Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Theorizing Relations between Past, Present and Future: Interactions between Process and Historical Organizational Studies through Whitehead’s Process Philosophy

  • Published:
Philosophy of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Our theoretical essay is an attempt to stimulate approximations and interactions between process philosophy - principally as proposed by Alfred North Whitehead (1861–1947) - and historical organizational studies. In order to reach this goal, we outline some theoretical and methodological possibilities of intersections among these two perspectives. Following the presentation of central concepts borrowed from a strong view of process, we present organizational history as a continuous emerging process of becoming. Following, we discuss recent literature reviews and attempts to categorize intersections among process and historical organization studies. Finally, we discuss theoretical and methodological implications of intersections between these fields of study under the principles of the strong view of process. We also discuss the thematic as an opportunity for overcoming the paradigmatic hegemony and research limitations in the fields of organizational and historical organizational studies. We conclude by encouraging empirical testing and management applications of the ideas introduced in this work.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Booth, C., and M. Rowlinson. 2006. Management and organizational history: Prospects. Management & Organizational History 1 (1): 5–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chia, R., and W.I. King. 1998. The organizational structuring of novelty. Organization 5: 461–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coraiola, D.M., W.M. Foster, and R. Suddaby. 2015. Varieties of history in organization studies. In The Routledge companion to Management & Organizational History, ed. P.G. McLaren, A.J. Mills, and T.G. Weatherbee, 206–221. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibben, M.R. 2009. Organisations and organizing: Understanding and applying Whitehead’s processual account. Philosophy of Management 7 (2): 13–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durepos, G., and A.J. Mills. 2012. Anti-history: Theorizing the past, history, and historiography in management and organization studies. Charlotte: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durepos, G., M. Maclean, R. Alcadipani, and S. Cummings. 2020. Historical reflections at the intersection of past and future: Celebrating 50 years of Management Learning. Management Learning 51: 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geertz, C. 1994. Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In Readings in the philosophy of social science, ed. M. Martin and Lee C. McIntyre, 213–231. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helin, J., T. Hernes, D. Hjorth, and R. Holt. 2014. The Oxford handbook of process philosophy and organization studies. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hernes, Tor 2008. Understanding organization as process: Theory for a tangled world. Routledge Studies in Management, Organisation and Society.

  • Hernes, T. 2014. A process theory of organization. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hussenot, A., and S. Missonier. 2016. Encompassing stability and novelty in organization studies: An events-based approach. Organization Studies 37 (4): 523–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarzabkowski, P., J. Lê, and P. Spee. 2017. Taking a strong process approach to analyzing qualitative process data. In The sage handbook of process organization studies, ed. A. Langley and H. Tsoukas, 237–253. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kipping, M., and J. Lamberg. 2017. History in process organization studies: What, why and how. In The Sage Handbook of Process Organization Studies, ed.a. Langley and S. Tsoukas, 303–320. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A. 1999. Strategies for theorizing from process data 24 (4): 691–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A., C. Smallman, H. Tsoukas, and A.H. Van de Ven. 2013. Process studies of change in organization and management: Unveiling temporality, activity and flow. Academy of Management Journal 56 (1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A., and S. Tsoukas. 2017. The sage handbook of process organization studies. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipartito, K. 2014. Historical sources and data. In Organizations in time: History, theory, methods, ed. M. Bucheli and D.R. Wadhwani, 284–304. UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maclean, M., C. Harvey, and S. Clegg. 2016. Conceptualizing historical organization studies. Academy of Management Review 41 (4): 609–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maclean, M., C. Harvey, and S. Clegg. 2017. Organization theory in business and management history: Present status and future prospects. Business History Review 91 (3): 457–481. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007680517001027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mesle, R.C., and M.R. Dibben. 2017. Whitehead’s process relational philosophy. In The sage handbook of process organization studies, ed. A. Langley and H. Tsoukas, 29–42. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miskell, P. 2018. Reflections on the integration of history and organization studies. Management & Organizational History. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1550286.

  • Nayak, A. 2014. Heraclitus (540-480 BC). In The Oxford handbook of process philosophy & organization studies, ed. J. Helin, T. Hernes, D. Hjorth, and R. Holt, 32–47. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Platts, J., and H. Harris. 2011. The place of philosophy in management. Philosophy of Management 10 (2): 19–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinecke, J., and S. Ansari. 2017. Time, temporality, and process studies. In The sage handbook of process organization studies, ed. A. Langley and H. Tsoukas, 403–416. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, K. 2017. Gilles Deleuze and process philosophy. In The sage handbook of process organization studies, ed. A. Langley and H. Tsoukas, 56–70. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R., W.M. Foster, and A.J. Mills. 2014. Historical institutionalism. In Organizations in time: History, theory, methods, ed. M. Bucheli and R.D. Wadhwani, 100–123. UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Üsdiken, B., and A. Kieser. 2004. Introduction: History in organization studies. Business History 46 (3): 321–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van De Ven, A.H., and M.S. Poole. 2005. Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization Studies 26 (9): 1377–1404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, A.F. 1978. Process and reality. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, A. F. 2016. The concept of nature. Ozymandias Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Ciências Sociais, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

    Queila Regina Souza Matitz & Sergio Filipe Chaerki

  2. Business School da Universidade Positivo, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

    Karine Francisconi Chaerki

Authors
  1. Queila Regina Souza Matitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karine Francisconi Chaerki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sergio Filipe Chaerki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors whose names appear on the submission made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the creation of new software used in the work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karine Francisconi Chaerki.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethics Approval

All authors whose names appear on the submission drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual contente.

Code Availability

‘Not applicable’.

Consent to Participate

All authors whose names appear on the submission agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Consent for Publication

All authors whose names appear on the submission approved the version to be published.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Matitz, Q.R.S., Chaerki, K.F. & Chaerki, S.F. Theorizing Relations between Past, Present and Future: Interactions between Process and Historical Organizational Studies through Whitehead’s Process Philosophy. Philosophy of Management 20, 201–217 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-020-00151-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-020-00151-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation