Reflection five: Critical Theory and Hegemony Simultaneous oppression and exploitation as a reality in organizational group membership.

David Owens-Hill Queens University of Charlotte

Introduction We are members of hundreds of organizational groups of all shapes and sizes. Some explicit (like our workplaces and families), some informal (our various groups of friends), and other implied (socioeconomic groups). Each comes with its own form of hegemony and within each we are oppressed and exploited. In many cases we are complicit with the oppression or exploitation, and in others the oppression is a nondefining factor in our actions. With a critical lens, we can evaluate these situations and understand the harm in always falling in like with the dominant narrative. Hegemony in the workplace I am a project manager at Queens University of Charlotte. More specifically, I manage print projects within the creative services team of graphic designers. I answer to the Director of Creative Services who answers to the Vice President of Marketing and Community Relations. In some ways, I am in control of the hegemonic attitude of our university. Branding falls into my dominion, and I work to encourage a consensus with every department that printed materials look like Queens, though I understand a key issue with hegemony to be whether or not an enforcer of hegemony has any agency within it. I was issued brand guidelines, and I enforce them. Though I help set the tone of the universitys look, I am not able to refine it in ways that I think to be valuable. In other ways I am oppressed. I am delegated which projects to manage both by my superiors and by the very nature of the workflow that I helped establish. I am not in a position to decline projects, regardless of the issues with any particular case. There are some projects that require management that are handled on a higher hierarchical plane. I have very little involvement with the editorial management of Queens Magazine, though

it is officially one of my teams projects. Projects with which my involvement is limited, like the magazine, tend to be the ones that either succeed in grand fashion, or fail with a resounding thud. It is in this type of project that I could show a high degree of ability or could show a fundamental lack of experience in managing this model of project. Either way, the lesson learned is valuable, and (in this case) unattainable. Exploitation in friend groups The word exploitation has such negative connotation, its difficult to unwind ones brain from this term as a pejorative verb. But we are all exploited (and often simultaneously oppressed) in our friend groups. Even defining friend groups in preparation for this paper was difficult. In how many different circles do we belong? How many overlap? I decided to concentrate on a core group of friends for this section of this paper. Names were purposefully omitted. I fall into a couple of key stereotypes within my specific, narrowly defined group of friends: I am the youngest, am perpetually single, arguably the smartest, and the one best able to keep confidential information. Because of this, my friends have come to rely on me as their confidant on the kids, their wing-man, the one who can help answer complicated questions, and the one most likely to keep their secrets without launching into a lecture on ethics. Each of these is a form of exploitation within these narrowly define social categories. Critically, it makes sense to say that I am more than the sum of the parts of these particular stereotypes. In at least one case, I am both exploited and oppressed by the same friends in regards to the same stereotypical category. As the only single member of this group composed of three other couples, I am often a vicarious conduit for relationship chatits not uncommon for one of my friends to point out

someone who is good looking and explain why that particular person is of interest to them. By living vicariously through my status as single person, they are exploiting my position. Simultaneously, because my friends are primarily couples, I am often surrounded by them we go out (physicallythere are a lot of them, only one of me.) Because I travel with this entourage, my status as single person is reified when other single people are intimidated to approach because of the number of people around me. My friends status as coupled is oppressing my agency within singularity in this particular instance. Rooted in existing ideology Its easy to see that my ideologies are rooted in the western, white, middle class privilege though in which it was written. The two examples above show a tremendous amount of moment-in-time thinking, and very little micro-ideological study. I see when reading the statements above that my friendships are based on a traditional model of faceto-face communication and group dynamics, and that my work life is fundamentally rooted in Human Resources management theory. Specific to the example of my friends, I am completely complicit in my oppression. Especially since the sole example presented relates expressly to my ability to obtain a matesomething unrelated to this particular groups dynamic. Creating a more democratic organization at Queens My oppression at Queens is primary a function of my employment status. I have worked at the school for a mere two yearsfar from receiving the ceremonial 25-year chair that several of my coworkers have in their offices. But a large amount of the oppression is a function of old-thinking at the organizational level. My suggestions to

create an organizational democracy in this example would be to further flatten the hierarchy between those employed on my hierarchical plane and the President as well as her Vice Presidents. If the flattening of the hierarchy proved impossible, I am fortunate to work in an environment where I can stand up and say things like Hey! Pay attention to me! We should try it this way! Functionally, our dominant narrative is one which I can comfortably reinforce. Were I employed in a bank, airline or fast food restaurant at this point in history, I believe my response would be very different. In time of economic hardship, those who work in industries most affected tend to bond over the ill-effects of the depletion of resources. I saw this first hand when working in the nonprofit sector shortly before the economic downturn of 2008. Our dominant narrative on all fiscal matters was that things were fine, and that we were unaffectedits best not to worry yourself with the fiscal operations of the organization. By reading our disclosed financial statements carefully and reviewing annual grant reports for the region and the organization specifically I challenged this narrative and made the decision to leave shortly before the organization was rocked by tremendous financial loss. Conclusion I have concluded, and debated on whether or not to write, that I am fairly comfortable with my position within my current narratives and ideologies. It is in this statement that I uncover the potential for future critical study, and thus I decided to include it. It was not until I wrote the above that I realized an individual can be content, and still require further critical approach. The question should always be why does it have to be this way, and I believed that I was asking this question regularly. I realize

now, in part because of the oppression that I face and the exploitation in which I am complicit, that Im not asking this question regularly, and that I must apply a critical lens more carefully to determine the answer.