{"title":"Ego-documents in management and organizational history","authors":"Morten Tinning, C. Lubinski","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2022.2158107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The vibrant exchange between history and organization studies has triggered major debates on engaging historiography and theorizing with history. By comparison, studies of historical methods have received less attention. We argue that one missing debate concerns different typologies of sources, which facilitate systematic comparative analysis and interpretation. Specifically, we introduce the category ‘ego-documents’, which we define as ‘sources that reveal the historical self as a thinking and feeling being in the world (agency in structure) or unveil the impact of social norms and relationships on the historical self (structure in agency).’ We review the history of the term ego-documents and debate the virtues and challenges of using it in management and organizational history. We then distinguish four uses of ego-documents and explicate their sources and purposes based on articles published in Management and Organizational History.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":"17 1","pages":"166 - 188"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management & Organizational History","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2022.2158107","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
ABSTRACT The vibrant exchange between history and organization studies has triggered major debates on engaging historiography and theorizing with history. By comparison, studies of historical methods have received less attention. We argue that one missing debate concerns different typologies of sources, which facilitate systematic comparative analysis and interpretation. Specifically, we introduce the category ‘ego-documents’, which we define as ‘sources that reveal the historical self as a thinking and feeling being in the world (agency in structure) or unveil the impact of social norms and relationships on the historical self (structure in agency).’ We review the history of the term ego-documents and debate the virtues and challenges of using it in management and organizational history. We then distinguish four uses of ego-documents and explicate their sources and purposes based on articles published in Management and Organizational History.
期刊介绍:
Management & Organizational History (M&OH) is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal that aims to publish high quality, original, academic research concerning historical approaches to the study of management, organizations and organizing. The journal addresses issues from all areas of management, organization studies, and related fields. The unifying theme of M&OH is its historical orientation. The journal is both empirical and theoretical. It seeks to advance innovative historical methods. It facilitates interdisciplinary dialogue, especially between business and management history and organization theory. The ethos of M&OH is reflective, ethical, imaginative, critical, inter-disciplinary, and international, as well as historical in orientation.