LECCIONES Y RECOMENDACIONES :

Drawing upon Foucault’s ideas on power, feminist poststructuralism, textual deconstructionism, and Freud’s and Lacan’s psychoanalysis, postcolonial theory is also criticized for being too elastic. Besides, some of the theories it borrows from, for example poststructuralism, are considered ‘politically regressive’ by many, while others, such as Freud’s psychoanalysis, are still combating charges of ‘methodological debility’ (Moore- Gilbert et al, 1997:60). Postcolonialists, such as Spivak (1988) reply to this by pointing out that colonialism affected different people in different ways and hence, there can be no one way o f analyzing their experiences. Besides, this ‘clash of epistemes’ or comparative methodologies make postcolonial theory well rounded and provides conditions for theoretical innovation (Bhabha, 1994; Ashcroft et al, 1989). The language of postcolonialism is also accused for being ‘lucid,’ ‘complex,’ and interspersed with ‘inflationary rhetoric’ (Ketu Katrak, in Moore-Gilbert et al, 1997:61). Using Western tradition to understand Eastern problems is a ‘hybrid’ methodology, according to Ashcroft et al (1989:36), something the postcolonial theorist him/herself looks suspiciously at. Agreeing with Spivak and Bhabha, I too think that it is the fluid methodology o f postcolonial inquiry that has made the theory relevant in several fields of study, ranging from literature, to politics, to sociology and to management. My research too makes use o f these several methodological tools in order to study the values endorsed in the Pakistani MBA programmes, from the point of view of different stakeholders. Without so much methodological flexibility, I would have been compelled to limit my research to a few groups o f respondents, data sources or data collection methods. Even if such a methodology be considered ‘hybrid’ and not free of tensions, I have acknowledged

the limitations in such a methodology, while making use of its advantageous features (c.f. chapter 9).

Another point of criticism against the epistemology and methodologies of postcolonialism, particularly against the ‘Holy Trinity’ of Said-Spivak-Bhabha (Young,

195:163) and Fanon, is that they have spent major parts of their lives in the West and borrowed heavily from the European tradition (Dirlik, 1996). This makes many question their claim of speaking for the people they have not lived long enough with (Ashcroft et al, 1989:39). Postcolonial texts, observes Shohat (1996) have also remained dependent on the very structures they are interested in dismantling. The term postcolonial itself ‘linguistically reproduces, once again, the centrality of the colonial narrative’ (ibid: 328). I would reply to this by acknowledging that though these pioneers of postcolonial theory may have spent significant proportions of their lives in Western countries and even if their contributions reflect Western epistemes, they have at least laid the foundation for subsequent postcolonial researchers to develop the theory and improve upon its arguments. My research too, though in no way comparable to these celebrated authors’, makes a slight addition to postcolonial epistemology and methodology by utilizing texts from non-Western sources, for example, management texts and data from Pakistan and religious texts from Islam.

3.5.3 Critically examining the salient features of postcolonial theory

Individual features o f postcolonial theory have also been criticized by some. For example, Spivak has been called to account by Ashcroft et al (1989) for speaking for the subaltern

despite her fervent claims that the subaltern has no place to speak (Spivak, 1988), and for underlining the importance of Derrida’s work for understanding the native, despite pronouncing that only ‘the native can know the native’ (Moore-Gilbert et al, 1997). Spivak replies that Said’s work has given us a place to speak from (Spivak, 1996:200). Loomba, on the other hand points out, we first need to define ‘speak’ (1998). Though I do not agree with Spivak’s view that the postcolonial subject has no place to speak from, I value her comment on not ignoring the native. My research too is such an attempt. But instead of speaking for the postcolonial subjects, I have offered them (postcolonial management teachers, students and practitioners) an opportunity to speak of their views and opinions about their MBA programmes and/or with MBA students.

Bhabha’s (1994) concept of hybridity is also criticized by Dirlik (1996) for being vague and failing to distinguish between types of hybridity. Though Bhabha may not have given details o f hybridity, subsequent postcolonial researches, such as mentioned in this study (c.f. 3.6) and even my own, have problemetized the concept of hybridity and illuminated various aspects o f it.

The project of Minority Discourse is also taken by critics to mark not only the return of the native but also the return of Eurocentricism. The project of Minority Discourse is nothing less than a collaborative effort on the part of the marginalized to overthrow the canon and the state power that produced it, contend Moore-Gilbert et al (1997.49). Moore-Gilbert et al (1997) also detect such proletarian tendencies in Spivak’s concept of the subaltern and to a lesser extent in Fanon s writings. For them Fanon-Algeria and Said-Palestine associations as well as some postcolonists insistence on class reorients the

concept of class. JanMohamed and Lloyd’s (1997) response to this is that the project of Minority Discourse is only to recover lost cultures. My research too, even if it be called a part o f the Minority Discourse, is intended to recover the lost Islamic values in management education of Pakistan. It does not aim to devalue the management cannon, but suggests to the imperialist educator and the management subaltern to look critically and realistically at the established cannon to identify shortcomings in its knowledge.

Moore-Gilbert et al (1997) also question that though some postcolonial authors, such as Said (1993) and Dirlik (1996), distrust nationalism, why do others, such as Bhabha (1994), retain cultural difference. Loomba’s (1998:13) reply to that is why should there be a homogenization of a ‘white culture.’ I add, why shouldn’t there be an attempt to recover lost cultural values and why should such an attempt be seen in a nationalistic light? Thus my research is not a nationalistic project, but an attempt to salvage some of the Islamic values buried under the colonial project.

3.5.4 Can postcolonial theory be called a discourse?

Finally some critics of postcolonial theory, such as Dirlik (1996) and Moore-Gilbert et al (1997), often refer to it as a discourse. Ashcroft et al (1989) also call postcolonial theory a discourse or a conglomerate between several discourses grounded in a struggle for power.’ In my view, this discursive label is misapplied. Not only is the definition and methodology of postcolonial theory not fixed, unlike the case with discourses, but different authors have used it differently to air different ideas. It does not define any truths or any acceptable rules of speaking or writing but is itself fiercely against rigidity

o f metanarratives (see Gee, 1996, for explanation of discourse). Besides, though postcolonialism shares much with the discourse perspective, it must be remembered that what postcolonial authors discuss is not ‘postcolonial discourse,’ but rather a problematization of the colonial discourse. Moreover, the reference of Moore-Gilbert et al (1997:49) to the reading/writing practices of postcolonialists as the ‘Minority Discourse,’ is a term they have used to criticize what in their opinion is a dogmatic project o f overthrowing the European canon. Even if they consider this project as discursive, they do not refer to the entire postcolonial theory as a discourse. Instead they mostly use the word ‘theory’ to critique postcolonialism, as do other critics, such as Ashcroft et al. (1989) and Dirlik (1996).

Despite the criticism faced by postcolonial theory, Moore-Gilbert et al (1997:57) acknowledge that

postcolonialism has transformed university syllabuses, reconsidered and extended established canons, constructed an expanding material base of journals, conferences and academic networks, stimulated new areas of both academic and non-academic publishing and changed the way that a whole range of academic disciplines have traditionally been configured and studied.

Yet they do not forget to add that within Euro-American academy postcolonialism is still not recognized as an ‘important or even distinct mode of cultural analysis (ibid. 57). Even though, in a small way, I hope my research can contribute to the recognition of postcolonial theory as a distinct theoretical perspective.

3.6 Research using the postcolonial perspective

Before I describe my methodology in the next chapter, I would like to give the reader an insight into the kind of researches, including their methodological and philosophical approaches, which are being conducted using the postcolonial perspective. The postcolonial perspective is rather flexible in its methodological approach. Researches using postcolonial theory have employed a variety of qualitative techniques, ranging from interviews to textual analysis, to address their questions. At the same time, they often use the theory in conjunction with other notions that have informed the postcolonial theory. Presented below are some such examples.

A study in management education which I found strikingly similar to mine is that of Priyadharshini’s (2000). The author uses deconstructive ethnography to explore elements reminiscent o f the colonial era in the curricula and teaching methodology of two Indian MBA programmes. She brings out through the use of postcolonial, as well as the feminist and discourse perspectives, students’ fantasy of the MBA as a ticket to a life of modernity and material success, their disregard for the universal application of the Western management thought, as well as the tension some feel in working like a cog in the capitalistic machinery. Works of Foucault, Said, Spivak, and Bhabha form the cornerstone of Priyadharshini’s thesis. Parameswaran (1999) has also used an ethnographic approach, along with interviews and observations, in her postcolonial study to examine the reception of imported popular novels among urban Indian women.

Moulette s (2003) study contests the idea of fixed identities. He maintains that colonialism is not limited to specific time and place, but can be related to all kinds of power relationships, for example, to cross-cultural encounter. With the help of in-depth interviews, based on the conversation technique and observation of three meetings in three companies, as well as Glaser and Strauss’s grounded theory, the author studied adaptation attitudes of people in foreign countries. Some respondents gave accounts of successful adaptation, while others spoke of divided selves and confessed a change in their self-images as a result of cross-cultural interaction. Thus the researcher demonstrates that identity is not a fixed and finished product. Bradley and Hebson’s (1999) study of class categorization behaviour of non-native English residents of Bristol, also based on open-ended interviews and Hall’s and Bhabha’s ideas on identity and class hybridity, showed similar results.

In the field of marketing, Thompson and Tambyah (1999) use textual analysis of phenomenologically oriented interviews, employing the postcolonial and poststructural perspectives, to study the role of marketing in promoting modern ideas o f consumerism. Armond (2001) employs a critical hermeneutical analysis from a postcolonial vein, to see how ‘international accounting’ is ‘constructed’ and to identify some forces shaping this construction. A paper by Caldas and Alcadipani (2003) unveils the recolonization of Brazil after World War II. Using historical documents, the authors describe how national development, conceived of as a process of modernization, extended an open invitation to multinationals, imported managerial technology from America, and negotiated between the Ministry of Education and USAID to contribute to the growing influence of America in Brazil.

Westwood and Kirkbride’s (1998) study of a Hong Kong company documents how the American culture, with all it elements familiar and non-familiar to local people, is being brought to the company through a variety of activities. Using observation and a simple textual analysis of the company’s mission statement and logo and its promotion of certain American texts, and even the architecture of buildings - elements heavily borrowed from the American style - the authors raise questions about the value of successfully transplanting Western notions into an Asian company’s culture.

My research explores the work values endorsed in the MBA curricula of two business schools in Pakistan. Collecting data from various stakeholders in management education (students and teachers in business schools and managers in industry) through open-ended interviews, supplemented with observation studies and schools’ official publications, I have tried to shed light on how far these values are in harmony with Islam and/or

reflective of other main discourses in MBA education of today - technicist-managerialist and Westernization/colonialism. I have used the postcolonial perspective to conduct this study not only because I am interested in inquiring into the incidence of

Westernization/colonialism in postcolonial Pakistani MBA education, but also because certain characteristic features of technicist-managerialist thinking, such as

marginalization of certain ideas and values, rationalistic constructs o f progress and modernity (as I mentioned in my discussions above) are also challenged by postcolonial authors. Thus the postcolonial perspective offers a suitable lens to critique Pakistani MBA education of today.

3.7 Chapter Summary

In this chapter I described my theoretical perspective of study, along with its critiques and its relevance to my research. Though I had been interested in the theory on account o f its addressing the Westernization/colonization discourse in management education and its promise to shed light on the values of Islam lost in colonial educational agenda, I also found it to critique the technicist-managerialist discourse I discussed in chapter 2. 1 have thus chosen it as my theoretical perspective for this research. In this chapter I have noted how the theory’s unique characteristics as well as points in common with other

perspectives have helped me frame my research questions, develop my analysis and select my research methods. For example, I mentioned how the unique features o f the

postcolonial theory, such as that of the subaltern, mimicry, hybridity, consent, and Minority Discourse relate to specific elements in my research topic and how I have used them to research whether Islamic values are being othered and whether the subaltern is being reproduced in the MBA curricula by mimicking the curricula o f foreign countries; in the spirit of the Minority Discourse, I have pointed out Islamic values lost in

socialization in imported curricula; regarding issues of identity, I have identified any instances o f hybridity and mimicry in the curricula and the values of the Pakistani MBA education o f today.

Regarding features of postcolonial theory in common with discourse, feminist, Marxist, postmodernist and poststructuralist perspectives I found it to challenge the authority of discourses, question marginalization of other cultures ethical and social values, contest capitalistic ideas of (career) development, confront modernity s narrative of progress, and

challenge the dominance of the colonial constructs in the spirit of each of these perspectives respectively. Thus in my data collection, I questioned respondents about their ideas o f progress, their comments on the case study schools’ curricula content, development and teaching and some of the values they believed were being endorsed in MBA programmes. In my analysis I identified any discourses and ideologies, pointed out issues o f marginalization of ethical and emotional concepts and values in MBA curricula, and critically looked at the narratives of progress and development, domination and subordination that respondents mentioned in their interviews or I found in my observation studies or readings of schools’ official publications.

In addition to data collection and analysis, I also used the postcolonial theory to select my data collection and analytical methods. In order to give voice to the postcolonial subjects’ views and feelings, I allowed respondents, through open-ended interviews, to comment freely on their experiences and opinions of MBA degree programmes and MBA graduates. To supplement interview findings, I conducted observation studies and read official publications of schools. But even these were taken back to the respondents to ask for their views on the relevant pieces of information I gathered from these sources. Use of multiple methods therefore helped to reduce any personal bias in the collection of data. To prevent preconceived notions from colouring my understanding of data, I used an analytical procedure which allowed for emergence of my interpretation without any predefined reference points or hypotheses. A detailed account o f all these methods is given in chapter 5.

In the next chapter I would like to give a brief contextual account of Pakistan and my respondents before moving on to describe my research methodology and data findings. By providing this context I expect to present my findings more realistically.