Sensemaking involves turning circumstances into a situation that is comprehended explicitly in words and that serves as a springboard into action. In this paper we take the position that the concept of sensemaking fills important gaps in organizational theory. The seemingly transient nature of sensemaking belies its central role in the determination of human behavior, whether people are acting in formal organizations or elsewhere. Sensemaking is central because it is the primary site where meanings materialize that inform and constrain identity and action. The purpose of this paper is to take stock of the concept of sensemaking. We do so by pinpointing central features of sensemaking, some of which have been explicated but neglected, some of which have been assumed but not made explicit, some of which have changed in significance over time, and some of which have been missing all along or have gone awry. We sense joint enthusiasm to restate sensemaking in ways that make it more future oriented, more action oriented, more macro, more closely tied to organizing, meshed more boldly with identity, more visible, more behaviorally defined, less sedentary and backward looking, more infused with emotion and with issues of sensegiving and persuasion. These key enhancements provide a foundation upon which to build future studies that can strengthen the sensemaking perspective.

This study examines the microprocesses in the social networks of those involved in organizational innovation and their strategic behavioral orientation toward connecting people in their social network by either introducing disconnected individuals or facilitating new coordination between connected individuals. This tertius iungens (or "third who joins") strategic orientation, contrasts with the tertius gaudens orientation emphasized in structural holes theory, which concerns the advantage of a broker who can play people off against one another for his or her own benefit. Results of a multimethod study of networks and innovation in an engineering division of an automotive manufacturer show that a tertius iungens orientation, dense social networks, and diverse social knowledge predict involvement in innovation. Implications of the study for innovation and social networks, as well as for social skill and agency within firms are presented.• How exactly do individuals in organizations engage in innovation activities? Is it a function of the social networks in which they are embedded, individual intentional actions or agency, or some combination of these? Despite extensive research into a process so crucial to firm growth and competitiveness (Schumpeter, 1942;Van de Ven, 1986;Tushman and Moore, 1988;Jelinek and Schoonhoven, 1990), key questions about the social nature of the innovation process remain unanswered.Organizational innovation is often a process of creating new social connections between people, and the ideas and resources they carry, so as to produce novel combinations. Recent treatments of innovation follow Schumpeter (1934) in viewing innovation as emerging from the active combination of people, knowledge, and resources (Kogut and Zander, 1992;Brown and Duguid, 1991;Henderson and Clark, 1990;Dougherty, 1992; Hargadon, 2003). While Schumpeter (1934: 81) emphasized the innovation process (and not the innovator), characterizing innovation as a "type of conduct" occurring both within and outside organizations, the fundamental social mechanics of innovative combination remain underspecified.If combination is the key to innovation, then social network activity may be an important predictor of people's involvement in innovation. The early social networks literature examined the connection between social networks and innovation quite explicitly. Studies using a social network approach to innovation and product development (e.g., Allen, 1977;Tushman, 1978;Tushman and Scanlan, 1981) determined that strategically positioned individuals facilitate information dissemination which in turn facilitates innovation. Allen (1977) found that individuals with more informal contacts outside the organization, or "gatekeepers," were critical for importing novel information and linking the organization with its environment. These gatekeepers effectively serve as the primary link to external sources of information and technology (Katz and Tushman, 1981). These advantageously situated individuals facilitate information flow from a...

No abstract

We argue for a broadened approach to brokerage by distinguishing between brokerage emphasizing a particular structural pattern in which two otherwise disconnected alters are connected through a third party ("brokerage structure") and the social behavior of third parties ("brokerage process"). We explore a processual view of brokerage by examining three fundamental strategic orientations toward brokerage: conduit, tertius gaudens, and tertius iungens that occur in many different forms and combinations. This processual view is especially relevant in increasingly complex and dynamic environments where brokerage behavior is highly varied, intense, and purposeful, and has theoretical implications for studying multiplexity, heterogeneity, and brokerage intensity AU:2 .

This paper presents a framework for action that accounts for both how organizations get routine things done and how they pursue markedly new things through “creative projects.” Based on this framework, organizational routines and creative projects are viewed as two types of action trajectories differing with respect to their repetitiveness. An ethnographic case study of an automotive prototype-purchasing process and two initiatives to redesign that process is used to compare an organizational routine with creative projects occurring within the same organizational setting and to further explicate the framework. Case analysis reveals how projection and planning, as well as combinatorial action, knowledge articulation, and contingency management, unfold differentially in organizational routines and creative projects. This paper contributes to our understanding of different forms of organizational change and innovation. It also provides a framework to examine the role of nonroutine organizing at several levels of organizational analysis and its relationship to more routine forms of organizing.