on a 'court', most business relationships are restricted and defined in relation to certain 'arenas' (e.g. particular product categories or geographically restricted markets). Similarly, timing may be crucial in winning organisational matches, just as it is in sports at SAGE Publications on September 22, 2015 mlq.sagepub.com Downloaded from 12 Management Learning Games' tight regulations, clear objectives and limited systems of symbols and boundaries allow players' actions to be more easily understood, anticipated and appreciated by both participants and spectators. Thanks to rules, an imaginary playing field becomes an ordered sphere where certain behaviour is allowed or condemned by a broader community The managerial literature is replete with examples of game tactics employed by business players, most of them aimed first at better understanding or getting to know one's partner and then at adjusting one's behaviour and (value) propositions to activate the audience and ensure both participation and engagement Proficient gamers champion the skill of 'getting under the skin' of their opponents, achieving intimate understandings of their opponents' beliefs and thought patterns and adapting their tactics accordingly The clash of interests is built into … it's just a regular part of the game. It's a certain convention … There is, of course, the tendency to occasionally grab the provider or customer by the throat. Sometimes you just have to shout, so that they know their place. It's not very nice, but it is just an inevitable aspect of the game. (Robert) Regardless of the level and type of game being played, sly players require an intimate understanding of their opponents. Getting to know the motivations and ambitions of other players, and the resources and constraints with which they are confronted, allows managers and executives to conceive new strategies and enables them to adapt their tactics to changing conditions. To this end, they tend to search for information -for example, on the Internet, in newspapers and through social media -and they elicit insights from people in their informal networks. However, as our interviews illustrate, it may be particularly interesting to contact people who have 'changed sides' of the playing field. These are more likely to recognise the rules of the game and provide other players with inside knowledge of their rivals: In negotiations, you need to understand the provider […]. I used to work for a software provider before I came here, so I know the other side very well. And that is the basis for everything I do. (Ben) Our empirical material further suggests that the rules applying to games both enable and constrain the actions taken by managers and executives. Although rules commonly serve to simplify human behaviour, allowing players to better understand and evaluate the moves of their partners, our at SAGE Publications on September 22, 2015 mlq.sagepub.com Downloaded from Latusek and Vlaar 13 interviews also suggest that people who are truly skilful at playing games do not only recognise the importance of rules but also aspire to establish and modify them, making others 'play the game' as they define it: From the very beginning, we are in a game … Both parties enter the deal, and both parties know that it is just not real … On the one hand [for example], we need to tell the customer that there are areas which we need to work on, but on the other hand, we cannot reveal that some things that we have promised at the beginning will just not happen … It's a constant game. (Adam) According to the executives and managers in our studies, respect for other players is of the utmost importance. Successful managers understand that the ultimate goal of most games is not a definitive win, but to enjoy the process and to continue to play. Although one may attempt to undermine the position of one's opponents (e.g. competitors, clients, regulators), it rarely makes sense to 'kill' or 'eliminate' them from the playing field. Moreover, skilful managers tend to be quite aware of their own capabilities and the (implicit) choices they make among elements of their behavioural repertoire: It is nothing else but a game. What you need to keep in mind … I am very driven about my area and think I know a lot about sales. Maybe not as much on the theoretical side of sales, but I am aware of my capabilities. I can sense, for example, when I need to be mad, or smile. It is not something I can explain … but it is really the case. And it really is just a game. It is about firing arrows and understanding how to dodge them. (Kris) Managers play games, but they also attempt to construct, control and restructure games for their own benefit. Power games, for instance, may be pathological for an organisation, challenging executives to manage such games carefully, neutralise dangerous players early on and halt destructive dynamics. Moreover, games can sometimes be won even before they are played. For example, managers and executives can delineate the borders of a playing field so as to favour players who have particular qualities or abilities. In other instances, players may have opportunities to partially determine the rules of the game -and generally do so for their own benefit. Third metaphor -fighting battles The third prominent metaphor from our field data is 'fight'; it appears to be common in the organisational world, especially in the field of strategic management In our interviews, management parlance was rife with military expressions. The war metaphor tends to polarise dialogue participants, reducing possibilities for negotiation and compromise that could produce other solutions Fights are usually seen as final escalations of conflict It is a kind of symbiosis which cannot be devoid of the elements of war, especially when projects are large and complex. (Jill) In the course of most business relations, open confrontations eventually occur, regardless of one's temper and attitude towards others. Our interviewees suggested that skilled managers are rarely taken by surprise. Take this example of a conflict between an executive and a client: We've known each other now for six months. Last time when he was in Holland, we had a huge conflict about something and he started screaming at me. I told him to listen very carefully, saying: 'Listen! We both know that you've got a big mouth. And we can blow the whole situation up. But let's not bet on who's got the biggest mouth. I'll win that. Now, do you want to make a deal, yes or no?' And that was the first time I saw him getting calmer. And I think I received more respect from him, since I handled him this way. (Bill) Another participant in our study indicated that executives sometimes feign 'being angry' and that they may purposefully initiate and nurture conflicts to achieve their goals: Interviewees further noted that successful managers and executives often seem to think in military terms, applying popular military-related sayings such as 'jump the gun', 'keep your powder dry', 'choose your battles', 'fight fire with fire', 'shoot across the bow' and the like. As good commanders-in-chief, respected managers know when it is beneficial to step back and prevent escalation of conflicts or fights. One of the managers in our Dutch study offered a clear illustration: Let's say I have a contract with a company, and I expect to find 30 000 dollars in savings. Assuming that we agreed on a fee of twenty per cent, this would mean we receive 6 000 dollars. Now, savings turn out to be 300 000 dollars, which would mean 60 000 for us. The client can think that this is too much and may not agree. This is a dilemma. On the one hand, I want the 60 000 dollars. On the other hand, I value our long-term relationship. If this situation will ever occur, and I am sure it will, I will not turn it into an open conflict. I'd rather receive eight -or ten thousand dollars each of the following ten years than having a fight and breaking up our relation. Eventually, the thing that you need to protect and take care of is your name and reputation. Latusek and Vlaar 15 Discussion Our findings confirm the idea that managers and executives perceive managerial behaviour in terms of the metaphors 'performing drama/theatre', 'playing games' and 'fighting battles'. They use language pertaining to these three metaphors when talking about the performances they enact to create meaning and manage impressions, deploying linguistic and visual elements to impress, persuade and manipulate others. These findings corroborate the extant research on each of these metaphors, but more importantly, they show that combining the use of metaphor as an analytical tool with a focus on managers' perceptions of behaviours offers substantial potential to synthesise theory and practice. Building on the results presented in this manuscript, we further substantiate this argument here. First, our findings suggest that metaphors are layered in nature, helping us interpret our observations. More specifically, our findings clarify that adopting metaphor as an analytical tool allows researchers and practitioners to ascertain confrontation or symbiosis between theoretical constructs and practice (see 16 Management Learning several statements about managerial behaviour can be discerned, possibly leading to enrichment of the concept and contextualisation of individual observations. Identification of such fine-mazed patterns becomes more likely when researchers focus their studies on statements concerning practitioners' micro-level behaviours of practitioners, without risking that researchers might impose specific constructs or theoretical predispositions on interviewees ex ante. We have shown that by collecting micro-level empirical material in the field and interpreting it through the analytical lens of metaphorical language, scholars preside over a research approach that enables them to concurrently leverage powerful sources of experiential and academic knowledge: close-to-practice representations of behaviour integrated with the pure and well-established analytical tool of metaphor Limitations and future research The three metaphors dominating our field data do not exist in isolation. Of course it is kind of theatre. I have got nothing personal against that man. I actually think he is a really nice guy. It is just about the money. That moment, I am just furious in my role as an account manager. Look, the game is still reality for me, because we are talking about big figures. But with games, if you play them, you have to play them well and you have to be convincing. It is hard to fake emotions in my business. When I am mad at you, I am mad at you as a business partner … It is a game in which I have two roles: one at home, the quiet guy; and [two] over here, when I need to get the money, and then I am mad as a tool to achieve my targets. (Barry) This quote hints at the idea that different types of behaviours may co-evolve in relationships and that behavioural sequences may have to be interpreted through various metaphorical lenses. Adopting process-oriented perspectives on each of the three metaphors, taking into account how they co-evolve among actors within and across organisations Moreover, we suggest that further attention is warranted to the fact that the three metaphors presented in this article appear to be so dominant in our international collection of field studies. This is important, for example, because the dominance of any metaphor may entail certain threats and disadvantages Latusek and Vlaar 17 cultures tend to share a common figurative language. In this regard, we were very surprised that actors speaking different languages painted very similar pictures with their words, which seems to confirm the emergence of a cosmopolitan managerial culture Likewise, future research on the use of metaphor as an analytical tool should further recognise that metaphors only illuminate certain aspects of phenomena while they hide others. When focusing on fighting, for instance, we may overlook that certain aspects of management have a conciliatory, communicative and consensual nature. Thus, metaphors are never complete and they should not be taken too literally Finally, our findings have important implications for educational policies. They show that 'focusing on the production of meanings and concepts used by social actors in real settings' (Gephart, 2004: 457) is likely to be instrumental in generating important insights into 'how meanings and their implications are shaped by or contingent upon contextual forces' (Bamberger, 2008: 843). Everyday managerial experiences may be translated into the figurative and imaginative language of metaphor to help practitioners embrace the paradoxes and ambiguities pervading organisational life Funding This research received a grant funded by Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education (N N115 289439 "Trust and uncertainty management in interorganizational collaboration"). Notes 1. Such studies have gradually become well established in, for example, the strategy-as-practice literature at SAGE Publications on September 22, 2015 mlq.sagepub.com Downloaded from 18 Management Learning in these studies, the researchers have engaged in direct interaction with practitioners so as to build collaborative and learning relationships References