Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T08:45:01.332Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 5 - Pragmatism and Routine Dynamics

from Part I - Theoretical Resources for Routine Dynamics Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2021

By
Dionysios D. Dionysiou
Edited by
Martha S. Feldman ,
Brian T. Pentland ,
Luciana D'Adderio ,
Katharina Dittrich ,
Claus Rerup  and
David Seidl
Martha S. Feldman
Affiliation:
University of California, Irvine
Brian T. Pentland
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Luciana D'Adderio
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Katharina Dittrich
Affiliation:
University of Warwick
Claus Rerup
Affiliation:
Frankfurt School of Finance and Management
David Seidl
Affiliation:
University of Zurich
Get access

Summary

The ideas of classical pragmatists receive increasing attention by scholars working in diverse fields, who realize their fertility in addressing contemporary theoretical and practical challenges. Pragmatism, as a philosophical perspective, embraces a processual view of the world according to which what really exists is ‘in the making,’ in a process of becoming, and places great attention to action and its meaningful experience. In this chapter, I introduce the common themes in the work of the founding figures of classical pragmatism and examine their convergence with the theoretical assumptions underpinning routine dynamics theorizing. I trace the influence of pragmatism in routine dynamics research and suggest that pragmatist thinking has much to offer to the study of routines as dynamic, processual phenomena.

Keywords

Routinesroutine dynamicspragmatismagencyexperienceuncertaintytemporalityprocess thinking
Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics , pp. 62 - 72
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bernstein, R. J. (1992). The resurgence of pragmatism. Social Research, 59(4), 813–840.Google Scholar
Bernstein, R. J. (2010). The Pragmatic Turn. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D. (2007a). Reading Dewey: Reflections on the study of routine. Organisation Studies, 28(5), 773–786.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D. (2007b). Administrative behavior: Laying the foundations for Cyert and March. Organization Science, 18(3), 503–506.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963/1992). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2011). Artifacts at the centre of routines: Performing the material turn in routines theory. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7(2), 197–230.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1917). The Need for a Recovery of Philosophy. In Dewey, J., ed., Creative Intelligence: Essays in the Pragmatic Attitude. New York: Holt, pp. 3–69.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1922). Human Nature and Conduct: An Introduction to Social Psychology. New York: Random House/The Modern Library.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. New York: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1981). The Philosophy of John Dewey. (McDermott, J. J., ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. and Bentley, A. (1949). Knowing and the Known. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Dionysiou, D. D. (2017). Symbolic interactionism. In Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., The Sage Handbook of Process Organization Studies. London: Sage Publications, pp. 144–159.Google Scholar
Dionysiou, D. D. and Sutcliffe, K. M. (2019). Acting in a Dynamic World: Pragmatism and Routine Dynamics. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, 8–12 August 2019, Boston.Google Scholar
Dionysiou, D. D. and Tsoukas, H. (2013). Understanding the (re)creation of routines from within: a symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 38(2), 189–205.Google Scholar
Dittrich, K. and Seidl, D. (2018). Emerging intentionality in routine dynamics: A pragmatist view. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 111–138.Google Scholar
Emirbayer, M. and Maynard, D. W. (2011). Pragmatism and ethnomethodology. Qualitative Sociology, 34, 221–261.Google Scholar
Emirbayer, M. and Miche, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 962–1023.Google Scholar
Farjoun, M., Ansell, C. and Boin, A. (2015). Pragmatism in organization studies: Meeting the challenges of a dynamic and complex world. Organization Science, 26(6), 1787–1804.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6), 611–629.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2016). Routines as process: Past, present and future. In Rerup, C., Howard-Grenville, J., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How they are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Perspectives on Process Organization Studies Series. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 23–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Orlikowski, W. J. (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1240–1253.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 94–118.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Pentland, B., D’Adderio, L. and Lazaric, N. (2016). Beyond routines as things: Introduction to the special issue on routine dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 505–513.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Worline, M. (2016). The practicality of practice theory Academy of Management Learning and Education, 15(2), 304–324.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
George, J. M. and Jones, G. R. (2000). The role of time in theory and theory building. Journal of Management, 26(4), 657–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grodal, S., Nelson, A. J. and Siimo, R. M. (2015). Help-seeking and help-giving as an organizational routine: Continual engagement in innovative work. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1), 136–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernes, T. (2014). A Process Theory of Organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hernes, T., Simpson, B. and Soderland, J. (2013). Managing and temporality. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 29, 1–6.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16(6), 618–636.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. and Rerup, C. (2017). A process perspective on organizational routines. In Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., The Sage Handbook of Process Organization Studies. London: SAGE Publications, pp. 323–339.Google Scholar
James, W. (1878). Remarks on Spencer’s definition of mind as correspondence. The Journal of Speculative Psychology, 12(1), 1–18.Google Scholar
James, W. (1907). Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking. New York: Longman, Green and Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, W. (1908). The pragmatist theory of truth and its misunderstanders. The Philosophical Review, 17(1), 1–17.Google Scholar
James, W. (1909). A Pluralistic Universe. New York, Longman, Green and Co.Google Scholar
James, W. (1911). Some Problems of Philosophy. New York, Longman, Green and Co.Google Scholar
Joas, H. (1993). Pragmatism and Social Theory. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Joas, H. (1996). The Creativity of Action. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Joas, H. and Knobl, W. (2009). Social Theory: Twenty Introduction Lectures. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Langley, A. H. and Tsoukas, H. (2017). Introduction: Process thinking, process theorizing and process researching. In Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., The Sage Handbook of Process Organization Studies. London: Sage Publications, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
Locke, K. (2001). Grounded Theory in Management Research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
Locke, K., Golden-Biddle, K. and Feldman, M. S. (2008). Making doubt generative: Rethinking the role of doubt in the research process. Organization Science, 19(6), 907–918.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, G. and Lerner, J. S. (2003). The role of affect in decision making. In Davidson, R. J., Scherer, K. R. and Goldsmith, H. H., eds., Handbook of Affective Sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 619–642.Google Scholar
Lorino, P. (2018). Pragmatism and Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
March, J. H. and Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Mead, G. H. (1932). The Philosophy of the Present. London: The Open Court Company.Google Scholar
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society from the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mead, G. H. (1935). The philosophy of John Dewey. International Journal of Ethics, 46(1), 64–81.Google Scholar
Mead, G. H. (1938). The Philosophy of the Act. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Menand, L. (2002). The Metaphysical Club. London: Flamingo.Google Scholar
Misak, C. (2013). The American Pragmatists. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nicolini, D. (2009). Zooming in and zooming out: A package of method and theory to study work practices. In Ybema, S., Yanow, D., Wels, H. and Kamsteeg, F., eds., Organizational Ethnography: Studying the Complexities of Everyday Life. London: SAGE Publications, pp. 120–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1992). The Essential Peirce, Vol 1 (1867–1893). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1998). The Essential Peirce, Vol 2 (1893–1913). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2005). Organizational routines as unit of analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5), 793–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reck, A. J. (1963). The philosophy of George Herbert Mead. In Studies in Recent Philosophy. Tulane Studies in Philosophy Series, Volume 12. Netherlands: Springer, pp. 5–51.Google Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. and Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.Google Scholar
Sandberg, J. and Tsoukas, H. (2011). Grasping the logic of practice: Theorizing through practical rationality. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 338–360.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. R. (2001). Introduction: Practice theory. In Schatzki, T. R., Knorr-Cetina, K. and Savigny, E. V., eds., The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 10–23.Google Scholar
Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Shotter, J. (2006). Understanding process from within: An argument for ‘withness’-thinking. Organization Studies , 27 (4), 585–604.Google Scholar
Shotter, J. (2010). Situated dialogic action research: Disclosing ‘beginnings’ for innovative change in organizations. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 268–285.Google Scholar
Simpson, B. and Lorino, P. (2016). Re-viewing routines through a pragmatist lens. In Rerup, C., Howard-Grenville, J., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How they are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Perspectives on Process Organization Studies Series. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 47–70.Google Scholar
Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic Interactionism. New Jersey: The Blackburn Press.Google Scholar
Thayer, H. S. (1982). Pragmatism: The Classic Writings. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Fern, M. J. (2012). Examining the stability and variability of routine performances: The effects of experience and context change. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1407–1434.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Rindova, V. (2012). A balancing act: How organizations pursue consistency in routine functioning in the face of ongoing change. Organization Science, 23(1), 24–46.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Rindova, V. (2018). Watching the clock: Action timing, patterning, and routine performance. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4), 1253–1280.Google Scholar
Wegener, F. and Lorino, F. (2020). Capturing the experience of living forward from within the flow: Fusing ‘withness’ approach & pragmatist inquiry. In Reinecke, J., Suddaby, R., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Perspectives on Process Organization Studies Vol. 7: About Time: Temporality and History in Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 138–168.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organizing, 2nd ed. Reading, MA: Addison-Westley.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (2003). Theory and practice in the real world. In Tsoukas, H. and Knudsen, C., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 453–475.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M. and Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. (2013). Habit, deliberation, and action: Strengthening the microfoundations of routines and capabilities. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(2), 120–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×