2011
DOI: 10.1177/0170840611430589
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Discipline and Change: How Technologies and Organizational Routines Interact in New Practice Creation

Abstract: International audienceIn this paper we study the development and implementation of a technology over a long period of time, with a particular focus on how its disciplinary effects interplay with and change organizational routines and actors' capacities, thus producing new patterns of action. To identify these processes of change and emergence of practices, we propose a combinative theoretical analysis at the interface between institutional and practice-based approaches. Drawing on a rich ethnographic case stud… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
93
0
6

Year Published

2014
2014
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(99 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
(116 reference statements)
0
93
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on this new ontology, significant efforts have been devoted to exploring issues of agency (Howard-Grenville, 2005) as well as structure in organizational routines, particularly with regard to phenomena involving organizational change, new practices creation, learning, power and political behaviour (Bruns, 2009;D'Adderio, 2008;Labatut, Aggeri, & Girard, 2012;Rerup & Feldman, 2011). This article contributes to ongoing debates on organizational routines by maintaining that equating agency with change is too simplistic and that replacing a duality of agency and structure for the traditional duality of change and stability does not fully account for the complexities of routines as constituted by both ostensive and performative aspects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on this new ontology, significant efforts have been devoted to exploring issues of agency (Howard-Grenville, 2005) as well as structure in organizational routines, particularly with regard to phenomena involving organizational change, new practices creation, learning, power and political behaviour (Bruns, 2009;D'Adderio, 2008;Labatut, Aggeri, & Girard, 2012;Rerup & Feldman, 2011). This article contributes to ongoing debates on organizational routines by maintaining that equating agency with change is too simplistic and that replacing a duality of agency and structure for the traditional duality of change and stability does not fully account for the complexities of routines as constituted by both ostensive and performative aspects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Labatut et al (2012) seek to reinsert the study of routines (a micro component) into the wider institutional contexts in which routines are embedded. This is of interest to the study of institutions and agency because standardized ways of doing things, consequent upon the introduction of technologies in organizations or fields, impinge upon and change the ostensive nature of routines (understood broadly) and how routines are enacted in particular settings.…”
Section: Patchwork Institutionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The best animals are then mated according to their EBVs through artificial insemination or natural mating to ensure the creation of genetic gain. Farmers thus rear the next generation of breeding animals Labatut et al (2012) As regards plant varieties, there are currently tensions between the design of limited-number local breeds with participatory approaches, and design processes that make use of genomic approaches for developing more sustainable animals (disease-resistant, feed efficient, etc. )…”
Section: Plant Varietymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conversely, merchant innovations such as chemical inputs, decision support tools or varieties are generally generic objects adapted to a large range of agricultural conditions. And some objects can be designed both from a local or a generic point of view: for example, cow breeds designed for worldwide diffusion (Holstein for instance) versus local breeds fitted to one region and specific livestock system (the Manex Black Sheep, a dairy sheep breed for mountainous areas in the Western Pyrenees; see Labatut et al 2012). Actually, the two approaches are often intertwined but both call for design methods that allow the designers to deal with this environmental diversity.…”
Section: Design In Agriculture Requires Renewing the Way To Address Tmentioning
confidence: 99%