Le dernier numero de M@n@gement (juillet 2017) est online (http://www.management-aims.com/) et il comporte des contributions sur strategy as practice, l’imitation dans les champs organisationnels, et le debat rigueur-pertinence dans la recherche. Dans la section Unplugged, vous (re)découvrirez l’ouvrage de Danny Miller et un essai de Silvia Gherardi sur l’affect. Une petite dose de recherche à prendre pendant vos vacances d'été !
Nous attendons vos soumissions dans le champ de la stratégie et de la théorie des organisations. Nous nous engageons à un processus rapide et constructif.
http://www.management-aims.com/pg-40-regles-de-soummission-d-articles-scientifiques-en-management-strategie-et-organisation-m@n@gement.html
July 2017 issue – 20(2)
Ce numéro est accessible ici http://www.management-aims.com/ et contient les contributions suivantes :
Reconciling structure and agency in strategy -as-practice research: Towards a strong structuration theory approach
Tamim Elbasha, Alex Wright.
Abstract. An overwhelming focus of research on the micro agency of strategic actors has led to the literature being characterized as demonstrating a micro-myopia, resulting in a micro-isolationism. This means we know little about how the micro interrelates with the macro in strategy work. We address this problem in our conceptual article which adopts a structurationist stance to explicate how strategy-as-practice (SaP) research could be enhanced and extended by paying equal attention to both agency and structure. Specifically, we advance strong structuration theory (SST), a promising development from Giddens’ seminal work on structuration theory, to show how strategic activity can be understood as an ongoing process of structuration unfolding over time. We argue for the use of both types of methodological bracketing (context and conduct analysis), advocating systematic attention to the interplay between macro-societal and micro-local levels of analysis. Our discussion concludes with guidance for researchers inviting them to undertake empirical fieldwork that overcomes SaP’s current micro-myopia, creating a more balanced corpus of work.
Complex field-positions and non-imitation: Pioneers, strangers, and insulars in Australian fine-wine
Grégoire Croidieu, Charles-Clemens Rüling, Bilal-Ahmed Jathol.
Abstract. This paper studies how complex field-positions, characterized by combinations of structural and cultural mechanisms, are associated with the non-imitation of dominant field-level practices. Theoretically, the notion of complex field-position complements prior institutional research on fieldpositions and non-imitation, which focuses primarily on structural mechanisms. Our empirical study looks at 62 Australian fine-wines, using qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to identify combinations of structural and cultural mechanisms associated with the non-imitation of Penfolds Grange, a role model in the Australian fine-wine field. We find three distinct complex field-positions—pioneers, strangers, and insulars— which occurred at different moments in the history of this field. We build on these findings to discuss the importance of complex field-positions as sources of positional opportunities, and their role in the development and persistence of diversity in organizational fields.
Is management research relevant? A systematic analysis of the rigor-relevance debate in top-tier journals (1994–2013)
Guillaume Carton, Philippe Mouricou.
Abstract. Since the field of management science came into existence, many scholars have raised questions about the rigor of the knowledge produced by management research about and the relevance of this knowledge to practice. In this article, we question the causes of the continuation of the rigor-relevance debate within management science. To do this, we build on science and technology studies and on the analytical framework of scientific controversies. By analyzing 253 articles published in 11 top tier journals between 1994 and 2003, we identify four typical positions on rigor and relevance in management research: gatekeepers’ orthodoxy, collaboration with practitioners, paradigmatic shift and refocusing on common good. Although contradictory, these positions coexist within the debate and are constantly being repeated. This debate, which has developed within a specially adapted space in academic journals (the hybrid forum) contribute to the “scientification” of management sciences. We link these findings to the literature on scientific controversies and discuss their implications for the rigor-relevance debate.
Unplugged - My Own Book Review - Review of The Icarus Paradox by its Nostalgic
Author Danny Miller.
Unplugged - Carte blanche- Which is the place of affect within practice-based studies?
____
En espérant que vous apprécierez ces travaux !
