ABSTRACT

While previous studies have framed the construction of elite identities in the context of prestigious organizations as unambiguous, this paper investigates elite identities across different contexts as potentially contested and tension-ridden, due to both positive and negative societal connotations with elitism. Based on 36 interviews with ex-consultants, the paper indicates how people engage with an elite discourse in multiple ways when reporting upon a past or present work context: they (a) establish; (b) continue; (c) modify; or (d) subvert the discourse. In each of these variations, it was observed how engagements with notions of elitism were conflicted with tensions. The paper conceptualizes these tensions as struggles with ‘endorsing’, ‘normalizing’, ‘embellishing’ or ‘denying’ elitism. It thereby contributes an understanding of elite identities that is more varied and contested than currently acknowledged. Moreover, it helps to explain why an elite discourse persists across different contexts despite – or because of – its controversial nature.

摘要

虽然先前的研究已经将在有声望的组织背景下的精英身份构建框架化为明确的，但由于精英主义的积极和消极社会内涵，本文研究了不同背景下的精英身份可能存在争议和紧张局势。基于对前顾问的 36 次采访，本文指出了人们在报道过去或现在的工作环境时如何以多种方式参与精英话语：他们 (a) 建立；(b) 继续；(c) 修改；或 (d) 颠覆话语。在这些变化中的每一个中，都观察到了与精英主义概念的接触如何与紧张局势发生冲突。该论文将这些紧张局势概念化为与“支持”、“正常化”、“美化”或“否认”精英主义的斗争。因此，它有助于理解比目前公认的更多样化和更有争议的精英身份。此外，它有助于解释为什么精英话语在不同的语境中持续存在，尽管——或因为——其有争议的性质。