Skip to main content

Peace Piece: On the Machiavellian Moment in Organizational Innovation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Debating Innovation

Part of the book series: Palgrave Debates in Business and Management ((PDBM))

Abstract

In contrast to accounts that describe innovation as solely a matter of disruption, this chapter explores the role of stabilization in innovation. Starting from a brief review of Machiavelli’s views on innovation, it introduces the work of sociologist David Stark as a contemporary account of how successful organizational innovations are dependent on negotiations, settlements, and resolutions. For Stark, innovation is a play between dissonance and resolution; a clashing of contradictory values, succeeded by a negotiated resolution of such tensions. In reviewing critiques of Stark’s account, the chapter seeks to extend his work by embellishing the musicological connotations of the dynamic between dissonance and resolution. In so doing, the chapter suggests that music may assist in conceptualizing the simultaneous occurrence of dissonance and stability in organizations.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Akrich, M., Callon, M., Latour, B., & Monaghan, A. (2002). The key to success in innovation, part II: The art of choosing good spokespersons. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6(2), 207–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attali, J. (1985). Noise: The political economy of music. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckert, J. (2011). Coordination through dissonance. Socio-Economic Review, 9(3), 606–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bokina, J. (1991). Deity, beast, and tyrant: Images of the prince in the operas of Monteverdi. International Political Science Review/Revue internationale de science politique, 12(1), 48–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boltanski, L., & Thevenot, L. (2006). On justification: Economies of worth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., Law, J., & Rip, A. (1986). How to study the force of science. In M. Callon, J. Law, & A. Rip (Eds.), Mapping the dynamics of science and technology (pp. 3–15). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. (1978). A dual-core model of organizational innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 21(2), 193–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godin, B. (2015). Innovation contested. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Holm, P. (2010). David Stark, with Daniel Beunza, Monique Girard, and János Lukács: The sense of dissonance: Accounts of worth in economic life. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(2), 332–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horton, S. (2010). Machiavelli: The eternal contest of parties. Harpers. https://harpers.org/2010/01/machiavelli-the-eternal-contest-of-parties/. Accessed 11 April 2022.

  • Jameson, F. (1985). Foreword. In J. Attali (Ed.), Noise: The political economy of music (pp. vii–xiv). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1988). The prince for machines as well as machinations. In B. Elliott (Ed.), Technology and social change (pp. 20–43). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepore, J. (2014). What the gospel of disruption gets wrong. The New Yorker, June 23, pp. 30–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machiavelli, N. ([1532]1998). The prince. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marres, N. (2005). No issue, no public. Doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam. Amsterdam: Ipskamp Print partners.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molnar, S. (2022). The framing of urban values and qualities in inter-organizational settings: The case of ground floor planning in Gothenburg, Sweden. Urban Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980221090883.

  • Molnar, S., & Palmås, K. (2021). Dissonance and diplomacy: Coordination of conflicting values in urban co-design. CoDesign, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2021.1968441.

  • Palmås, K. (2020). The state of suspension. Eurozine. https://www.eurozine.com/the-state-of-suspension/. Accessed 11 April 2022.

  • Parel, A. (1991). The question of Machiavelli’s Modernity. The Review of Politics, 53(2), 320–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pocock, J. (1975). The Machiavellian moment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, M. (2007). Some other time. Pitchfork. https://pitchfork.com/features/resonant-frequency/6625-resonant-frequency-47/. Accessed 11 April 2022.

  • Runciman, D. (2014). The confidence trap. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sennett, R. (1998). The corrosion of character. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, D. (2009). The sense of dissonance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • von Busch, O., & Palmås, K. (2016). Social means do not justify corruptible ends: A realist perspective of social innovation and design. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 2(4), 275–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Busch, O., & Palmås, K. (2023). The Corruption of Co-Design: Political and Social Conflicts in Participatory Design Thinking. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karl Palmås .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Palmås, K., Molnar, S. (2023). Peace Piece: On the Machiavellian Moment in Organizational Innovation. In: Rehn, A., Örtenblad, A. (eds) Debating Innovation. Palgrave Debates in Business and Management. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16666-2_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics