Search results

In this paper, I compare Theodore Schatzki’s practice theory, the existential phenomenology of Martin Heidegger upon whom Schatzki drew in its formation, and my own theory of institutional logics which I have sought to develop as a religious sociology of institution. I examine how Schatzki and I both differently locate our thinking at the level of practice. In this essay I also explore the possibility of appropriating Heidegger’s religious ontology of worldhood, which Schatzki rejects, in that project. My institutional logical position is an atheological religious one, poly-onto-teleological. Institutional logics are grounded in ultimate goods which are praiseworthy “objects” of striving and practice, signifieds to which elements of an institutional logic have a non-arbitrary relation, sources of and references for practical norms about how one should have, make, do or be that good, and a basis of knowing the world of practice as ordered around such goods. Institutional logics are constellations co-constituted by substances, not fields animated by values, interests or powers.

Because we are speaking against “values,” people are horrified at a philosophy that ostensibly dares to despise humanity’s best qualities. For what is more “logical” than that a thinking that denies values must necessarily pronounce everything valueless? Martin Heidegger, “Letter on Humanism” (2008a, p. 249).

In this chapter we develop a new approach, based on the identification of strategy classes, to study how firms face multiple demands. The procedure that we propose (called Relational Class Analysis) stems from an analysis of the similarity of associative patterns across multiple observable outcomes, which reflect the underlying set of choices firms make to similarly address demands. Empirically, the study of 18 financial and extra-financial performance outcomes for 3,655 firms shows the existence of three main strategic classes. Drawing on our analysis, we redefine strategy as the set of committed decisions undertaken to resolve trade-offs between multiple concurrent objectives and discuss the implications of our approach for eight core questions for strategy and organizational theory.

The central objective of this chapter is to develop a theoretical reading of the international and contemporary discourse of reproductive rights. My hope is that the perspective and analytical proposal set forth represent a contribution to the expansion and consolidation of the field of study, and renders useful for the analysis and evaluation of the situation of reproductive rights within national contexts.

Time pressures in paid work and household labor have intensified in recent decades because of the increase in dual-earner families and long and nonstandard employment hours. This analysis uses U.S. time-diary data from 1998 to 2000 to investigate the association of employment and household multitasking. Results indicate that mothers do more multitasking than fathers and the gender gap in household labor is largest for the most intense type of multitasking: combining housework and child care. In addition, mothers employed for long hours spend more time multitasking than mothers employed 35–40h per week. It appears that motivations for multitasking are heterogeneous: some multitasking is done out of convenience, whereas other multitaskings are a strategy used to manage too much work in too little time.

The ‘sharing economy’ involves the giving and taking of goods, services, your room, my car, our food recipes and alternative forms of money to create a new economic imperative. Its open-sourced character is the creation of producers, users, consumers and, crucially, citizens, who consciously or unwittingly are carving out a new economy with a collaborative, social impetus. Driven, on the one hand, by technology that refuses to be constrained in the hands of the few, and, on the other, by the fracturing of our economies and societies by inequality (ecological, demographic, the movement of people across borders), the giving-and-taking phenomenon is lubricated by new sources of funding and philanthropy. The sharing economy opens up possibilities for the further consolidation of wealth either in the coffers of a privileged minority or a reversal of wealth creation and the inculcation of entrepreneurship as the right and responsibility of citizens through the sharing of ideas, technologies and values, locally and globally in varied ‘commons’. This chapter offers an analysis of the phenomenon of giving and taking in an open-sourced environment and proposes ideas for a prospective citizen entrepreneurship to open up spaces for collaborative new ventures.

The concept of novelty is central to questions of creativity, innovation, and discovery. Despite the prominence in scientific inquiry and everyday discourse, there is a chronic ambiguity over its meaning and a surprising variety of empirical measures, which muddle the interpretation of prior findings and frustrate the consolidation of knowledge. To help dispel some of the unclarity, this paper presents a survey and synthesis of conceptualizations and operationalizations of novelty scattered across social, cognitive, and organizational studies. From this analysis, I advance the argument that novelty is generally regarded as a function of frequency or proximity, and in these two complementary perspectives, it is commonly bounded its empirical study and theoretical understanding. I further argue that contextual and temporal aspects are integral to the specification of novelty and primary contributors to its multifaceted nature.