Waste in Organizations: Discerning (Dis)value in Rational, Natural, and Open Systems Perspectives

IF 1.7 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY Critical Sociology Pub Date : 2023-11-23 DOI:10.1177/08969205231214251
Nadine Arnold, Christopher Dorn
{"title":"Waste in Organizations: Discerning (Dis)value in Rational, Natural, and Open Systems Perspectives","authors":"Nadine Arnold, Christopher Dorn","doi":"10.1177/08969205231214251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Society overflows with waste, and waste and discard studies emphasize the social construction and contingency of waste, outlining it as the negatively valued. However, organizational sociology currently does not reflect these insights and rarely accounts for waste. Therefore, this article asks what kind of theory is required to capture waste in organized contexts. By searching for waste in Scott and Davis’ well-accepted three perspectives on organizations (as rational, natural, or open systems), it becomes evident that each perspective conceptualizes waste based on its theoretical conception of organizations (rational: disorder; natural: disintegration; open: overdetermination) that is mirrored in different accounts of waste. While these perspectives assign negative value to different organizational conditions, they offer little insight into how organizations themselves disvalue entities and generate waste. To overcome this shortcoming, the article introduces an integrative perspective that incorporates the three prevalent perspectives, conceptualizing organizations as closed and open systems (COS) based on Luhmann’s system concept and observation theory. The COS perspective explains how organizations construct waste through their selective indication of values and disvalues. It thereby identifies waste as a contingent yet inevitable part of any organization and shifts attention from the study of symptomatic waste to its underlying origins.","PeriodicalId":47686,"journal":{"name":"Critical Sociology","volume":"93 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08969205231214251","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Society overflows with waste, and waste and discard studies emphasize the social construction and contingency of waste, outlining it as the negatively valued. However, organizational sociology currently does not reflect these insights and rarely accounts for waste. Therefore, this article asks what kind of theory is required to capture waste in organized contexts. By searching for waste in Scott and Davis’ well-accepted three perspectives on organizations (as rational, natural, or open systems), it becomes evident that each perspective conceptualizes waste based on its theoretical conception of organizations (rational: disorder; natural: disintegration; open: overdetermination) that is mirrored in different accounts of waste. While these perspectives assign negative value to different organizational conditions, they offer little insight into how organizations themselves disvalue entities and generate waste. To overcome this shortcoming, the article introduces an integrative perspective that incorporates the three prevalent perspectives, conceptualizing organizations as closed and open systems (COS) based on Luhmann’s system concept and observation theory. The COS perspective explains how organizations construct waste through their selective indication of values and disvalues. It thereby identifies waste as a contingent yet inevitable part of any organization and shifts attention from the study of symptomatic waste to its underlying origins.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
组织中的浪费:从理性、自然和开放系统的角度辨别(不)价值
社会充斥着废物,废物和废弃物研究强调废物的社会建构和偶然性,将其概括为负面价值。然而,组织社会学目前并没有反映出这些见解,也很少对浪费进行说明。因此,本文提出了需要什么样的理论来捕捉组织环境中的浪费现象。通过在斯科特和戴维斯广为接受的关于组织的三种视角(理性、自然或开放系统)中寻找浪费,我们可以发现,每种视角都是根据其关于组织的理论概念(理性:无序;自然:解体;开放:过度决定)对浪费进行概念化,而这些概念又反映在对浪费的不同描述中。虽然这些观点对不同的组织条件赋予了负面价值,但它们对组织本身如何使实体失去价值并产生浪费却没有提供什么见解。为了克服这一缺陷,文章引入了一种综合视角,将三种流行视角融为一体,基于卢曼的系统概念和观察理论,将组织概念化为封闭系统和开放系统(COS)。封闭和开放系统视角解释了组织如何通过选择性地表明价值和不价值来构建浪费。因此,它将浪费确定为任何组织的一个偶然但又不可避免的组成部分,并将注意力从对症状性浪费的研究转移到对其根本原因的研究上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Sociology
Critical Sociology SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Critical Sociology is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes the highest quality original research. Originally appearing as The Insurgent Sociologist, it grew out of the tumultuous times of the late 1960s and was a by-product of the "Sociology Liberation Movement" which erupted at the 1969 meetings of the American Sociological Association. At first publishing work mainly within the broadest boundaries of the Marxist tradition, over the past decade the journal has been home to articles informed by post-modern, feminist, cultural and other perspectives that critically evaluate the workings of the capitalist system and its impact on the world.
期刊最新文献
New Wave of Thinking About Revolutions From Labour Process Theory to Organisational Political Economy: A Response to Benassi, Ikeler and Wood Platform Organizations and Fields: Exploring the Influence of Field Conditions on Platformization Processes Disguised Workers: The Transformation of Labour and the Myth of Entrepreneurship in ‘Post-Socialist’ Polish Capitalism Contesting Power From the Periphery: The Latin American Sociological Imagination and the Media
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1