反身性与机构工作之间的关系:公共机构案例研究

IF 4.5 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Tiina Tuominen
{"title":"反身性与机构工作之间的关系:公共机构案例研究","authors":"Tiina Tuominen","doi":"10.1177/00187267241290637","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reflexivity is often considered a prerequisite for institutional work. However, the relationship between reflexivity and institutional work has rarely been examined rigorously in empirical research, and there is a lack of consensus on when and how reflexivity motivates such efforts. This study aims to address this gap by reviewing existing operationalisations of reflexivity and exploring how different forms of reflexivity impacted employees’ engagement in institutional work in a public organisation undergoing institutional change. The empirical results revealed seven distinct patterns of reflexivity and institutional work, indicating that variations across three dimensions of reflexive evaluation – scope, openness and relationality – contributed to decisions about whether and how to engage in institutional work. The results also demonstrated that reflexivity is profoundly grounded in individuals’ concerns and shaped by their work and professional histories. These findings suggest that researchers and practitioners must develop a deeper understanding of the multidimensional nature of reflexivity in order to foster meaningful employee contributions to institutional processes.","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relations between reflexivity and institutional work: A case study in a public organisation\",\"authors\":\"Tiina Tuominen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00187267241290637\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Reflexivity is often considered a prerequisite for institutional work. However, the relationship between reflexivity and institutional work has rarely been examined rigorously in empirical research, and there is a lack of consensus on when and how reflexivity motivates such efforts. This study aims to address this gap by reviewing existing operationalisations of reflexivity and exploring how different forms of reflexivity impacted employees’ engagement in institutional work in a public organisation undergoing institutional change. The empirical results revealed seven distinct patterns of reflexivity and institutional work, indicating that variations across three dimensions of reflexive evaluation – scope, openness and relationality – contributed to decisions about whether and how to engage in institutional work. The results also demonstrated that reflexivity is profoundly grounded in individuals’ concerns and shaped by their work and professional histories. These findings suggest that researchers and practitioners must develop a deeper understanding of the multidimensional nature of reflexivity in order to foster meaningful employee contributions to institutional processes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Relations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267241290637\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267241290637","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

反身性通常被认为是机构工作的先决条件。然而,实证研究很少严格考察反身性与机构工作之间的关系,而且对于反身性何时以及如何激发机构工作缺乏共识。本研究旨在通过回顾现有的反身性操作方法,探讨不同形式的反身性如何影响正在进行机构变革的公共组织中员工对机构工作的参与,从而弥补这一空白。实证结果揭示了七种不同的反身性和机构工作模式,表明反身性评价的三个维度--范围、开放性和关系性--的变化有助于决定是否以及如何参与机构工作。研究结果还表明,反思性深深植根于个人的关切,并受其工作和职业历史的影响。这些研究结果表明,研究人员和从业人员必须更深入地了解反思性的多面性,以促进员工为机构进程做出有意义的贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Relations between reflexivity and institutional work: A case study in a public organisation
Reflexivity is often considered a prerequisite for institutional work. However, the relationship between reflexivity and institutional work has rarely been examined rigorously in empirical research, and there is a lack of consensus on when and how reflexivity motivates such efforts. This study aims to address this gap by reviewing existing operationalisations of reflexivity and exploring how different forms of reflexivity impacted employees’ engagement in institutional work in a public organisation undergoing institutional change. The empirical results revealed seven distinct patterns of reflexivity and institutional work, indicating that variations across three dimensions of reflexive evaluation – scope, openness and relationality – contributed to decisions about whether and how to engage in institutional work. The results also demonstrated that reflexivity is profoundly grounded in individuals’ concerns and shaped by their work and professional histories. These findings suggest that researchers and practitioners must develop a deeper understanding of the multidimensional nature of reflexivity in order to foster meaningful employee contributions to institutional processes.
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
Human Relations
Human Relations Multiple-
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
7.00%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.
×
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