On methodology and myths: exploring the International Crisis Group’s organisational culture

Berit Bliesemann de Guevara

Third World Quarterly, 2014, vol. 35, issue 4, 616-633

Abstract: Exploring the historiography of the International Crisis Group (icg), this article looks critically at the narratives surrounding the organisation’s self-declared success. The focus is specifically on the so-called icg methodology, consisting of field-based research and analysis, practical policy recommendations and high-level advocacy. Combining a three-level approach to the analysis of organisational cultures with Yanow’s concept of organisational myths, the article argues that the icg methodology contains a number of organisational myths that are meant to mask tensions and contradictions in the organisation’s underpinning basic assumptions and values, which, if publicly discussed, could have the power to undermine its expert authority. The four myths looked at in detail are the ‘field facts myth’, the ‘myth of flexible pragmatism’, the ‘myth of uniqueness’ and the ‘neutrality/independence myth’.

Date: 2014
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01436597.2014.924064 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:ctwqxx:v:35:y:2014:i:4:p:616-633

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/ctwq20

DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2014.924064

Access Statistics for this article

Third World Quarterly is currently edited by Shahid Qadir

More articles in Third World Quarterly from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().