The Interplay of Reflective and Experimental Spaces in Interrupting and Reorienting Routine Dynamics

Abstract

When organization members strive to radically change routines, they face a puzzle: How can they bring about change in performances when these are guided by pre-existing ideas on how to perform the routine, that are themselves recursively reproduced? Drawing on insights from longitudinal case studies of two initiatives to change patient processes in hospitals, this paper suggests that two types of “spaces”—bounded social settings characterized by social, physical, temporal, and symbolic boundaries—are important mechanisms through which actors engage in deliberate efforts to alter both performances (performative aspect) and abstract understandings (ostensive aspect) of a given routine. Specifically, whereas reflective spaces are set apart by social, physical, and temporal boundaries and involve interactions that are geared toward developing novel conceptualizations of a routine, experimental spaces enable the integration of new actions into routine performances by locating them within the original routine, while establishing symbolic and temporal boundaries that signal the provisional and localized nature of experimental performances. As both types of spaces contribute to achieving change in complementary ways, they need to be enacted iteratively in relation to each other. The study offers a model of intentional routine change that articulates the role of spaces in interrupting and reorienting their recursive dynamics.

Inter‐organizational sensemaking in the face of strategic meta‐problems: Requisite variety and dynamics of participation

“…Using purposeful sampling, we looked for prototypical cases that would allow us to study our subject "in depth and over time" (Patton, 2015, p. 266). In line with similar studies (e.g., Bucher & Langley, 2016;Kaplan, 2008;Maitlis, 2005;Whiteman & Cooper, 2011), we decided to focus on two exemplary cases, rather than one (Bucher & Langley, 2016), as this helps distinguishing between idiosyncratic and general patterns (Leonard-Barton, 1990). In both cases, representatives of different organizations got together to jointly explore a strategic meta-problem.…”

Beyond Routines as Things: Introduction to the Special Issue on Routine Dynamics

“…Routines are emergent accomplishments in large part because of the effort involved in accomplishing them (Feldman 2000). Each time a routine is enacted is an occasion for variation, and may also be an occasion for some amount of reflection (Bucher andLangley 2016, Dittrich et al 2016). Variations may be retained (or not) for a variety of reasons, which may or may not be conscious or articulated.…”

“…A key element of the routine dynamics perspective is to identify the possibilities that are inherent in agency, reflection, and repetitive accomplishment (effortful or otherwise). While reflection is a general capacity shown to be operative in the studies presented in this special issue, the studies by Bucher and Langley (2016) and Dittrich et al (2016) focus specifically on opportunities for reflection created respectively through reflective spaces and through different ways of talking about routines. As shown in the papers in this issue, agency, reflection, and repetitive accomplishment create the possibility (not the necessity) of path making and endogenous change.…”

“…For instance, they show how talk among participants provides opportunities for thought experiments as participants work out new routines. Moreover, they help address the issue raised by Bucher and Langley (2016) by showing how talk can bridge stability and change differently in relation to the performative and ostensive aspects of routines.…”

Sustainable Incremental Organizational Change—A Case of the Textile and Apparel Industry

“…Putting on a practice-based lens on sustainability issues allows one to reconsider crucial categories in organizations that adopt sustainability solutions in their everyday praxis. Therefore, sustainability issues may be analysed from the view of adaptive change of routines, social background of reproduced routines, the relationship between technology and practice, value (co)creation, the replication of routines [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. Most studies on performed practices in textile and apparel industry are focused on industry competitiveness [17]; operations and practices in supply chains [18,19]; supply network strategies [20] or product development processes [21].…”