Pub Date : 2022-07-01DOI: 10.1177/26317877221109276
Johan Alvehus, Olof Hallonsten
As a theoretical framework in organization studies, institutional logics is immensely popular. It has been used in a large amount of highly contributory and enlightening empirical studies, and developed far beyond its original formulation in a classical paper by Friedland and Alford (1991). In our paper, we identify three key theoretical problems that have emerged in the development and use of institutional logics theory in the past three decades: the lack of uniformity and coherence in the definitions and empirical identifications of logics; the tendency of institutional logics theorists to attempt to build grand theory to connect micro, meso, and macro levels of analysis; and the difficulties to explain how institutional logics are reproduced and how institutional logics interrelate and evolve over time. To address these issues, we highlight the similarities between institutional logics theory and classical functionalist differentiation theory, drawing its legacy from Max Weber, Talcott Parsons, and Robert Merton, and propose its use as a resource in further theoretical development. The aim of the paper is not to reject institutional logics theory, or merely to point out its weaknesses, but to demonstrate how a revival of some classics in sociological theory can be used to sharpen institutional logics as an analytical tool and thus assist in efforts to further improve the usefulness of institutional logics as a theoretical framework in organization studies.
{"title":"Institutional Logics and Functionalist Differentiation Theory: Challenges and pathways forward","authors":"Johan Alvehus, Olof Hallonsten","doi":"10.1177/26317877221109276","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877221109276","url":null,"abstract":"As a theoretical framework in organization studies, institutional logics is immensely popular. It has been used in a large amount of highly contributory and enlightening empirical studies, and developed far beyond its original formulation in a classical paper by Friedland and Alford (1991). In our paper, we identify three key theoretical problems that have emerged in the development and use of institutional logics theory in the past three decades: the lack of uniformity and coherence in the definitions and empirical identifications of logics; the tendency of institutional logics theorists to attempt to build grand theory to connect micro, meso, and macro levels of analysis; and the difficulties to explain how institutional logics are reproduced and how institutional logics interrelate and evolve over time. To address these issues, we highlight the similarities between institutional logics theory and classical functionalist differentiation theory, drawing its legacy from Max Weber, Talcott Parsons, and Robert Merton, and propose its use as a resource in further theoretical development. The aim of the paper is not to reject institutional logics theory, or merely to point out its weaknesses, but to demonstrate how a revival of some classics in sociological theory can be used to sharpen institutional logics as an analytical tool and thus assist in efforts to further improve the usefulness of institutional logics as a theoretical framework in organization studies.","PeriodicalId":50648,"journal":{"name":"Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory","volume":"1162 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86477587","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-01DOI: 10.1177/26317877221109282
P. Fleming
Jean-Paul Sartre’s enormous and often difficult Critique of Dialectical Reason (1960/2004) has largely been forgotten today. But the concepts it contains are worth reconsidering, particularly from an organization theory perspective. The book offers novel explanations of organizations, groups, institutions, power, resistance and technology that remain eminently relevant. I argue that a compelling and fruitful organization theory lurks in the Critique of Dialectical Reason with respect to (at least) three key topics: power/resistance, management hierarchies and technology. I outline the contours of this Sartrean organization theory and present implications and avenues for future inquiry.
{"title":"Sartre’s Lost Organization Theory: Reading the Critique of Dialectical Reason Today","authors":"P. Fleming","doi":"10.1177/26317877221109282","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877221109282","url":null,"abstract":"Jean-Paul Sartre’s enormous and often difficult Critique of Dialectical Reason (1960/2004) has largely been forgotten today. But the concepts it contains are worth reconsidering, particularly from an organization theory perspective. The book offers novel explanations of organizations, groups, institutions, power, resistance and technology that remain eminently relevant. I argue that a compelling and fruitful organization theory lurks in the Critique of Dialectical Reason with respect to (at least) three key topics: power/resistance, management hierarchies and technology. I outline the contours of this Sartrean organization theory and present implications and avenues for future inquiry.","PeriodicalId":50648,"journal":{"name":"Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85920646","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-01DOI: 10.1177/26317877211052296
M. Power
This essay is a conversation between Shoshana Zuboff’s theory of surveillance capitalism, Mikkel Flyverbom’s conceptualization of the hyper-visibility afforded by digital architectures, and my own ‘analog’ theory of accounting dynamics in the ‘audit society’. Drawing upon trends in accounting practice and research I develop a number of inflection points which define theoretical tensions between the concepts of audit society and surveillance capitalism. These tensions suggest that theoretical innovation is required in the face of: the accelerating constitution of organizations by platforms and their processes – ‘platformization’; the constitution of human agents as data-driven subjects of these data architectures – ‘cyborgization’; and the reconstruction of the social sciences by a pervasive data positivism in which accounting becomes ‘accountics’. The exploration of these three inflection points reveals the deep operational logic of surveillance capitalism as an ‘economy of traces’ and traceability. Zuboff’s challenge of a political dystopia governed by technology giants and Flyverbom’s image of a society ‘overlit’ by digital architectures necessitate a re-specification of the audit society dynamics that I have previously theorized. The re-specification that I propose in this essay is a form of a critical ‘traceology’ which takes as its focus the ongoing production of all manner of traces and how they make up organizations, people and forms of knowledge.
{"title":"Theorizing the Economy of Traces: From Audit Society to Surveillance Capitalism","authors":"M. Power","doi":"10.1177/26317877211052296","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877211052296","url":null,"abstract":"This essay is a conversation between Shoshana Zuboff’s theory of surveillance capitalism, Mikkel Flyverbom’s conceptualization of the hyper-visibility afforded by digital architectures, and my own ‘analog’ theory of accounting dynamics in the ‘audit society’. Drawing upon trends in accounting practice and research I develop a number of inflection points which define theoretical tensions between the concepts of audit society and surveillance capitalism. These tensions suggest that theoretical innovation is required in the face of: the accelerating constitution of organizations by platforms and their processes – ‘platformization’; the constitution of human agents as data-driven subjects of these data architectures – ‘cyborgization’; and the reconstruction of the social sciences by a pervasive data positivism in which accounting becomes ‘accountics’. The exploration of these three inflection points reveals the deep operational logic of surveillance capitalism as an ‘economy of traces’ and traceability. Zuboff’s challenge of a political dystopia governed by technology giants and Flyverbom’s image of a society ‘overlit’ by digital architectures necessitate a re-specification of the audit society dynamics that I have previously theorized. The re-specification that I propose in this essay is a form of a critical ‘traceology’ which takes as its focus the ongoing production of all manner of traces and how they make up organizations, people and forms of knowledge.","PeriodicalId":50648,"journal":{"name":"Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74539443","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-01DOI: 10.1177/26317877221129290
Shoshana Zuboff
Surveillance capitalism is what happened when US democracy stood down. Two decades later, it fails any reasonable test of responsible global stewardship of digital information and communications. The abdication of the world’s information spaces to surveillance capitalism has become the meta-crisis of every republic because it obstructs solutions to all other crises. The surveillance capitalist giants–Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, and their ecosystems–now constitute a sweeping political-economic institutional order that exerts oligopolistic control over most digital information and communication spaces, systems, and processes. The commodification of human behavior operationalized in the secret massive-scale extraction of human-generated data is the foundation of surveillance capitalism’s two-decade arc of institutional development. However, when revenue derives from commodification of the human, the classic economic equation is scrambled. Imperative economic operations entail accretions of governance functions and impose substantial social harms. Concentration of economic power produces collateral concentrations of governance and social powers. Oligopoly in the economic realm shades into oligarchy in the societal realm. Society’s ability to respond to these developments is thwarted by category errors. Governance incursions and social harms such as control over AI or rampant disinformation are too frequently seen as distinct crises and siloed, each with its own specialists and prescriptions, rather than understood as organic effects of causal economic operations. In contrast, this paper explores surveillance capitalism as a unified field of institutional development. Its four already visible stages of development are examined through a two-decade lens on expanding economic operations and their societal effects, including extraction and the wholesale destruction of privacy, the consequences of blindness-by-design in human-to-human communications, the rise of AI dominance and epistemic inequality, novel achievements in remote behavioral actuation such as the Trump 2016 campaign, and Apple-Google’s leverage of digital infrastructure control to subjugate democratic governments desperate to fight a pandemic. Structurally, each stage creates the conditions and constructs the scaffolding for the next, and each builds on what went before. Substantively, each stage is characterized by three vectors of accomplishment: novel economic operations, governance carve-outs, and fresh social harms. These three dimensions weave together across time in a unified architecture of institutional development. Later-stage harms are revealed as effects of the foundational-stage economic operations required for commodification of the human. Surveillance capitalism’s development is understood in the context of a larger contest with the democratic order—the only competing institutional order that poses an existential threat. The democratic order retains the legiti
{"title":"Surveillance Capitalism or Democracy? The Death Match of Institutional Orders and the Politics of Knowledge in Our Information Civilization","authors":"Shoshana Zuboff","doi":"10.1177/26317877221129290","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877221129290","url":null,"abstract":"Surveillance capitalism is what happened when US democracy stood down. Two decades later, it fails any reasonable test of responsible global stewardship of digital information and communications. The abdication of the world’s information spaces to surveillance capitalism has become the meta-crisis of every republic because it obstructs solutions to all other crises. The surveillance capitalist giants–Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, and their ecosystems–now constitute a sweeping political-economic institutional order that exerts oligopolistic control over most digital information and communication spaces, systems, and processes. The commodification of human behavior operationalized in the secret massive-scale extraction of human-generated data is the foundation of surveillance capitalism’s two-decade arc of institutional development. However, when revenue derives from commodification of the human, the classic economic equation is scrambled. Imperative economic operations entail accretions of governance functions and impose substantial social harms. Concentration of economic power produces collateral concentrations of governance and social powers. Oligopoly in the economic realm shades into oligarchy in the societal realm. Society’s ability to respond to these developments is thwarted by category errors. Governance incursions and social harms such as control over AI or rampant disinformation are too frequently seen as distinct crises and siloed, each with its own specialists and prescriptions, rather than understood as organic effects of causal economic operations. In contrast, this paper explores surveillance capitalism as a unified field of institutional development. Its four already visible stages of development are examined through a two-decade lens on expanding economic operations and their societal effects, including extraction and the wholesale destruction of privacy, the consequences of blindness-by-design in human-to-human communications, the rise of AI dominance and epistemic inequality, novel achievements in remote behavioral actuation such as the Trump 2016 campaign, and Apple-Google’s leverage of digital infrastructure control to subjugate democratic governments desperate to fight a pandemic. Structurally, each stage creates the conditions and constructs the scaffolding for the next, and each builds on what went before. Substantively, each stage is characterized by three vectors of accomplishment: novel economic operations, governance carve-outs, and fresh social harms. These three dimensions weave together across time in a unified architecture of institutional development. Later-stage harms are revealed as effects of the foundational-stage economic operations required for commodification of the human. Surveillance capitalism’s development is understood in the context of a larger contest with the democratic order—the only competing institutional order that poses an existential threat. The democratic order retains the legiti","PeriodicalId":50648,"journal":{"name":"Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory","volume":"97 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80870194","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-18DOI: 10.1007/s10588-022-09359-y
D. Pynadath, B. Dilkina, David C. Jeong, R. John, S. Marsella, Chirag Merchant, L. Miller, S. Read
{"title":"Disaster world","authors":"D. Pynadath, B. Dilkina, David C. Jeong, R. John, S. Marsella, Chirag Merchant, L. Miller, S. Read","doi":"10.1007/s10588-022-09359-y","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-022-09359-y","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50648,"journal":{"name":"Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory","volume":"29 1","pages":"84 - 117"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43165209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-30DOI: 10.1007/s10588-021-09349-6
A. Naugle, D. Krofcheck, C. Warrender, K. Lakkaraju, L. Swiler, Stephen Verzi, Ben Emery, J. Murdock, Michael Bernard, Vicente Romero
{"title":"What can simulation test beds teach us about social science? Results of the ground truth program","authors":"A. Naugle, D. Krofcheck, C. Warrender, K. Lakkaraju, L. Swiler, Stephen Verzi, Ben Emery, J. Murdock, Michael Bernard, Vicente Romero","doi":"10.1007/s10588-021-09349-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-021-09349-6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50648,"journal":{"name":"Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory","volume":"29 1","pages":"242 - 263"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46942249","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-18DOI: 10.1007/s10588-021-09346-9
A. Naugle, Adam Russell, K. Lakkaraju, L. Swiler, Stephen Verzi, Vicente Romero
{"title":"The Ground Truth program: simulations as test beds for social science research methods","authors":"A. Naugle, Adam Russell, K. Lakkaraju, L. Swiler, Stephen Verzi, Vicente Romero","doi":"10.1007/s10588-021-09346-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-021-09346-9","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50648,"journal":{"name":"Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory","volume":"29 1","pages":"1 - 19"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43303238","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The objective of this paper is to examine the evolutionary mechanism regarding how a co-creation community network evolves as the growth of user interaction, which differs from the existing studies concentrating on the explanation of the forward problems of information management systems (e.g. motivational identification of user participation and examination of users’ outcomes). To achieve this objective, network generation model is formulated as nodes of users, ties of user’s interactions, random process, and preferential attachment. Then, real networks formulated by practice and artificial networks generated by the proposed model are compared by cumulative degree distribution, so as to validate the feasibility of the proposed model and to explain user behavior from the perspective of link formulation. Results indicate that: (i) new users account for main contributions for the development of co-creation community; (ii) new users prefer to interact high-influence all the time, while old users interchangeably choose preferential attachment or random linking in different time periods, (iii) the initial number of users, the probability for choosing preferential attachment or random attachment has a great influence on the properties of a user interactive network.
{"title":"Random or preferential? Evolutionary mechanism of user behavior in co-creation community","authors":"Fanshun Zhang, Congdong Li, Cejun Cao, Zhiwei Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s10588-021-09357-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-021-09357-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The objective of this paper is to examine the evolutionary mechanism regarding how a co-creation community network evolves as the growth of user interaction, which differs from the existing studies concentrating on the explanation of the forward problems of information management systems (e.g. motivational identification of user participation and examination of users’ outcomes). To achieve this objective, network generation model is formulated as nodes of users, ties of user’s interactions, random process, and preferential attachment. Then, real networks formulated by practice and artificial networks generated by the proposed model are compared by cumulative degree distribution, so as to validate the feasibility of the proposed model and to explain user behavior from the perspective of link formulation. Results indicate that: (i) new users account for main contributions for the development of co-creation community; (ii) new users prefer to interact high-influence all the time, while old users interchangeably choose preferential attachment or random linking in different time periods, (iii) the initial number of users, the probability for choosing preferential attachment or random attachment has a great influence on the properties of a user interactive network.</p>","PeriodicalId":50648,"journal":{"name":"Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory","volume":"157 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138541930","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-01DOI: 10.1007/s10588-022-09361-4
Inês Domingues, Ana Filipa Sequeira
{"title":"Editorial of the Special Issue from WorldCIST'20.","authors":"Inês Domingues, Ana Filipa Sequeira","doi":"10.1007/s10588-022-09361-4","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10588-022-09361-4","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50648,"journal":{"name":"Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory","volume":"1 1","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8972705/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48374961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-01DOI: 10.1177/26317877221090317
Annika Weiser, T. Laamanen
The dynamic equilibrium model of organizing has become an influential theoretical framework in paradox research. The model describes paradox management as tightrope-walking, as actors cope with paradoxical tensions through continuous microshifts. The underlying assumption is that once actors accept the paradox and support opposing poles in a consistently inconsistent manner, they can effectively manage organizational tensions. We argue that paradoxical tensions cannot be subsumed under managerial control in this way due to the emergent and unpredictable nature of paradoxes in organizations. Hence, in addition to needing to balance on a tightrope, the tightrope walker may find the rope suddenly pulled in an unexpected direction by a strong gust of wind. To advance theory development, we put forward the concept of dissipative equilibrium to better capture the temporary nature of balance and the continuous vigilance and interventions needed from management to (re)balance an organization in the presence of unexpected developments that are beyond management’s control.
{"title":"Extending the Dynamic Equilibrium Model of Paradox: Unveiling the dissipative dynamics in organizations","authors":"Annika Weiser, T. Laamanen","doi":"10.1177/26317877221090317","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877221090317","url":null,"abstract":"The dynamic equilibrium model of organizing has become an influential theoretical framework in paradox research. The model describes paradox management as tightrope-walking, as actors cope with paradoxical tensions through continuous microshifts. The underlying assumption is that once actors accept the paradox and support opposing poles in a consistently inconsistent manner, they can effectively manage organizational tensions. We argue that paradoxical tensions cannot be subsumed under managerial control in this way due to the emergent and unpredictable nature of paradoxes in organizations. Hence, in addition to needing to balance on a tightrope, the tightrope walker may find the rope suddenly pulled in an unexpected direction by a strong gust of wind. To advance theory development, we put forward the concept of dissipative equilibrium to better capture the temporary nature of balance and the continuous vigilance and interventions needed from management to (re)balance an organization in the presence of unexpected developments that are beyond management’s control.","PeriodicalId":50648,"journal":{"name":"Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory","volume":"100 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82503207","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：