v i a Journal of Management 19117. Vol. 13, No I.

41 54
,

Howard S. Schwartz
Oakland University

of narcissism and his theory of the "ego ideal" (19211 1955, 191411957) Klein's (1948) theory

d against." Standing Conference on Organizational Symbolism, University of Quebec at Mon?treal, June 25-27. 1986. The author wish

Copyright 1987 by the Southern Management Association 0149-2063/87/S2.00. 41

one's specific identity. To cause a person to collapse into a symbol one has projected fo

e after I am not. In the end, by virtue of the laws of bi?ology if by nothing else, I get rubb

ORGANIZATIONAL TOTALITARIANISM

43

us the image of a perfect "good world that will be our world when the bad stuff is gotte
-

onsequence is that we never get to be the ego ideal. The ego ideal represents us as we believe we would be if w

he idea of the organization serving the

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, VOL. 13, NO. I, 1957

The Ego Ideal and the Organization Ideal

o ideal assumes that the others have also redefined themselves as the organization and t y a matter of the fulfillment of mutual personal principle but the direct object of moral sanction-the threat of th enacted world, but always stands aside from my enactments and says of them, that is not me, that is not me." D

ORGANIZATIONAL TOTALITARIANISM

45

for more. His ambitions lay within the company hierarchy and his conscious concerns we

she'll say, "Why not?" Then 1 think to myself, "Why not? It's been good to me." (p. 185)

the company man was put back in place. "[Fords has been good to me," replaced and co icipant undertakes to "want" to do what the organization needs doing. Thus, the polarit nd direct, in which people want to do what needs to be done, in which every member is after all, in one form or another, at the heart of many normative theories of organization, elf-actualization means: "Be healthy and then you may trust your impulses, (p. 179) these
-

on generally, or at least to the extent that people put their faith in it. If we have found th Hierarchy and Ontological Differentiation

e attributed to the enemy. Under the circumstances, a quite satisfying degree of localized and therefore the need to believe that the orga?nization is the organization ideal. But th

ORGANIZATIONAL TOTALITARIANISM

47

ntegrated into the organization. This shame is experienced by contrast to others who he Nazi party, for example, con?tained ideological fanatics at all levels of the state ap eat chain of Being." It represents, in a word, a structured adaptation to the idea that rd to the organization.' The problem is that if I am going to hold the belief that progress

'Note the connection between this depth dimension and Schein's 1980) concept of organizational central?ity.
-

For a further discussion of the psychodynamics of hierarchy, see Schwartz (in press). JOU RNA L OF MANAGEMENT. VOL. t3, NO 1, 1987

ac?quiescing to the narcissism of some specific others as one's own moral obliga?tion,

But whereas the self-enhancing bias of the leader arises naturally and almost automatic

ORGANIZATIONAL TOTALITARIANISM

49

been drawn in terms of Argyris and Schon's (1974) distinction between es?poused theori es cannot be relied upon as grounds for moral judg?ment. and because actions which turn out later to be devia onality. Although it may come naturally to him or her, it must seem to others, if they understand it at all, as some ed to maintain one's own meaning structure. There is something not only unnatural but p

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, VOL. l3, NO. 1, 1987

f at any time any one of them said, as each of them somehow knows, "this is a bunch of the rest of the corporation, to help them in designing a compensation system for the new was the way they responded when it appeared that their leader was going to ask them a over their heads. Behind a certain bluster in their facade, I thought I could detect shamef ant, which would employ a new culture, based upon a team concept. So, naturally, a team

ORGANIZATIONAL TOTALITA RI AN ISM

51

re doing this, because they were supposed to be the "design team" and to fit D's "reco ast track, by which they were enticed, must have been felt as shameful in the fantasy the

nity of his supervisor and tell him and others how important the super?visor and the dep

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, VOL. 13. NO. 1, 1987

from reality must have serious consequences for the organization's effectiveness. nsciousness, and becoming not a side?show that characterizes the dark side of organiza hat others are doing so as well) and in which all contributions within this context are adeq

ORGANIZATIONAL TOTALITARIANISM

53

They can deal with the problems of the indi?vidual only as an abstraction. But it is just th
References

Staw, B.M. (1980). Rationality and justification in organizational life. In B.M. Staw & L.L. Cum-

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, VOL. 13. NO. 1, 1987

SCHWARTZ
-

esearch in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 2). (pp. 45 80). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. orking. New York: Pantheon. The social psychology of organizing (2nd. ed.). Reading, Mass.: Addison- Wesley. ., Kulka, A.. Reed, L., Rest, S., & Rosenbaum. R.M. (1971). Perceiving the causes of success and failure. Morristown. N.1.: Genera

Schwartz is an Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior in the School of Business Administration at Oakland University.

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT. VOL. 13, NO. I, 1987