Writing Africa into MOS: The dangerous perpetuation of “Tribe(s)” and other misrepresentations

We critique the use of “tribe” in management and organization studies (MOS) research, aiming to unsettle its normative acceptance as a way to describe ethnic groups in Africa. We draw from postcolonial theory to illuminate the invention of “tribes” by European colonizers to subjugate and control African people during colonialism. Our analysis reveals the various ways the term “tribe” has been employed in MOS research and the meanings attached to it. We ask why “tribe” appears to be the default characterization of ethnic groups in Africa, given its racist and stereotypical connotations. The genealogy of “tribe” and, primarily, its construction during colonialism, suggests the need for caution in using it as a valid representation of ethnic groups in Africa. We argue that its continued use, along with other misrepresentations of the continent, reproduces racist colonial and neocolonial tropes of the continent. Instead, we urge MOS researchers to use ethnic groups, which have become the default concept for distinguishing groups based on culture, language, and ancestry.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Organization
Published
2026-02-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/13505084251409372
Primary Topic
Global and Cross-Cultural Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Writing Africa into MOS: The dangerous perpetuation of “Tribe(s)” and other misrepresentations

Stella M. Nkomo, Nceku Nyathi
Organization
Global and Cross-Cultural Management
article

Writing Africa into MOS: The dangerous perpetuation of “Tribe(s)” and other misrepresentations

Stella M. Nkomo, Nceku Nyathi
article en

Abstract

We critique the use of “tribe” in management and organization studies (MOS) research, aiming to unsettle its normative acceptance as a way to describe ethnic groups in Africa. We draw from postcolonial theory to illuminate the invention of “tribes” by European colonizers to subjugate and control African people during colonialism. Our analysis reveals the various ways the term “tribe” has been employed in MOS research and the meanings attached to it. We ask why “tribe” appears to be the default characterization of ethnic groups in Africa, given its racist and stereotypical connotations. The genealogy of “tribe” and, primarily, its construction during colonialism, suggests the need for caution in using it as a valid representation of ethnic groups in Africa. We argue that its continued use, along with other misrepresentations of the continent, reproduces racist colonial and neocolonial tropes of the continent. Instead, we urge MOS researchers to use ethnic groups, which have become the default concept for distinguishing groups based on culture, language, and ancestry.

Organization
University of South Africa (ZA), Monash University (AU)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Global and Cross-Cultural Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Writing Africa into MOS: The dangerous perpetuation of “Tribe(s)” and other misrepresentations — Stella M. Nkomo, Nceku Nyathi · Organization (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS