A Relational Approach to Materiality and Organizing: The Case of a Creative Idea

Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 489)

Abstract

In this paper, we propose to go beyond the notion of entanglement that has been proposed in recent years to fill the so-called gap between “the social” and “the material”, especially in organizational studies. While this notion rightly invites us to reconsider the way we traditionally approach the question of materiality and organizing, we believe that its formulation tends to implicitly reproduce the gap it claims to fill. In contrast, we propose a view according to which sociality and materiality should, in fact, be considered aspects of everything that comes to be and exist. Throughout the analysis of an episode taken from fieldwork devoted to creative teams, we show that things as abstract as ideas, for instance, in order to emerge, exist, and continue to exist, have to materialize themselves in various identifiable beings. While the sociality of an idea is identified through the various relations that make it what it is, we show that its materiality comes from what precisely materializes these relations.

Keywords

Relational ontology Aspectuality Communication Materiality Organization Sociomateriality 

References

  1. 1.
    Orlikowski, W.J., Scott, S.V.: What happens when evaluation goes online? Exploring apparatuses of valuation in the travel sector. Organ. Sci. 25(3), 868–891 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barad, K.: Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Duke University Press, Durham and London (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Orlikowski, W.J.: Sociomaterial practices: exploring technology at work. Organ. Stud. 28(9), 1435–1448 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Orlikowski, W.J., Scott, S.V.: Sociomateriality: challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2(1), 433–474 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kautz, K., Jensen, T.B.: Sociomateriality at the royal court of IS: a Jester’s monologue. Inf. Organ. 23, 15–27 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., Galliers, R., Henfridsson, O., Newell, S., Vidgen, R.: The sociomateriality of information systems: current status future directions. MIS Q. 38(3), 809–830 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McPhee, R.D., Zaug, P.: The communicative constitution of organizations: a framework for explanation [electronic version]. Electron. J. Commun. 10, 1–6 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Putnam, L.L., Nicotera, A.M. (eds.): Building Theories of Organization: The Constitutive Role of Communication. Routledge, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Taylor, J.R., Van Every, E.J.: The Emergent Organization Communication as Site and Surface. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schoeneborn, D., Blaschke, S., Cooren, F., McPhee, R.D., Seidl, D., Taylor, J.R.: The three schools of CCO thinking: interactive dialogue and systematic comparison. Manag. Commun. Q. 28(2), 285–316 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cooren, F.: Communication theory at the center: ventriloquism and the communicative constitution of reality. J. Commun. 62, 1–20 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    D’Adderio, L.: Artifacts at the centre of routines: performing the material turn in routines theory. J. Inst. Econ. 7(2), 197–230 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leonardi, P., Barley, S.R.: Materiality and change: challenges to building better theory about technology and organizing. Inf. Organ. 18(3), 159–176 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leonardi, P.M., Nardi, B., Kallinikos, J. (eds.): Materiality and Organizing: Social Interaction in a Technological World. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Butler, J.: Bodies that Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex”. Routledge, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Callon, M., Latour, B.: Unscrewing the big leviathan: how actors macro-structure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In: Cicourel, A.V., Knorr-Cetina, K. (eds.) Advances in Social Theory and Methodology. Towards an Integration of Micro- and Macro-Sociologies, pp. 277–303. Routledge & Kegan Paul, Boston (1981)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Law, J. (ed.): A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power Technology and Domination. Routledge, London and New York (1991)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Deleuze, G., Guattari, F.: A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis (1980/1987)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Foucault, M.: Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Vintage Books, New York (1975/1977). Translated by A. SheridanGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jones, M.: A matter of life and death: exploring conceptualizations of sociomateriality in the context of critical care. MIS Q. 38(3), 895–925 (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leonardi, P.M.: When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: affordance constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Q. 35(1), 147–176 (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Leonardi, P.M.: Car Crashes Without Cars: Lessons about Simulation Technology and Organizational Change from Automotive Design. MIT Press, Cambridge (2012)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weick, K.E.: The Social Psychology of Organizing. Random House, New York (1979)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Weick, K.E.: Sensemaking in Organizations. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1995)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Putnam, L.L., Pacanowsky, M.E.: Communication and Organizations: An Interpretive Approach. Sage, Newbury Park (1983)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pickering, A.: The mangle of practice: agency and emergence in the sociology of science. Am. J. Sociol. 99, 559–589 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Faulkner, P., Runde, J.: On sociomateriality. In: Leonardi, P.M., Nardi, B.A., Kallinikos, J. (eds.) Materiality and Organizing: Social Interaction in a Technological World, pp. 49–66. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mutch, A.: Sociomateriality: taking the wrong turning? Inf. Organ. 23(1), 28–40 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Leonardi, P.M.: Theoretical foundations for the study of sociomateriality. Inf. Organ. 23, 59–76 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kohn, E.: How Forests Think: Toward an Anthropology Beyond the Human. University of California Press, London (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Latour, B.: Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Latour, B.: An Inquiry into Modes of Existence: An Anthropology of the Moderns. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2013)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Law, J.: After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. Routledge, London (2004)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Slife, B.D.: Taking practice seriously: toward a relational ontology. J. Theoret. Philos. Psychol. 24(2), 157–178 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cooren, F.: In medias res: communication, existence and materiality. Commun. Res. Pract. 1(4), 307–321 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Martine, T., Cooren, F., Bénel, A., Zacklad, M.: What does really matter in technology adoption and use? A CCO approach. Manag. Commun. Q. 30(2), 164–187 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cooren, F., Fairhurst, G., Huët, R.: Why matter always matters in organizational communication. In: Leonardi, P.M., Nardi, B.A., Kallinikos, J. (eds.) Materiality and Organizing: Social Interaction in a Technological World, pp. 296–314. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ashcraft, K.L., Kuhn, T., Cooren, F.: Constitutional amendments: “materializing” organizational communication. Acad. Manag. Ann. 3(1), 1–64 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bencherki, N., Cooren, F.: Having to be: the possessive constitution of organization. Hum. Relat. 64(12), 1579–1607 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cooren, F.: The organizational world as a Plenum of agencies. In: Cooren, F., Taylor, J.R., Van Every, E.J. (eds.) Communication as Organizing: Empirical and Theoretical Explorations in the Dynamic of Text and Conversation, pp. 81–100. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (2006)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Cooren, F.: Action and Agency in Dialogue: Passion, Incarnation, and Ventriloquism. John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Derrida, J.: Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning, and the New International. Routledge, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Robichaud, D., Cooren, F.: Organization and Organizing: Materiality, Agency and Discourse. Routledge, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cooren, F., Kuhn, T., Cornelissen, J., Clark, T.: Communication, organizing and organization: an overview and introduction to the special issue. Organ. Stud. 32(9), 1149–1170 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Brummans, B.H.J.M., Cooren, F., Robichaud, D., Taylor, J.R.: Approaches in research on the communicative constitution of organizations. In: Putnam, L.L., Mumby, D.K. (eds.) Sage Handbook of Organizational Communication, pp. 173–194. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2014)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Cooren, F.: Organizational Discourse: Communication and Constitution. Polity, London (2015)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Taylor, J.R., Van Every, E.J.: The Situated Organization: Case Studies in the Pragmatics of Communication. Routledge, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Taylor, J.R., Van Every, E.J.: When Organization Fails: Why Authority Matters. Routledge, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bakthin, M.M.: The Dialogic Imagination. University of Texas Press, Austin (1981)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bakhtin, M.M.: Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. University of Texas Press, Austin (1986)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Cooren, F., Sandler, S.: Polyphony, Ventriloquism, and Constitution: in dialogue with Bakhtin. Commun. Theory 24(3), 225–244 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Fauré, B., Brummans, B.H.J.M., Giroux, H., Taylor, J.R.: The calculation of business, or the business of calculation? Accounting as organizing through everyday communication. Hum. Relat. 63(8), 1249–1273 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Peirce, C.S.: Peirce on Signs: Writings on Semiotic. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill (1991)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Garfinkel, H.: Ethnomethodology’s Program: Working Out Durkheim’s Aphorism. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham (2002)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Vásquez, C., Brummans, B.H.J.M., Groleau, C.: Notes from the field: organizational shadowing as framing. Qual. Res. Organ. 7(2), 144–165 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Jefferson, G.: Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In: Lerner, G.H. (ed.) Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, pp. 13–23. John Benjamins, Philadelphia (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université de MontréalMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations