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-7b9c58cd5d-hxdxx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-13T15:18:20.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 35 - The Role of Materiality in the Practice of Strategy Revisited

from Part V - Substantive Topic Areas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2025

By
Jane Lê  and
Paul Spee
Edited by
Damon Golsorkhi ,
Linda Rouleau ,
David Seidl  and
Eero Vaara
Damon Golsorkhi
Affiliation:
emlyon Business School
Linda Rouleau
Affiliation:
HEC Montréal
David Seidl
Affiliation:
Universität Zürich
Eero Vaara
Affiliation:
Saïd Business School, University of Oxford
Get access

Summary

Jane Lê and Paul Spee set an agenda for the growing body of research exploring the role of materiality in strategy research. In their overview of existing work, they differentiate four different approaches to materiality: the communication approach; the technology approach; the sensemaking approach; and the positivist approach. They explain the assumptions inherent in each approach and how these assumptions affect the way we understand and study strategizing. They conclude with an outline of different avenues for future research on materiality in strategizing.

Keywords

strategy as practicepractice approachmaterialitycommunication approachtechnology approachsensemaking approachpositivist approach
Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice , pp. 638 - 654
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

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

Abdallah, C. and Langley, A. (2014), ‘The double edge of ambiguity in strategic planning’, Journal of Management Studies, 51/2: 235–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aggerholm, H. K., Asmuß, B. and Thomsen, C. (2012), ‘The role of recontextualization in the multivocal, ambiguous process of strategizing’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 21/4: 413–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashcraft, K. L. (1999), ‘Managing maternity leave: a qualitative analysis of temporary executive succession’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 44/2: 240–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashcraft, K. L., Kuhn, T. R. and Cooren, F. (2009), ‘Constitutional amendments: “materializing” organizational communication’, Academy of Management Annals, 3/1: 1–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, D. E., Faraj, S., Hinds, P. J., Leonardi, P. M. and von Krogh, G. (2022), ‘We are all theorists of technology now: a relational perspective on emerging technology and organizing’, Organization Science, 33/1: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balogun, J. and Johnson, G. (2004), ‘Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking’, Academy of Management Journal, 47/4: 523–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balogun, J., Best, K. and Lê, J. (2015), ‘Selling the object of strategy: how frontline workers realize strategy through their daily work’, Organization Studies, 36/10: 1285–313.CrossRefGoogle 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: 801–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barad, K. (2007), Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barley, S. R. (1986), ‘Technology as an occasion for structuring: evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 31/1: 78–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, D. and Elmes, M. (1997), ‘Strategy retold: toward a narrative view of strategic discourse’, Academy of Management Review, 22/2: 429–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basque, J., Bencherki, N. and Kuhn, T. (eds) (2022), The Routledge Handbook of the Communicative Constitution of Organization. London; Taylor & Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bechky, B. A. (2003), ‘Object lessons: workplace artifacts as representations of occupational jurisdiction’, American Journal of Sociology, 109/3: 720–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bechtel, R. B. and Churchman, A. (eds) (2002), Handbook of Environmental Psychology. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Bellamy, L. C., Amoo, N., Mervyn, K. and Hiddlestone-Mumford, J. (2019), ‘The use of strategy tools and frameworks by SMEs in the strategy formation process’, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 27/2: 337–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bencherki, N., Matte, F. and Cooren, F. (eds) (2019), Authority and Power in Social Interaction: Methods and Analysis. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bencherki, N., Sergi, V., Cooren, F. and Vásquez, C. (2021), ‘How strategy comes to matter: strategizing as the communicative materialization of matters of concern’, Strategic Organization, 19/4: 608–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bitner, M. J. (1992), ‘Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees’, Journal of Marketing, 56/2: 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloch, P. (1995), ‘Seeking the ideal form: product design and consumer response’, Journal of Marketing, 59/1: 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boxenbaum, E. and Rouleau, L. (2011), ‘New knowledge products as bricolage: metaphors and scripts in organizational theory’, Academy of Management Review, 36/2: 272–96.Google Scholar
Boxenbaum, E., Jones, C., Meyer, R. E. and Svejenova, S. (2018), ‘Towards an articulation of the material and visual turn in organization studies’, Organization Studies , 39/5–6: 597–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P. (2001), ‘Knowledge and organization: a social-practice perspective’, Organization Science, 12/2: 198–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brundin, E., Liu, F. and Cyronac, T. (2022), ‘Emotion in strategic management: a review and future research agenda’, Long Range Planning, 55/4: 102–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, J. (1990), Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Butler, J (2010), ‘Performative agency’, Journal of Cultural Economy, 3/2: 147–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, R. (1995), ‘Time in organizations: its experience, explanations and effects’, Organization Studies, 16/6: 925–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabantous, L., Gond, J. P. and Wright, A. (2018), ‘The performativity of strategy: taking stock and moving ahead’, Long Range Planning, 51/3: 407–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Çalışkan, K. and Callon, M. (2009), ‘Economization, part 1: shifting attention from the economy towards processes of economization’, Economy and Society, 38/3: 369–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Çalışkan, K. and Callon, M. (2010), ‘Economization, part 2: a research programme for the study of markets’, Economy and Society, 39/1: 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callon, M. (2010), ‘Performativity, misfires and politics’, Journal of Cultural Economy, 3/2: 163–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, D. E. (1979), ‘Interior office design and visitor response’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 64/6: 648–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlile, P. R. (2002), ‘A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development’, Organization Science, 13/4: 442–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlile, P. R. (2004), ‘Transferring, translating, and transforming: an integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries’, Organization Science, 15/5: 555–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., Galliers, R. D., Henfridsson, O., Newell, S. and Vidgen, R. (2014), ‘The sociomateriality of information systems: current status, future directions’, MIS Quarterly, 38/3: 809–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, S., Cunha, M. P., Rego, A. and Dias, J. (2013), ‘Mundane objects and the banality of evil: the sociomateriality of a death camp’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 22/3: 325–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R. (1997), ‘Relationality’, Organization Studies, 26/11: 1689–710.Google Scholar
Cooren, F. (2004), ‘Textual agency: how texts do things in organizational settings’, Organization, 11/3: 373–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, F., Taylor, J. R. and van Every, E. J. (eds) (2006), Communication as Organizing: Empirical and Theoretical Explorations in the Dynamic of Text and Conversation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cornelissen, J., Mantere, S. and Vaara, E. (2014), ‘The contraction of meaning: the combined effect of communication, emotions, and materiality on sensemaking in the Stockwell shooting’, Journal of Management Studies, 51/5: 699–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courpasson, D., Dany, F. and Clegg, S. (2012), ‘Resisters at work: generating productive resistance in the workplace’, Organization Science, 23/3: 801–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, A. L., Luhman, J. T. and Boje, D. M. (2004), ‘Narrative temporality: implications for organizational research’, Organization Studies, 25/2: 261–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
d’Adderio, L. (2008), ‘The performativity of routines: theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routine dynamics’, Research Policy, 37/5: 769–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
d’Adderio, L. (2011), ‘Artifacts at the centre of routines: performing the material turn in routines theory’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 7/S2: 197–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, K. and Burrell, G. (2008), The Spaces of Organisation and the Organisation of Space: Power, Identity and Materiality at Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dameron, S., Lê, J. K. and LeBaron, C. (2015), ‘Materializing strategy and strategizing material: why matter matters’, British Journal of Management, 26/S1: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewenstein, B. and Whyte, J. (2009), ‘Knowledge practices in design: the role of visual representations as “epistemic objects”’, Organization Studies, 30/1: 7–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fauré, B. and Rouleau, L. (2011), ‘The strategic competence of accountants and middle managers in budget making’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 36/3: 167–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fechner, G. T. (1860), Elemente der Psychophysik, vol. I. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel.Google Scholar
Fenton, C. and Langley, A. (2011), ‘Strategy as practice and the narrative turn’, Organization Studies, 32/9: 1171–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gherardi, S. (2017), ‘Sociomateriality in posthuman practice theory’, in Hui, S., Shove, E., and Schatzki, T. (eds), The Nexus of Practices: Connections, Constellations, and Practitioners: 38–51. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gifford, R. (2007), ‘Environmental psychology and sustainable development: expansion, maturation, and challenges’, Journal of Social Issues, 63/1: 199–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gioia, D. A. and Chittipeddi, K. (1991), ‘Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation’, Strategic Management Journal, 12/6: 433–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E. (eds) (2010), Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gond, J. P. and Brès, L. (2020), ‘Designing the tools of the trade: how corporate social responsibility consultants and their tool-based practices created market shifts’, Organization Studies, 41/5: 703–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gond, J. P., Cabantous, L. and Krikorian, F. (2018), ‘How do things become strategic? “Strategifying” corporate social responsibility’, Strategic Organization, 16/3: 241–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D. M. and Swets, J. A. (1966), Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Heatherton, T. F. and Wheatley, T. (2010), ‘Social neuroscience’, in Baumeister, R. F., and Finkel, E. (eds), Advanced Social Psychology: The State of the Science: 575–612. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hellpach, W. (1911), Geopsyche. Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar
Heracleous, L. and Jacobs, C. D. (2008a), ‘Crafting strategy: the role of embodied metaphors’, Long Range Planning, 41/3: 309–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heracleous, L. and Jacobs, C. D. (2008b), ‘Understanding organizations through embodied metaphors’, Organization Studies, 29/1: 45–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgkinson, G. P. and Wright, G. (2002), ‘Confronting strategic inertia in a top management team: learning from failure’, Organization Studies, 23/6: 949–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, R. and Zundel, M. (2023), The Poverty of Strategy: Organization in the Shadows of Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hultin, L. and Mähring, M. (2017), ‘How practice makes sense in healthcare operations: studying sensemaking as performative, material-discursive practice’, Human Relations, 70/5: 566–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, E. (1995), Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Kaplan, S. (2015), ‘Strategy tools‐in‐use: a framework for understanding “technologies of rationality” in practice’, Strategic Management Journal, 36/4: 537–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Bednarek, R. and Spee, P. (2015), Making a Market for Acts of God: The Practice of Risk-Trading in the Global Reinsurance Industry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Burke, G. and Spee, P. (2015), ‘Constructing spaces for strategizing work: a multimodal perspective’, British Journal of Management, 26/S1: 26–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Lê, J. and Balogun, J. (2019), ‘The social practice of coevolving strategy and structure to realize mandated radical change’, Academy of Management Journal, 62/3: 850–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Lê, J. K. and Feldman, M. S. (2012), ‘Toward a theory of coordinating: creating coordinating mechanisms in practice’, Organization Science, 23/4: 907–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Lê, J. K. and van de Ven, A. H. (2009), ‘Doing which work? A practice approach to institutional pluralism’, in Lawrence, T., Leca, B., and Suddaby, R. (eds), Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in International Studies of Organizations: 284–316. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Lê, J. K. and van de Ven, A. H. (2013), ‘Responding to competing strategic demands: how organizing, belonging, and performing paradoxes coevolve’, Strategic Organization, 11/3: 245–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Spee, P. and Smets, M. (2013), ‘Material artifacts: practices for doing strategy with “stuff”’, European Management Journal, 31/1: 41–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., Treisman, A. and Gibbs, B. J. (1992), ‘The reviewing of object files: object-specific integration of information’, Cognitive Psychology, 24/2: 175–219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaplan, S. (2008), ‘Framing contests: strategy making under uncertainty’, Organization Science, 19/5: 729–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, S. (2011), ‘Strategy and PowerPoint: an inquiry into the epistemic culture and machinery of strategy making’, Organization Science, 22/2: 320–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, S. and Orlikowski, W. J. (2013), ‘Temporal work in strategy making’, Organization Science, 24/4: 965–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knorr Cetina, K. (1997), ‘Sociality with objects: social relations in postsocial knowledge societies’, Theory, Culture and Society, 14/4: 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knorr Cetina, K. and Preda, A. (eds) (2012), The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Finance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohtamäki, M., Whittington, R., Vaara, E. and Rabetino, R. (2022), ‘Making connections: harnessing the diversity of strategy‐as‐practice research’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 24/2: 210–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornberger, M. (2017), ‘The values of strategy: valuation practices, rivalry and strategic agency’, Organization Studies, 38/12: 1753–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornberger, M. and Clegg, S. (2011), ‘Strategy as performative practice: the case of Sydney 2030’, Strategic Organization, 9/2: 136–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kouamé, S. and Langley, A. (2018), ‘Relating microprocesses to macro‐outcomes in qualitative strategy process and practice research’, Strategic Management Journal, 39/3: 559–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T. (2006), ‘A “demented work ethic” and a “lifestyle firm”: discourse, identity, and workplace time commitments’, Organization Studies, 27/9: 1339–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T. (2008), ‘A communicative theory of the firm: developing an alternative perspective on intra-organizational power and stakeholder relationships’, Organization Studies, 29/8–9: 1227–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (1987), Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Law, J. and Mol, A. (1994), ‘Notes on materiality and sociality’, The Sociological Review, 43/2: 274–94.Google Scholar
Lê, J. K. and Schmid, T. (2022), ‘The practice of innovating research methods’, Organizational Research Methods, 25/2: 308–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LeBaron, C., Christianson, M. K., Garrett, L. and Ilan, R. (2016), ‘Coordinating flexible performance during everyday work: an ethnomethodological study of handoff routines’, Organization Science , 27/3: 514–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LeBaron, C., Jarzabkowski, P., Pratt, M. G. and Fetzer, G. (2018), ‘An introduction to video methods in organizational research’, Organizational Research Methods, 21/2: 239–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, H. and Liebenau, J. (1999), ‘Time in organizational studies: towards a new research direction’, Organization Studies, 20/6: 1035–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonardi, P. M. (2011), ‘When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies’, MIS Quarterly, 35/1: 147–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonardi, P. and Barley, S. R. (2010), ‘What’s under construction here? Social action, materiality, and power in constructivist studies of technology and organizing’, Academy of Management Annals, 4/1: 1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonardi, P., Bailey, D. E. and Pierce, C. S. (2019), ‘The coevolution of objects and boundaries over time: materiality, affordances, and boundary salience’, Information Systems Research, INFORMS, 30/2: 665–86.Google Scholar
Levine, A. (1997), A Geography of Time: The Temporal Misadventures of a Social Psychologist, or How Every Culture Keeps Time Just a Little Bit Differently. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Li, W., Moallem, I., Paller, K. A. and Gottfried, J. A. (2007), ‘Subliminal smells can guide social preferences’, Psychological Science, 18/12: 1044–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, F. and Maitlis, S. (2014), ‘Emotional dynamics and strategizing processes: a study of strategic conversations in top team meetings’, Journal of Management Studies, 52/2: 202–34.Google Scholar
Lusiani, M. and Langley, A. (2019), ‘The social construction of strategic coherence: practices of enabling leadership’, Long Range Planning, 52/5: 101840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKenzie, D. A. (2006), An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial Models Shape Markets. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maitlis, S. (2005), ‘The social processes of organizational sensemaking’, Academy of Management Journal, 48/1: 21–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maitlis, S. and Lawrence, T. B. (2007), ‘Triggers and enablers of sensegiving in organizations’, Academy of Management Journal, 50/1: 57–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGivern, G. and Dopson, S. (2010), ‘Inter-epistemic power and transforming knowledge objects in a biomedical network’, Organization Studies, 31/12: 1667–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J. A. (1974), An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, R. E., Höllerer, M. A., Jancsary, D. and van Leeuwen, T. (2013), ‘The visual dimension in organizing, organization, and organization research: core ideas, current developments, and promising avenues’, Academy of Management Annals, 7/1: 487–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meziani, N. and Cabantous, L. (2020), ‘Acting intuition into sense: how film crews make sense with embodied ways of knowing’, Journal of Management Studies, 57/7: 1384–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miettinen, R. and Virkkunen, J. (2005), ‘Epistemic objects, artefacts and organizational change’, Organization, 12/3: 437–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naar, L. and Stang Våland, M. (2015), ‘Tales from the field: if buildings could talk’, in Naar, L., and Clegg, S. (eds), Gehry in Sydney: The Dr Chau Chak Wing Building, UTS: 253–73. Mulgrave, VIC: The Images Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Nicolini, D. (2013), Practice Theory, Work, and Organization: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000), ‘Using technology and constituting structures’, Organization Science, 11/4: 404–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (2007), ‘Sociomaterial practices: exploring technology at work’, Organization Studies, 28/9: 1435–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (2015), ‘Practice in research: phenomenon, perspective and philosophy’, in Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., and Vaara, E. (eds), Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice: 23–33. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. and Scott, S. V. (2008), ‘Sociomateriality: challenging the separation of technology, work and organization’, Academy of Management Annals, 2/1: 433–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. and Scott, S. V. (2013), ‘What happens when evaluation goes online? Exploring apparatuses of valuation in the travel sector’, Organization Science, 25/3: 868–91.Google Scholar
Parker, B. and Clegg, S. (2006), ‘Globalization’, in Clegg, S., Hardy, C., Lawrence, T., and Nord, W. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Organization Studies: 651–74. 2nd edn. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Paroutis, S., Franco, L. A. and Papadopoulos, T. (2015), ‘Visual interactions with strategy tools: producing strategic knowledge in workshops’, British Journal of Management, 26/S1: 48–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pascucci, S., Dentoni, D., Clements, J., Poldner, K. and Gartner, W. B. (2021), ‘Forging forms of authority through the sociomateriality of food in partial organizations’, Organization Studies, 42/2: 301–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, A. R. (2009), ‘Moving away from chronological time: introducing the shadows of time and chronotopes as new understandings of “narrative time”’, Organization, 16/3: 389–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Feldman, M. S., Becker, M. C. and Liu, P. (2012), ‘Dynamics of organizational routines: a generative model’, Journal of Management Studies, 49/8: 1484–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, A. (1995), The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinch, T. and Swedberg, R. (2008), Living in a Material World: Economic Sociology Meets Science and Technology Studies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Proshansky, H. M. (1987), ‘The field of environmental psychology: securing its future’, in Stokols, D., and Altman, I. (eds), Handbook of Environmental Psychology, vol. II: 1467–88. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Ransom, S., Hinings, B. and Greenwood, R. (1980), ‘The structuring of organizational structure’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 25/1: 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ray, J. L. and Smith, A. D. (2012), ‘Using photographs to research organizations: evidence, considerations, and application in a field study’, Organizational Research Methods, 15/2: 288–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reckwitz, A. (2002), ‘Toward a theory of social practices: a development in culturalist theorizing’, European Journal of Social Theory, 5/2: 243–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robichaud, D. and Cooren, F. (eds) (2013), Organization and Organizing: Materiality, Agency and Discourse. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robichaud, D., Giroux, H. and Taylor, J. R. (2004), ‘The metaconversation: the recursive property of language as a key to organizing’, Academy of Management Review, 29/4: 617–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenfield, P., Lambert, N. M. and Black, A. (1985), ‘Desk arrangement effects on pupil classroom behaviour’, Journal of Educational Psychology, 77/1: 101–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schatzki, T. R. (2002), The Site of the Social: A Philosophical Account of the Constitution of Social Life and Change. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoeneborn, D. (2013), ‘The pervasive power of PowerPoint: how a genre of professional communication permeates organizational communication’, Organization Studies, 34/12: 1777–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreyögg, G. and Sydow, J. (2011), ‘Organizational path dependence: a process view’, Organization Studies, 32/3: 321–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, S. V. and Orlikowski, W. J. (2012), ‘Reconfiguring relations of accountability: materialization of social media in the travel sector’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 37/1: 26–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, W. R. (1995), Institutions and Organizations, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Seidl, D. and Guérard, S. (2015), ‘Meetings and workshops as strategy practices’, in Golsorkhi, et al. (eds), Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice: 564–81. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sewell, W. H. (1992), ‘A theory of structure: duality, agency, and transformation’, American Journal of Sociology, 98/1: 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slack, T. and Hinings, B. (1994), ‘Institutional pressures and isomorphic change: an empirical investigation’, Organization Studies, 15/6: 803–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spee, A. P. (2022), ‘Strategic management and CCO: a generative nexus’, in Basque, J., Bencherki, N., and Kuhn, T. (eds), The Routledge Handbook of the Communicative Constitution of Organization: 339–53. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Spee, P. and Jarzabkowski, P. (2009), ‘Strategy tools as boundary objects’, Strategic Organization, 7/2: 223–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spee, P. and Jarzabkowski, P. (2011), ‘Strategic planning as communicative process’, Organization Studies, 32/9: 1217–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stensaker, I., Balogun, J. and Langley, A. (2012), ‘Influences on identity work space in the context of major strategic change’, paper presented at the twenty-eighth European Group for Organizational Studies colloquium, Helsinki, 7 July.Google Scholar
Step, L., van den Berg, A. E. and de Groot, J. I. M. (2013), Environmental Psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stevens, S. S. (1957), ‘On the psychophysical law’, Psychological Review, 64/3: 153–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stigliani, I. and Ravasi, D. (2012), ‘Organizing thoughts and connecting brains: material practices and the transition from individual to group-level prospective sensemaking’, Academy of Management Journal, 55/5: 1232–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965), ‘Social structure and organizations’, in March, J. G. (ed.), Handbook of Organizations: 142–93. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Stokols, D. and Altman, I. (eds) (1987), Handbook of Environmental Psychology, 2 vols. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Streeck, J., Goodwin, C. and LeBaron, C. (eds) (2011), Embodied Interaction: Language and Body in the Material World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Suchman, L. A. (2007), Human–Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Suddaby, R., Seidl, D. and Lê, J. K. (2013), ‘Strategy as practice meets neo-institutional theory’, Strategic Organization, 11/3: 329–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundstrom, E., Bell, P. A., Busby, P. L. and Aasmus, C. (1996), ‘Environmental psychology 1989–1994’, Annual Review of Psychology, 47: 482–512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sydow, J., Schreyögg, G. and Koch, J. (2020), ‘On the theory of organizational path dependence: clarifications, replies to objections, and extensions’, Academy of Management Review, 45/4: 717–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. R. and van Every, E. J. (2000), The Emergent Organization: Communication as Site and Surface. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R., Cooren, F., Giroux, N. and Robichaud, D. (1996), ‘The communicational basis of organization: between the conversation and the text’, Communication Theory, 6/1: 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, S. and Spicer, A. (2007), ‘Time for space: a narrative review of research on organizational spaces’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 9/4: 325–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, L. and Ambrosini, V. (2015), ‘Materializing strategy: the role of comprehensiveness and management controls in strategy formation in volatile environments’, British Journal of Management, 26/S1: 105–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treisman, A. M. and Gelade, G. (1980), ‘A feature-integration theory of attention’, Cognitive Psychology, 12/1: 97–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1974), ‘Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases’, Science, 185: 1124–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vásquez, C., Bencherki, N., Cooren, F. and Sergi, V. (2018), ‘From “matters of concern” to “matters of authority”: studying the performativity of strategy from a communicative constitution of organization (CCO) approach’, Long Range Planning, 51/3: 417–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1995), Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Wenzel, M. and Koch, J. (2018), ‘Strategy as staged performance: a critical discursive perspective on keynote speeches as a genre of strategic communication’, Strategic Management Journal, 39/3: 639–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werle, F. and Seidl, D. (2015), ‘The layered materiality of strategizing: epistemic objects and the interplay between material artefacts in the exploration of strategic topics’, British Journal of Management, 26/S1: 67–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wexner, L. B. (1954), ‘The degree to which colors (hues) are associated with mood-tones’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 38/6: 432–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (2007), ‘Strategy practice and strategy process, family differences and the sociological eye’, Organization Studies, 28/10: 1575–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittle, A. and Mueller, F. (2010), ‘Strategy, enrolment and accounting: the politics of strategic ideas’, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 23/5: 626–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittle, A., Housley, W., Gilchrist, A., Lenney, P. and Mueller, F. (2014), ‘Power, politics and organizational communication: an ethnomethodological perspective’, in Cooren, F., Vaara, E., Langley, A., and Tsoukas, H. (eds), Language and Communication at Work: Discourse, Narrativity, and Organizing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, G. D. (1966), ‘Arousal properties of red versus green’, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 23/3: 947–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolkowitz, C. (2006), Bodies at Work. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, A. (2005), ‘The role of scenarios as prospective sensemaking devices’, Management Decision, 43/1: 86–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, R. P., Paroutis, S. and Blettner, D. P. (2013), ‘How useful are the strategic tools we teach in business schools?’, Journal of Management Studies, 50/1: 92–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaheer, S., Albert, S. and Zaheer, A. (1999), ‘Time scales and organizational theory’, Academy of Management Review, 24/4: 725–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zilber, T. B. (2008), ‘The work of meanings in institutional processes and thinking’, in Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Sahlin, K., and Suddaby, R. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism: 151–69. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Zilber, T. B. (2012), ‘The relevance of institutional theory for the study of organizational culture’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 21/1: 88–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zundel, M. and Kokkalis, P. (2010), ‘Theorizing as engaged practice’, Organization Studies, 31/9–10: 1209–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zweigenhaft, R. L. (1976), ‘Personal space in the faculty office: desk placement and the student–faculty interaction’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 61/4: 529–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@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
×