A Critical Realist Approach: A Model for
Comprehending Organizations
BRAD C. ANDERSON
The Goals of Our Instruction
The following is a summary of what you will
study in this chapter.
What exactly does "critical realism" mean?
The several tiers of social reality that critical
realism proposes, include the following:
The genuine sphere
The real domain in question
The empirical domain
How the concept of critical realism contributes
to our understanding of organizations
The connection between introspective realism
and strategic organizational thinking
In the 1990s, in response to an allegation of
widespread corruption within the ranks of law
enforcement officials, the New South Wales
Police Service in New South Wales, Australia,
went through a period of major reform. Even
though there were several changes in
leadership and operations, long-established
patterns of conduct maintained. For instance,
although in the past the military organization
relied on officer seniority as the primary factor
in determining promotions, they have now put
in place processes that favor merit as the
primary factor. Even a decade after the
implementation of the new promotion system,
top officers continued to be promoted ahead of
their junior colleagues regardless of merit. The
new system was not successful in altering the
behavior of the organization. [1] It is difficult to
put changes into effect. In point of fact, around
seventy percent of significant transformation
efforts are unsuccessful in achieving their
objectives. Why is it so difficult to make changes
to the way companies are run?
This chapter provides an answer to that issue by
outlining a theoretical framework that is
referred to as critical realism. A model of the
way in which organizations (and society in
general) function is referred to as critical
realism. There are several conceptual
frameworks that describe how social activity
systems function. After critical realism comes
positivism and post-structuralism, which are
both well-known schools of thought. Before
delving into the specifics of critical realism, this
article provides a cursory overview of positivism
and post-structuralism, both of which are now
enjoying considerable popularity.
The theory of positivism asserts that human
behavior is governed by fixed rules. We are able
to get an understanding of these rules and
construct ideas about the functioning of social
organizations by using the methodology of the
scientific method. When put into practice, these
ideas will make it possible for us to develop
systems that regulate the behavior of groups.
On the other hand, poststructuralism contends
that social reality is produced not via
unchangeable rules but rather through
discursive practices (that is, language). Take, for
instance, the term "teacher," which is one of
our examples. The term "teacher," on the other
hand, is meaningless in the absence of a
"student." A social connection with clearly
defined authority and obligations is implied by
the phrases "teacher" and "student," which are
often used interchangeably.
This textbook does not assert that critical
realism is correct while all other frameworks are
incorrect, despite the fact that it ignores
positivism, poststructuralism, and all of the
other frameworks that are now in existence.
Instead, it places an emphasis on critical realism
due to the fact that this conceptual framework
assists us in comprehending the factors that
govern an organization. As wisdom is action-
oriented, critical realism helps us develop
organizational action.
Important Takeaways
The theory of critical realism is a paradigm that
explains how social systems function.
The model of social systems known as critical
realism is only one of several.
This work has an emphasis on critical realism
due to the usefulness of that approach in
comprehending the dynamics that regulate
organizational activity.
Then, Can You Please Explain Critical Realism
to Me?
First things first, let's make a clear distinction
between the natural world and the social world.
The natural world encompasses everything that
can be found in the cosmos, from galaxies and
planets to the force of gravity and individual
atoms. The universe of human activity is known
as the social world, and it is comprised of a
variety of things, including pupils, instructors,
money, and national boundaries. One of the
most significant distinctions between the two is
that the social world cannot exist apart from
the actions of humans. If every single person on
Earth were to disappear tomorrow, the stars
and planets would still be there, but there
would be no schools or money.
You may believe that altering the social
environment would be simple given that human
activity is responsible for the creation of things
like classrooms and pupils, but this is not the
case. Since humans were responsible for
establishing the roles of instructors and
students, and because you are also a human,
altering the roles of teachers and students
ought should be a straightforward task for you
to do. In spite of this, these roles are difficult to
alter. These positions were first formed by
humans, but once they were established, some
force ensured that they would not be altered.
People certainly have the ability to recast these
positions, but doing so on a widespread scale
would be incredibly challenging.
In addition, a good many of you probably
haven't given much consideration to the socially
constructed character of things like the
dynamics between teachers and students. You
have probably never asked yourself why the
instructor has the authority to give you
homework that are so difficult to complete that
you will lose sleep over them. When the
instructor asks you to write a report, however,
you give up your nights and weekends to
complete the assignment. It's likely that you've
never given any thought to the reason why
putting up your hand rather than, example,
rapping your knuckles on the desk is the
traditional technique to draw the attention of
the instructor. But, the instructor will call on
you to answer a question if you raise your hand,
but if you rap your knuckles on the desk, they
will urge you to cease being disruptive. Even
when we are not conscious of the social
structures that form human activity, these
structures nonetheless have the capacity to
either facilitate or limit the activities that we are
capable of doing. Even if we are unaware of
their existence or the nature of these
structures, we are nevertheless subject to their
influence.
In addition, the dynamics of the relationships
between instructors and pupils were already
established long before you entered your first
school. They are likely to remain long after you
have finished participating in a lesson for the
last time. So, despite the fact that these social
structures only exist in the minds of individuals,
they possess a kind of permanence that is
independent of any one particular person.
Once these social structures have been
established, in general, they are resistant to
alter. They have the ability to either free or
restrict your behaviors regardless of whether or
not you are consciously aware of their
presence, and they are capable of having a
semi-permanent effect on your behavior. [2]
Not bad for things that were only products of
our imagination.
Several levels of the social reality
Roy Bhaskar established the philosophy of
critical realism in order to provide an
explanation for the findings that were discussed
in the preceding section. He identified the three
distinct layers that make up social reality. [3]
The genuine sphere
The real domain in question
The empirical domain
The link that exists between these three levels
is shown in the accompanying picture, and the
ensuing sections then go on to discuss each of
these layers in further depth. In a nutshell, the
actual domain is made up of social structures
and generating processes, both of which will be
covered in more detail in the next sentence.
Within a social situation, these structures
provide resources and power to a variety of
individuals, which, in turn, permits or restricts
the activities those individuals are able to
perform. In the real domain, these actions (or
absence of actions) cause events (or non-
events). People have a tendency to conduct acts
that either modify the structures that already
exist in the actual realm or that replicate those
structures. There are instances when something
takes place and no one is around to see it. If, on
the other hand, an event is noticed, then that
observation or experience takes place in the
empirical domain. Let's go further into the
specifics of each of these levels and develop
them further.