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: 2024-11-10T06:21:03.871Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 6 - Actor-Network Theory and Routine Dynamics

from Part I - Theoretical Resources for Routine Dynamics Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2021

By
Kathrin Sele
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

Actor-network theory has always been an inspiring theoretical and methodological source for Routine Dynamics research. Seeing routines as networks of actants and as a consequence rather than a cause of collective action enabled scholars to move away from a priori assumptions about the world and shift their attention to situated performances, multiplicity, and connections-in action. In this chapter, I provide a brief historical account of actor-network theory highlighting some of its central authors and their work before unravelling how Routine Dynamics scholars have appropriated it—ironically, often as an undercover actor that remains invisible at first sight—and conclude by reflecting on how actor-network theory can continue to be of use for and shape Routine Dynamics research.

Keywords

Routinesroutine dynamicsactor-network theoryactantsconnectionstranslationinscriptionsmultiplicityrelationality
Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics , pp. 73 - 84
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

Abbott, A. D. (2004). Methods of Discovery: Heuristics for the Social Sciences. New York: Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Akrich, M., Callon, M. and Latour, B. (2002). The key to success in innovation part I: The art of interessement. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6(2), 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aroles, J. and McLean, C. (2016). Rethinking stability and change in the study of organizational routines: Difference and repetition in a newspaper-printing factory. Organization Science, 27(3), 535–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.Google Scholar
Baron, L. F. and Gomez, R. (2016). The associations between technologies and societies: The utility of actor-network theory. Science, Technology and Society, 21(2), 129–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertels, S., Howard-Grenville, J. and Pek, S. (2016). Cultural molding, shielding, and shoring at Oilco: The role of culture in the integration of routines. Organization Science, 27(3), 573–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanche, C. and Cohendet, P. (2019). Remounting a ballet in a different context: A complementary understanding of routines transfer theories. In Feldman, M. S., D’Adderio, L., Dittrich, K. and Jarzabkowksi, P., eds., Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation. Bingley: Emerald Publishing, pp. 11–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucher, S. and Langley, A. (2016). The interplay of reflective and experimental spaces in interrupting and reorienting routine dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 594–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cacciatori, E. (2012). Resolving conflict in problem‐solving: Systems of artefacts in the development of new routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1559–1585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callon, M. (1980). The state and technical innovation: A case study of the electrical vehicle in France. Research Policy, 9(4), 358–376.Google Scholar
Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieux Bay. In Law, J., ed., Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 196–233.Google Scholar
Callon, M. (1991). Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In Law, J., ed., A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. London: Routledge, pp. 132–161.Google Scholar
Callon, M. (1998a). An essay on framing and overflowing: Economic externalities revisited by sociology. The Sociological Review, 46(S1), 244–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callon, M., ed. (1998b). The Laws of the Markets. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
Callon, M. (2007). What does it mean to say that economics is performative? MacKenzie, D., Muniesa, F. and Siu, L., eds., Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Callon, M. and Latour, B. (1981). Unscrewing the big Leviathan: How actors macro-structure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In Knorr, K. and Cicourel, A., eds., Advances in Social Theory and Methodology: Toward an Integration of Micro-and Macro-Sociologies. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 277–303.Google Scholar
Callon, M. and Law, J. (1982). On interests and their transformation: Enrolment and counter-enrolment. Social Studies of Science, 12(4), 615–625.Google Scholar
Cohendet, P. S. and Simon, L. O. (2016). Always playable: Recombining routines for creative efficiency at Ubisoft Montreal’s video game studio. Organization Science, 27(3), 614–632.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Czarniawska, B. (2014). A Theory of Organizing. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Czarniawska, B. (2017). Actor-network theory. In Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., The SAGE Handbook of Process Organization Studies. Los Angeles: SAGE Publishing, 160–173.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2008). The performativity of routines: Theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routine dynamics. Research Policy, 37(5), 769–789.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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2014). The replication dilemma unravelled: How organizations enact multiple goals in routine transfer. Organization Science, 25(5), 1325–1350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Adderio, L. and Pollock, N. (2020). Making routines the same: Crafting similarity and singularity in routines transfer. Research Policy, 49(8), 104029.Google Scholar
De Laet, M. and Mol, A. (2000). The Zimbabwe bush pump: Mechanics of a fluid technology. Social Studies of Science, 30(2), 225–263.Google Scholar
Deken, F., Carlile, P. R., Berends, H. and Lauche, K. (2016). Generating novelty through interdependent routines: A process model of routine work. Organization Science, 27(3), 659–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and Repetition. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 281–317.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. and Howard-Grenville, J. A., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 23–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94–118.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2005). Organizational routines and the macro-actor. In Czarniawska, B. and Hernes, T., eds., Actor-Network Theory and Organizing. Copenhagen: Liber, pp. 91–111.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Pentland, B. T., 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
George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A. and Tihanyi, L. (2016). Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 1880–1895.Google Scholar
Gherardi, S. (2000). Practice-based theorizing on learning and knowing in organizations. Organization, 7(2), 211–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gherardi, S. and Nicolini, D. (2005). Actor-networks: Ecology and entrepreneurs. In Czarniawska, B. and Hernes, T., eds., Actor-Network Theory and Organizing. Copenhagen: Liber, pp. 285–306.Google Scholar
Glaser, V. L. (2017). Design performances: How organizations inscribe artifacts to change routines. Academy of Management Journal, 60(6), 2126–2154.Google Scholar
Gond, J.-P. and Cabantous, L. (2015). Performativity: Towards a performative turn in organizational studies. Mir, R., Willmott, H. and Greenwood, M., eds., The Routledge Companion to Philosophy in Organization Studies. London: Routledge, pp. 508–516.Google Scholar
Hetherington, K. and Law, J. (2000). After networks. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 18, 127–132.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Bednarek, R. and Spee, P. (2016). The role of artifacts in establishing connectivity within professional routines: A question of entanglement. In Rerup, C. and Howard-Grenville, J., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 117–131.Google Scholar
Kremser, W. and Schreyögg, G. (2016). The dynamics of interrelated routines: Introducing the cluster level. Organization Science, 27(3), 698–721.Google Scholar
Lannacci, F. (2014). Routines, artefacts and technological change: Investigating the transformation of criminal justice in England and Wales. Journal of Information Technology, 29(4), 294–311.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1986). The powers of associations. In Law, J., ed., Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 264–280.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1990). Technology is society made durable. The Sociological Review, 38(1), 103–131.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1994). On technical mediation. Common Knowledge, 3(2), 29–64.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1996a). Aramis, or, the Love of Technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1996b). On actor-network theory: A few clarifications plus more than a few complications. Soziale Welt, 47(4), 369–381.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1999a). On recalling ANT. In Law, J. and Hassard, J., eds., Actor Network Theory and After. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 15–25.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1999b). Pandora’s Hope. Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (2004). Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern. Critical Inquiry, 30(2), 225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (2018). Down to Earth: Politics in the New Climatic Regime. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Law, J., ed. (1986). Power, Action, and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Law, J. (1987). Technology and heterogeneous engineering: The case of Portuguese expansion. In Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P. and Pinch, T., eds., The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 111–134.Google Scholar
Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5(4), 379–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, J. (2002). Aircraft Stories: Decentering the Object in Technoscience. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Law, J. (2004). After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Law, J. and Callon, M. (1988). Engineering and sociology in a military aircraft project: A network analysis of technological change. Social Problems, 35(3), 284–297.Google Scholar
Law, J. and Hassard, J., eds. (1999). Actor Network Theory and After. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Law, J. and Singleton, V. (2014). ANT, multiplicity and policy. Critical Policy Studies, 8(4), 379–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, H. (2004). Rhythmanalysis: Space, Time and Everyday Life. New York: Continuum Books.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, D. A., Muniesa, F. and Siu, L. (2007). Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
McLean, C. and Hassard, J. (2004). Symmetrical absence/symmetrical absurdity: Critical notes on the production of actor-network accounts. Journal of Management Studies, 41(3), 493–519.Google Scholar
Mitzscherling, L. (2019). Dynamiken und Entstehung von inter-organisationalen Routinen in Innovationsnetzwerken. Dissertation Freie Universität Berlin.Google Scholar
Mol, A. (2002). The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mol, A. (2010). Actor-network theory: Sensitive terms and enduring tensions. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. Sonderheft, 50, 253–269.Google Scholar
Mol, A. and Law, J. (1994). Regions, networks and fluids: Anaemia and social topology. Social Studies of Science, 24(4), 641–671.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3(3), 398–427.Google Scholar
Parmigiani, A. and Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2011). Routines revisited: Exploring the capabilities and practice perspective. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 413–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2005). Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5), 793–815.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2008). Designing routines: On the folly of designing artifacts, while hoping for patterns of action. Information and Organization, 18(4), 235–250.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Rueter, H. H. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 484–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvato, C. (2009). Capabilities unveiled: The role of ordinary activities in the evolution of product development processes. Organization Science, 20(2), 384–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2018). Routine regulation: Balancing conflicting goals in organizational routines. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(1), 170–209.Google Scholar
Seidl, D. and Whittington, R. (2014). Enlarging the Strategy-as-Practice research agenda: Towards taller and flatter ontologies. Organization Studies, 35(10), 1407–1421.Google Scholar
Sele, K. and Grand, S. (2016). Unpacking the dynamics of ecologies of routines: Mediators and their generative effects in routine interactions. Organization Science, 27(3), 722–738.Google Scholar
Spee, P., Jarzabkowski, P. and Smets, M. (2016). The influence of routine interdependence and skillful accomplishment on the coordination of standardizing and customizing. Organization Science, 27(3), 759–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Star, S. L. (1991). Power, technology and the phenomenology of conventions: On being allergic to onions. In Law, J., ed., A Sociology of Monster: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. London: Routledge, pp. 26–56.Google Scholar
Steen, J., Coopmans, C. and Whyte, J. (2006). Structure and agency? Actor-network theory and strategic organization. Strategic Organization, 4(3), 303–312.Google Scholar
Suchman, L. A. (2007). Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.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
Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning, 29(5), 731–735.Google Scholar
Whittle, A. and Spicer, A. (2008). Is actor network theory critique? Organization Studies, 29(4), 611–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeow, A. and Faraj, S. (2014). Technology and sociomaterial performation. Working Conference on Information Systems and Organizations. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer, 48–65.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org 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
×