Towards a cultural psychology of metaphor a holistic development study of metaphor use in an institutional context

The Authors 2015 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1354067X15606376 cap.sagepub.com Towards a cultural psychology of metaphor: A holistic-devel

! The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1354067X15606376

cap.sagepub.com

Towards a cultural

psychology of metaphor:

A holistic-development

study of metaphor use in

an institutional context

Thomas Sønderby Christensen and Brady Wagoner

Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark

Abstract

This article asks the question how do we interpret the role of metaphors in human life, from the perspective of cultural psychology Taking inspiration from two articles by Carlos Cornejo, which outline a holistical-developmental theory of metaphor in con-trast to the dominant cognitive-linguistic paradigm, we provide a case study of meta-phor use in relation to organisation change The case is part of a larger study of structural changes enforced within the Danish religious organisation, Indre Mission Case extracts from two different interviews with the same employee, in which the same metaphor is used with different meaning, are analysed in relation to context and development (on both micro- and ontogenetic levels) This analysis leads to the con-clusion that a metaphor is understood through the particular complex situation in which

it is used In other words, rather than a conceptual interaction, this article proposes seeing metaphor use as a situated act of imagination in which the person experiences certain properties of the metaphor

Keywords

Metaphor, holistic-developmental approach, organizational change, imagination, microgenetic analysis

How can we understand the role of metaphors in human life? In psychology this question has typically been answered with different kinds of interaction between relatively stable concepts in the mind We draw on two key articles about metaphor

Corresponding author:

Brady Wagoner, Aalborg University, Kroghstraede 3, Aalborg 9220, Denmark.

Email: wagoner@hum.aau.dk

by Cornejo (2007; Cornejo, Olivares, & Rojas, 2013), to argue that in order to understand metaphor use, we must consider the developmental nature of human life, in which persons, environments and meanings of metaphors are constantly feeding into one another, transforming their relations In this paper, we aim to (1) further advance this framework with recent theories in developmental cultural psychology and (2) provide a longitudinal single case study, dealing with employ-ees’ reactions to organizational changes, to develop a methodology for exploring metaphorical expressions in their contextualised use This study thus provides both theoretically and methodologically challenges to existing approaches to metaphor: namely, to include an understanding of the situation in which the metaphor is used and to focus on the experience of the person as he or she imagines the metaphor

Two approaches to metaphor

Metaphor use has long been a subject of great interest in psychology as well as other social sciences (see e.g Ortony, 1993), but it has been approached in considerably different ways Cornejo (2007) identifies two paradigms of studying metaphors: the linguistic and the holistic-developmental The cognitive-linguistic is characterised by a focus on how concepts interact in cognition, making metaphors primarily a matter of thinking (Ko¨vecses, 2005, p 8) By contrast, the holistic-developmental approach is concerned with the phenomenological experi-ence of the situation where the metaphor is used (Cornejo et al., 2013)

A central work in the cognitive-linguistic approach to metaphors is that of Lakoff and Johnson (1980), whose book Metaphors we live by is widely cited They attempt to move away from understanding metaphors as merely linguistic expressions, claiming instead that metaphors structure thoughts through systematic metaphorical conceptualisations The idea is that an abstract target phenomenon such as time, love or happiness is conceptualised in terms of a more physically graspable source domain such as a container, a journey or a physical direction Through the familiar bodily experience of the source domain, certain aspects of the target domain are highlighted, as they correspond to each other through a mapping

of aspects from source to target One famous example from the authors is that of ARGUMENT IS WAR They argue that certain aspects of the domain of war are conceptually mapped on the domain of argument This is apparent in expressions such as to defend one’s position, be on target or win the argument (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980, p 4) Through the structuring function of metaphorical concepts, metaphors often become an unnoticed part of language However, it is possible to expand the metaphors through inferences where more aspects of the source domain are mapped on the target (Lakoff, 1993)

Cornejo and others have criticised the cognitive-linguistic view in its understand-ing of metaphors as beunderstand-ing basically conceptual While acknowledgunderstand-ing the attempt

to include bodily experiences into the realm of cognitive psychology, he also argues that it is an unnecessary and imprecise abstraction to talk of metaphors in terms of concepts He uses the example of the metaphorical expression ‘can’t see the forest

for the trees’, which through the theory of conceptual metaphors will become TO KNOW IS TO SEE This, he argues, does not capture the rich meaning of the metaphor Instead, he proposes a pragmatic view on metaphor where metaphors are seen as a type of language use, which insinuates rather than explains:

When considered as a language use phenomenon, metaphor is not a mapping Mappings suppose static cartographies to be related But, psychologically interpreted, metaphor is a contextualized, ongoing process of meaning development that has reality in the phenomenological experience of the person (Cornejo, 2007, p 484)

In short, the cognitive-linguistic approach implies a rather mechanistic view of meta-phors as consisting of semantic units interacting in mind and language as a system that can be described in logical terms On the contrary, a psychological interpretation

is concerned with the experience of the person as he or she intentionally uses a metaphor Therefore, for the psychologist, metaphors ‘should be studied in real human beings’ and include tensions between the said and the unsaid, as opposed

to in an abstract virtual place called ‘mind’ (Cornejo et al., 2013, p 487)

Cornejo has picked up the distinction between logical and psychological inter-pretations of metaphors from German psychologist Heinz Werner (1919), who was one of the core developmentalists of the 20th century (see Valsiner, 2005; Wagoner, 2013) Werner’s holistic-developmental approach shifts the emphasis from the semantic to the expressive or ‘physiognomic’ dimensions of metaphor use Physiognomic was Werner’s term to describe the expressive and dynamic qualities

of things, which were left unaccounted for from a description of shape and form (Wagoner, 2015) Like the perception of facial expression, physiognomic qualities are perceived at a preverbal level and thus go beyond the use of objective descrip-tion Werner extended the idea to language comprehension, making the under-standing of metaphor perceptual matter rather than conceptual (Werner, 1927/ 1978) One example is that of a ‘galloping cancer’ which, it is argued, is not a case of conceptual interaction between the domain of horseback riding and the domain of severe illness, but rather a perception of the bodily experience of some-thing becoming increasingly out of hand (Cornejo et al., 2013, p 500)

The present study aims to address the glaring gaps in the literature on metaphor use as identified by Cornejo and others, thus contributing to a truly psychological interpretation of metaphors, one that includes both the personal experience and the sociocultural context of the metaphor user In line with the analytic focus of cultural psychology, this study implies that the function of the use of a metaphor cannot be understood from analysing just the inner world of the person or just his sociocultural environment, but always the relation of the two at the given time for a specific purpose Moreover, we also want to highlight that the use of metaphors is

an imaginative process More than just filling the gaps of the unknown, imagination

is an expansive process in which a person’s experience is interrupted by something that is away from the here and now on the three scales of temporality, general-ization and fiction (Zittoun & Gillespie, 2015) From this perspective, imagination

creates a new or developed meaning when returning to the concrete situation in which it occurs (Zittoun & Cerchia, 2013; Zittoun & De Saint-Laurent, 2014)

In what follows we will provide a concrete contextualised case to further the holistic, developmental and cultural approach to metaphor

Making meaning of metaphors in organisational change

In order to study metaphor use, we have chosen two specific examples from a broader study on employees’ reactions to structural changes at work These exam-ples will be analysed on several parameters taken from the theoretical background outlined above and will help shed light on metaphor use from a psychological perspective The examples we will focus on are taken from interviews done on two different occasions with the same person, who we will call Luke In these excerpts, he uses the same metaphor, which nonetheless takes on a completely different meaning in each occasion However, to understand the analysis, we will begin by presenting further background information on the social setting of the organisation and the changes they are undergoing at the time of the interviews The study was designed as a longitudinal case study of the Danish religious organisation, Indre Mission (IM), with a mix of different methods of data collec-tion, over 15 months before and after the implementation of a new organisational structure The main data sources are semi-structured interviews with four team members on three different occasions.1 Additionally, the first author observed team meetings, looked through the recent archives of IM’s weekly magazine and conducted a questionnaire survey among employees on the perception of the changes early in the process

IM regards itself as a conservative movement within the Danish evangelical-Lutheran national church The core of the organisation is the 331 local commu-nities of varying size spread around the country2 where members engage in Christian activities such as Bible studies, praying and worshipping as a supplement

to services in the church In addition, IM has over 400 children’s clubs or other communities specifically for children or young people plus a range of national activities and conferences IM employs 91 people mainly concerned with assisting the communities or working in specific projects such as language schools for asylum seekers

In 2013, the central board and the general secretary decided to implement a new organisational structure, which is depicted in Figure 1 In the process, the employ-ees were informed and asked about changes, but it was principally the management that made the decisions We have adopted the terminology used in IM of the old structure and the new structure The circle at the top is the main board, whose position as the highest authority remains unchanged The circles at the bottom are the different regular employees who, up to this point, have worked relatively inde-pendently in smaller areas Widely regarded as the biggest change, these employees will in the new structure be organised in five regional teams (represented as the rectangle) in order to work together on assisting the whole region In the old

structure, the employees working with the main communities, often referred to as missionaries, answered to the general secretary and vice general secretary (circle just below and to the left of the Board) as their formal leader with the regional secretary (orange circle) as more of an inspirational leader in the daily work The employees who worked with more specific groups, such as young people, had a national leader specifically working with this area (circle below the Board to the right) With the introduction of regional teams, this role is reduced to an inspira-tional leadership role, while the new position as regional team leader takes over the formal leadership This role is circle above the bottom circles in the scheme During the process of restructuring, it was announced that the three regional secretaries would fill three of the five new positions as team leaders The four interview participants are three members of the same team and their team leader

In January 2014, a few weeks after the implementation of the new structure, the first author sent out a questionnaire to the employees and got 49 responses One of the questions was ‘which of the changes in the new structure will in your eyes have the biggest consequences?’3 As mentioned, most of the answers were concerned with different aspects of the new team structure, including team work, the team leader and the new regional focus Interestingly, 16 of the 49 answers are mainly negative or concerned, while only 7 answers show a positive attitude on this ques-tion The rest were either short and formal or nuanced This indicates that the process is complicated and that the changes have met a certain amount of opposi-tion among employees This impression is backed in the interviews in December

2013 and May 2014 when talking about the general attitude among colleagues

Figure 1 Structural change in IM, January 2014

In the first interviews, the focus was not explicitly on metaphors, but we noticed

a wide variety of more or less elaborate metaphors and images in the interviews and during observations from domains like sports, eyesight, vegetation and sailing The variety of metaphor discovered in this research could be grouped in a number of ways – for example, structural metaphors (e.g containers, buildings or frames) versus processual metaphors (e.g journeys or phases) A study of this distinction could be interesting from the perspective of organisational psychology However, for the present purpose, we consider it more useful to work with an in-depth analysis of concrete comparable cases of metaphor use

Microanalysis: Throwing balls in the air

On this background, we will turn to a microgenetic analysis (Wagoner, 2009) of the two sequences where Luke uses the metaphor that balls have been thrown in the air These are the only two instances across the data set where this metaphor is used The focused case study is conceptualised within the individual–socioecologi-cal reference frame (Valsiner, 2014) This reference frame is a cultural psychologiindividual–socioecologi-cal alternative to the two classical frames, the intra-individual (studying phenomena within a person) and the inter-individual (where persons or groups are compared) Both frames lack the cultural and contextual aspect of human life, which is central

to the individual–socioecological frame It has four main aspects: the person (or system) relating to the world; the world relating to the person; the person’s attitude

or intention towards this relation and finally the attitude or intention towards the relation from significant others or institutions (pp 10–12)

For the analysis to fit within this frame, we have chosen to include a descrip-tion of the context of the interview and the context of the quote within the interview This is also a way of strengthening the quality of the analysis in what Gaskell and Bauer (2000) call ‘thick description’ of the data, which is considered

a marker of both confidence and relevance Moreover a dialogical analysis of the institutional voices implicit in the interview (Hermans, 2001; Wertsch, 1993) provides a deeper understanding of the situation of the metaphor use, including institutional processes The power of a microgenetic analysis, comparing two instances from the same person on two different occasions, is to be able to study ontogenetic change contextualised within comparable social frames At the same time, an analysis like this avoids the often-committed ergodicity error, where differences between individuals at one point of time are mistakenly treated like development over time within an individual (Molenaar, Huizinga, & Nesselroade, 2003)

In order to make the analyses of the two excerpts comparable, we will answer the following questions:

1 What is the organisational context of the interview?

2 What is the practical and relational context of the interview?

3 What is the context of the quote within the interview?

4 What is the metaphorical expression and is it linked to other images?

5 Which aspects of the metaphor are highlighted?

6 What is the temporal orientation of the metaphor use?

7 How is the user’s voice and intonation in the sequence?

8 Is there development within the sequence?

9 Is there an implicit dialogue in the sequence?

After each extract is analysed individually through these questions, we will weave together the analyses and discuss the results with the existing perspectives presented above

December 2013: Looking with fresh eyes

Before presenting the first passage, we will answer the first three questions to give

an idea of the situation, in which the sequence takes place

1 The interview takes place a few weeks before the official instalment of the new structure a period of time described by many in the organisation, including Luke, as a waiting period or a vacuum In the interview in May, Luke described this period as strange because for a few months everybody knew more or less what was going to happen, but they had to wait for the management and administration to become ready Luke describes mixed reactions among his colleagues with quite some scepticism towards the decisions and the manage-ment, something that he senses has surprised the leaders In this sequence as well

as a few others in the interview, it becomes evident that he also is quite sceptical particularly of the process around the hiring of the regional leaders, where three were transferred from positions as regional secretaries, while one through an open competition was promoted from his current position as a regular employee

2 The interview takes place during working hours in the meeting room in the building where he also shares an office with some of his future team members The room is quiet and undisturbed The relation is positive, even though we have not met before The first author’s personal engagement with IM elsewhere

in the country might be a confidence-inspiring factor, as IM is sometimes repre-sented in a negative way in the general public

3 The question, to which the passage is Luke’s full reply, is a follow-up to the question ‘Would you call this a big change?’ where Luke answered no, except from the fact that eight people were fired, and the change of personnel responsibility to the regional leader Before this, he has stated that he is anxious about the team and the new team leader, whom he has not worked with before Later in the interview, he mentions the process of hiring the team leaders again as an unfortunate process At this point, meta-phor use was not the topic of interest and thus it was not specifically prompted

Interviewer: Could you have wanted even bigger changes?

Luke: [laughing] Ehm, that depends on which level you’re kind of looking on I actually think that, how to put it, the structural changes that has been made by going over to a regional way of thinking and a bigger team focus is actually a big change and I didn’t really necessarily see the need for much bigger changes in the purely structural, the way of thinking us employees, I actually think the management has hit something really good I think that I could want bigger changes, as I just mentioned, in the hiring of the regional leaders, ehm, and I don’t say that to, to question the competence of the people who happen to be hired, but more so because

I think, ehm, that what is dangerous is that now is the opportunity to throw up all the

opportunity to kind of say ‘okay, we’re here now, how is it then that we want to think Indre Mission moving forward?’ Ehm, and I kind of fear that this opportunity isn’t seized as well as it could have been, given that internal people were hired Ehm,

so, so I actually think that the structures and the changes, I actually think they are good and big enough and it is a big step and I don’t think you could have done much more without completely losing, ehm, the employees, ehm, and perhaps also the support base, if the changes had been much bigger, but the fact that you choose not to make bigger changes when it comes to the leaders, that, that annoys me a bit, because I think it could have been exciting with, well two or three new faces coming in and saying ‘So!’’ Well, came in with fresh eyes and kind of saw, ‘‘now I have this team, I don’t exactly know what you’ve done before or how you’ve done it, feel free to tell me that, but I really want to talk about, how we’re going to do it now.’’’

know a lot of the employed and what they have worked with and with which tasks and

of course I’m convinced that they can look at it with fresh eyes and also, ehm, are willing to, to new thinking, but it’s just much harder when you’re part of all the old Ehm, so on that point I could have seen bigger changes, and I could have seen the exciting in bigger changes, ehm, yes

I will now continue to analyse this passage through answering the remaining questions from above:

4 The metaphorical expression of interest is the one highlighted in bold in the extract It is to throw up all the balls In this instance, Luke uses it in connection with another metaphor, which is to look at something with fresh eyes Throwing

up all the balls in this case means roughly initiating a process of change

5 The expression is only used once; however, ‘looking with fresh eyes’ is repeated twice Through the connection of the two metaphors, it is obviously considered

a positively desired thing if the balls were thrown up He stresses the exciting aspect of the opportunity for something new to happen and also warns that it might be dangerous not to seize this opportunity

6 The temporal orientation of this metaphor is that of an alternative present or future through, a description of how the world could have been if other deci-sions were made by others in the last six months or so

7 Unfortunately, at the time of the interview, the first author was not aware of the exciting advantages of video recording when analysing metaphor use psycholo-gically, so the voice will have to do In this passage, Luke does not have more pauses, self-disruptions or rephrasings compared to the rest of the interview, which gives a sense of determination He is quite well formulated which could point to the fact that this is something he has said or thought before His voice is not particularly emotional, even if some criticism of the management can be sensed

8 There is not much development within the passage as his argument remains the same throughout However, he seems to become a bit more certain In line 7, he formulates himself a bit more trying as he says ‘I think that I could want’ compared to his last statement where he ends up answering the question with

a clear ‘yes’ (line 30)

9 One way to approach the metaphor use contextually with an eye to the inten-tionality of different actors is to look for implicit dialogue in the sequence As this is a criticism of decisions made from the national management that is the direction I will look His initial answer gives credit to general dispositions in the new structure, which might be a way of taking some of the harshness away from his criticism It is well known as a good way of criticising to start out with something positive and might also be a way of remaining fairly loyal or thought-ful This is repeated in lines 16–19 where he answers his own criticism from the perspective of the management before reiterating it (lines 20–21) with the emo-tional additions that ‘it could have been exciting’ and ‘that annoys me a bit’ (alternatively: that is a shame) Moreover, he twice states that he thinks the persons hired in the positions are competent (lines 9, 27–28) possibly to nuance

or soften his critique or to avoid insulting his new leader He says that it will be difficult for them to look at the situation with fresh eyes opposed to an outsider who could ‘come in with fresh eyes’ (line 22)

May 2014: Waiting at the roulette table

Now, we turn to the second extract from the same participant a few months later

1 This interview is held in May 2014, approximately five months after the first interview and four months after the official implementation of the new structure Across the interviews, it is evident that there is some frustration in the organisa-tion at the moment with the process, the other team members, the team leader and the national management In the first interview, when asked when the new structure becomes everyday life, Luke expresses a hope that it would make sense

after six months, but that for certain aspects like the teamwork it would prob-ably take a bit longer

2 The physical conditions for the interview are similar to those of the first inter-view The relation is probably a bit stronger due to a few encounters in the meantime

3 The passage is the full reply to the question, which marks a shift to a new topic

in the middle of the interview This is the first time the first author introduced his interest in metaphorical depictions of the organisation The first question in the interview is ‘how is the new structure going?’ to which Luke’s response is mostly positive, although he adds that there are still a number of areas where they are still under way When asked about his biggest surprise in the process, he answers that he is surprised how undramatic the process has been, although it has also been a negative surprise that certain things have not been under control The same pattern is expressed here, however, with a bigger focus on the negative aspects

Interviewer: I would like us to turn to talking about different metaphors and different ways of talking about the situation First I’ll ask you, which image or which metaphor do you think describes the situation in Indre Mission right now in the best way?

Luke: Ehm, the situation in Indre Mission [laughing]that is Well, ehm, a metaphor that, an image that has been used several times, ehm, at the moment and John as a leader also has pulled to the front, ehm, is this of building the ship while we’re sailing

It, well it’s trite in many ways, but never the less I think that, at least you just look at our region and the situation we’re in, it’s an image that describes the situation quite well, that, that there’s something new, ehm, it’s new as of January 1st, but it’s defi-nitely not finished, ehm, and the aim is then that we sail on anyway and carry on with the good work while something new is going on, ehm, I think that’s a picture, which, which describes the situation we have at least very locally with this team, ehm Well, other metaphors and images, ehm [12 s pause] I also think like, ehm, for me it’s also a situation right now in IM in general also, where, ehm, where a lot of balls have been thrown up in the air and right now we’re then figuring out around the organisation which ones to catch, ehm well, and, ehm, I still experience like a, I still experience an, an insecurity and an uncertainty and there’s still a, ehm, well we’re still not fallen into place, ehm, there are still many who, who are anxious of the new, both employed and volunteers, and there’s still, ehm, we’re still in this, ehm, thing where things haven’t really fallen into place, ehm I kind of imagine this, ehm, we’re each still waiting there

at the roulette table to see where the ball ends up ehm, we’re a lot who, ehm, whose tasks as employees or like the whole structure as an association, it has kind of been, this ball has kind of been put into motion, and now we’re kind of anxious to see, where does it land, can I, ehm, will I be happy with where it lands and can I settle as

an employee where it lands? Ehm, so I still think this, there’s still like an extra, well insecurity sounds negative, but this, ‘‘we haven’t calmed down’’ feeling, ehm, we’re still alert and still kind of, is it, how and why, questions are still unanswered So this