No abstract

No abstract

would like to acknowledge the support of the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) who funded the research presented in this article. If forms part of work conducted under an ESRC Fellowship entitled: The Social Study of the Information Technology Marketplace. We would like to thank those industry analysts and others who were kind enough to make themselves available for interview. We graciously acknowledge the help and advice of the Editor and anonymous referees who provided very helpful comments on drafts of this paper. Thanks also must go to the following people for providing useful suggestions and ideas during the writing process.

I examine how organizations address the replication dilemma by simultaneously enacting contrasting goals while transferring routines across complex organizational settings. I address this issue by drawing on a qualitative case-based inquiry into the multiplicity of the routines ostensive and performative aspects in the context of routines transfer and exact replication. The subject of inquiry is a leading electronics organization facing the dilemma of how to deal with simultaneous competing pressures to copy exactly (replicate) and change (innovate). I find that organizational members address this dilemma, first, by harnessing artifacts and communities to establish two sets of ostensive patterns and performances, one supporting alignment (replication) and one improvement (innovation); and, second, by striving to maintain a dynamic balance between them by enacting them in different proportions. This allows offsetting competing goals and the related pressures both at specific points in time, and over time. Building on these findings, I develop a theoretical framework which adds to the extant replication and routines literatures, and the Carnegie account of routines transfer and goal balancing, by capturing: (1) the micro-level, performative dynamics by which organizations unravel the replication dilemma in routines transfer while addressing competing goals and the associated pressures, and (2) the role of the social and material features of context in the (re)production and transfer of routines.

Abstract:Existing theories of organizational routines have generally had simplistic and extreme views of artifacts as fully deterministic or largely inconsequential. Artifacts have been treated as either too solid to be avoided, or too flexible to have an effect. This paper endeavours to improve our understanding of the influence of artifacts on routines dynamics by proposing a novel and deeper conceptualization of their mutual relationship. In drawing from recent advances in Routines and STS/Performativity Theory, the paper contributes to advancing our understanding of routines dynamics by bringing artifacts and materiality from the periphery to the very centre of routines and Routines Theory.

No abstract

The dominant theme within extant research on performance and ranking conceptualises the organisational response to a ranking as one where it responds by 'conforming' to the measure (Korberger and Carter 2010, Scott and Orlikowski 2012, Shore and Wright 2015). This process of 'reactivity' (Espeland and Sauder 2007), however, is not always possible, especially in the complex and rapidly-changing settings described in this paper. In certain contexts organisations are typically surrounded by multiple measures, raising the question as to which they should align. Drawing on an ethnographic study across a number of sites, we show how some organisations instead of conforming to a single measure are 'transforming' to respond to the challenge of multiple rankings, by constructing and elaborating new forms of expertise, knowledge and connection with rankers. Unlike prior research that presents organisations as constrained by systems of measuring (which we name 'reactive conformance'), we examine how they are becoming more proactive towards this challenge (described as 'reflexive transformation'). Specifically, building on themes from accounting and the 'sociology of worth', we present evidence that organisations exercise greater choice than expected about which rankings they respond to, shape their ranked positions, as well as wield influence over assessment criteria and the wider evaluative ecosystem.

Existing theories of organizational routines have generally had simplistic and extreme views of artifacts as fully deterministic or largely inconsequential. Artifacts have been treated as either too solid to be avoided, or too flexible to have an effect. This paper endeavours to improve our understanding of the influence of artifacts on routines dynamics by proposing a novel and deeper conceptualization of their mutual relationship. In drawing from recent advances in Routines and STS/Performativity Theory, the paper contributes to advancing our understanding of routines dynamics by bringing artifacts and materiality from the periphery to the very centre of routines and Routines Theory.