通过三种理论与方法的混合,克服过程组织研究中的强弱二元论

Miguel Pinha e Cunha, Stewart Clegg, Rafael Alcadipani
{"title":"通过三种理论与方法的混合,克服过程组织研究中的强弱二元论","authors":"Miguel Pinha e Cunha, Stewart Clegg, Rafael Alcadipani","doi":"10.1515/joso-2023-0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In processual approaches to the sociology of organizations, there are prevalent assumptions differentiating ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ process research. In this paper, we challenge this assumption and suggest a novel, non-dualistic hybrid approach that is methodologically strong-weak. This approach integrates both flux (becoming) and its temporary material instantiations (being), addressing tensions between slow-moving and mid-range elements of process. We argue that both strong and weak process views can contribute to understanding organizing. We explore how their dualism can be overcome methodologically through the combination of time horizons, incorporating substantialist and flux views, as well as proximal and distal perspectives. Using a strong-weak dualism creates an unnecessary theoretical and methodological divide between process as flow and process as material instantiation. We advance three hybrid approaches which we call reifying, liquefying, and embedding. Our contribution consists of strategies to overcome strong-weak dualism for conceptualizing organizations in a sociologically dynamic and holistic manner.","PeriodicalId":445948,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Organizational Sociology","volume":"50 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Overcoming Strong–Weak Dualisms in Process Organization Studies via Three Theory-Methodology Hybrids\",\"authors\":\"Miguel Pinha e Cunha, Stewart Clegg, Rafael Alcadipani\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/joso-2023-0026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In processual approaches to the sociology of organizations, there are prevalent assumptions differentiating ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ process research. In this paper, we challenge this assumption and suggest a novel, non-dualistic hybrid approach that is methodologically strong-weak. This approach integrates both flux (becoming) and its temporary material instantiations (being), addressing tensions between slow-moving and mid-range elements of process. We argue that both strong and weak process views can contribute to understanding organizing. We explore how their dualism can be overcome methodologically through the combination of time horizons, incorporating substantialist and flux views, as well as proximal and distal perspectives. Using a strong-weak dualism creates an unnecessary theoretical and methodological divide between process as flow and process as material instantiation. We advance three hybrid approaches which we call reifying, liquefying, and embedding. Our contribution consists of strategies to overcome strong-weak dualism for conceptualizing organizations in a sociologically dynamic and holistic manner.\",\"PeriodicalId\":445948,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Organizational Sociology\",\"volume\":\"50 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Organizational Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/joso-2023-0026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Organizational Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/joso-2023-0026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在组织社会学的过程研究方法中,普遍存在着区分 "强 "和 "弱 "过程研究的假设。在本文中,我们挑战了这一假设,并提出了一种新颖的、非二元对立的混合方法,即方法论上的强-弱。这种方法综合了流动(成为)及其暂时的物质实例(存在),解决了过程的慢动作元素和中程元素之间的紧张关系。我们认为,强过程观和弱过程观都有助于理解组织工作。我们探讨了如何通过时间跨度的组合,结合实质性和流动性观点,以及近端和远端观点,在方法论上克服二元论。使用强弱二元论会在作为流动的过程和作为物质实例化的过程之间造成不必要的理论和方法上的分歧。我们提出了三种混合方法,分别称为重化、液化和嵌入。我们的贡献包括克服强弱二元论的策略,以社会学上动态和整体的方式对组织进行概念化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Overcoming Strong–Weak Dualisms in Process Organization Studies via Three Theory-Methodology Hybrids
In processual approaches to the sociology of organizations, there are prevalent assumptions differentiating ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ process research. In this paper, we challenge this assumption and suggest a novel, non-dualistic hybrid approach that is methodologically strong-weak. This approach integrates both flux (becoming) and its temporary material instantiations (being), addressing tensions between slow-moving and mid-range elements of process. We argue that both strong and weak process views can contribute to understanding organizing. We explore how their dualism can be overcome methodologically through the combination of time horizons, incorporating substantialist and flux views, as well as proximal and distal perspectives. Using a strong-weak dualism creates an unnecessary theoretical and methodological divide between process as flow and process as material instantiation. We advance three hybrid approaches which we call reifying, liquefying, and embedding. Our contribution consists of strategies to overcome strong-weak dualism for conceptualizing organizations in a sociologically dynamic and holistic manner.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信