Search results

The methodological debate relating to accounting research using actor‐network theory (ANT) has primarily focused on how ANT generates performative studies that significantly differ from ostensive studies. These discussions have in many ways (and for good reasons) distanced performative from ostensive research. Recently, however, several scholars have emphasized the interdependencies between ostensive and performative aspects when it comes to knowledge development, thereby underlining the need to coordinate ostensive and performative studies and bring them closer together. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the methodological opportunities and limitations for ANT researchers who seek to move closer to ostensive research.

The basis for exploring the opportunities and threats stemming from integration at the methodological level is a comparison of performative and ostensive case study methodologies as they have been presented in research. Robert K. Yin's case study methodology is chosen to represent an ostensive view whereas performative case study methodology is represented by the methodological reflections of Bruno Latour, John Law, and Michel Callon.

The paper illustrates how the process is a balancing act. On the one hand, it requires performative researchers to relate more closely to aspects decisive for ostensive researchers; yet, on the other, they need to preserve the distinctiveness of the performative approach.

This paper exemplifies these issues with reference to management accounting research and contributes by clarifying the methodological implications of moving performative research closer to ostensive research.

This paper aims to address how organizational routines paradoxically affect the process of organizational innovation based on a new construct of routines or to investigate the coexistence of both hindering and promoting effects from routines and their differentiated affecting paths.

This paper adopts an interpretive and exploratory case study on the business model innovation of Yimu Technology Company Limited (Yimu Tech) from product standardization to customization. Considering that this innovation reflects a successful down-up rather than traditional up-down innovation, this paper focuses on it to explore how the most micro routines affect the whole process of innovation. Almost two years were spent in collecting data from Yimu Tech and in following the innovation through approaches of semi-structured interviews, archival data and observation; the data were analyzed through a five-step process before a framework showing the paradoxical effects was finally set up.

This research specifies the construct of organizational routines and promotes a five-dimensional concept covering the organizational, collective and individual levels of an organization. It confirms the interaction between the performative and ostensive aspects of routines, by showing that the ostensive aspect may not only guide tasks performing but also allow multiple changes, and the performative aspect may affect the ostensive aspect through the down-up or up-down path. Also, it finds that routines may paradoxically affect all three phases of innovation, with a strong up-down hindering effect but a weak down-up promoting effect in the preparation phase, a strong down-up promoting effect but a weak hindering effect in the emergence phase and both significant effects in the consolidation phase.

This research is constrained by several limitations. The set up framework of routines and their paradoxical effects on innovation need a further confirmation in more contexts or organizations; more elements should be considered in exploring the evolution of routines and their effects on innovations; little attention has been paid to the relationship between these two types of effects, conflicting with each other, joining together or working independently.

The findings offered some valuable insights for further research on organizational routines and organizational innovation and hold important implications for management practices. This research enriched the two-aspect view of routines by constructing a five-dimensional framework; further research studies on routine dynamics by showing the interaction between the performative and ostensive aspects can contribute to the study on effects of organizational routines on innovations by showing how routines promote and hinder innovation simultaneously throughout the whole process. It reminds managers of the strong power from the microlevel of an organization in innovation.

The purpose of this paper is to contrast and to connect a transaction cost economics (TCE) perspective and an actor‐network theory (ANT) perspective on control of interfirm transactional relationships.

The paper outlines two theoretical perspectives on interfirm control: an ostensive TCE perspective and a performative ANT perspective. By contrasting these perspectives the different assumptions of each perspective are highlighted. By connecting them, potentially interacting research approaches become visible.

Ostensive research and performative research may be two sides of the same coin. Ostensive TCE‐based research produces intentional explanations for the choice of certain control structures, while performative research exposes the mobilization of control structures in specific episodes from practice. Interaction between the two potentially accelerates and enhances knowledge production on control in interfirm relationships. TCE‐based ostensive research produces conceptualizations that can be followed as actors, thus enabling a demonstration of their enactment. Conversely, ANT‐based research may challenge the stability of (con)text as it is perceived in TCE‐based research.

The paper offers a base for multi‐paradigm research into control of interfirm transactional relationships. Specifically, the paper offers a base for connecting TCE‐informed research and ANT‐informed research into interfirm control.

The performative approach views organizational routines as generative systems with internal aspects – ostensive and performative – and dynamics (Feldman and Pentland, 2003). The purpose of this paper is to better understand under which conditions the routine dynamics happens or not.

To deal with this issue, for 13 months, the authors conducted a comparative and longitudinal case studies based on the evolution of the organizational routines in absence management in two departments of a French hospital.

The results show contrasting dynamics in the studied organizational routines: one evolved, the other in contrast, seemed blocked. The authors suggest that the routine dynamics depends on the relative weight of its ostensive and performative aspects: a balance situation makes mutual adaptions possible and an imbalance situation leads to the conservation of defective routine. The research underlines also that, in the hospital context, the capacity of management and teams to discuss and to negotiate the implementation of external rules plays an important role in the balance of the internal dimensions of routine.

While the literature on performative approach focusses on the “how and why” the routine act as a source of continuous change, this research investigates more in depth the working of the routines dynamics itself. The issue of balance or imbalance introduces a new element in the framework of routine dynamics and can constitute an interesting focus for managers looking to transform their organizational routines.

The purpose of this paper is to enhance the eminent work of Burns and Scapens (B&S) by introducing broader conceptualisations on organisational routines and rules into management accounting.

The paper sets out with the B&S framework. The paper is primarily conceptual in nature and with the addition of some more recent literature on organisational routines serves to bolster the underpinnings of the B&S framework. Drawing especially on the work of Feldman and Pentland, the nature of management accounting routines in particular is explored in some detail. By association, rules are also explored.

This paper proposes that an ostensive‐performative distinction of routines augments our conceptualisation of how management accounting routines can represent both a source of stability and of change (simultaneously). Also, by showing how routines can represent both structure and action simultaneously, some light is shed on the ongoing interrelationship between routines and rules as highlighted in the B&S framework and some concerns in recent literature addressed. In particular, a refined view of both routines and rules not only bolsters the work of B&S, but potentially increases its applicability as a theoretical lens to empirical studies in less formal organisations.

The proposed refinements to the B&S framework, which aim to clarify the nature of rules and routines in a management accounting context, may be particularly useful for researchers studying less formalised (or, less rules‐based) organisations. The findings emphasise the potentially more important role of the less formal concept of routines in most organisations.

The paper supports and complements the B&S framework by integrating more recent conceptual developments on organisational routines and offering some potential definitional clarity on rules and routines in management accounting.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the dynamics involved in the emergence and change of management accounting routines. It seeks to provide an understanding of the ways in which these complex routines foster stability and change in management accounting practices.

A longitudinal case study was conducted at the Rabobank Groningen – an autonomous member of the cooperative Rabobank group – over a period of four years. The emergence of a new routine of planning and control was traced, which evolved substantially over the period of study.

It was found that the cognitive representations of the routine studied, i.e. the way it was subjectively understood, provided a temporarily stable basis for the routine. Change arose from improvisations through its recurrent performances. It was also found that change could result from complex dynamics in the routine, as opposed to viewing them as static and stable entities that react to “external” stimuli.

The research findings contribute to an understanding of the reproduction of management accounting routines and the ways in which change can arise in these routines. It provides a means to study the micro‐processes of reproduction of routines, which play an important part in institutional theories of management accounting change.

This paper places management accounting routines and their processes of reproduction at the centre of the argument to provide an understanding of the role of routines in accounting change. Since the notion of management accounting routines has not been developed extensively, this understanding contributes to studies into the nature of routines and their role in management accounting change.

This paper seeks to inquire into the theoretical assumptions that underpin much accounting‐strategy research and to develop an alternative way to approach such study.

Two theoretical lenses are discussed and contrasted. These are the ostensive and performative lenses.

Hitherto, most accounting‐strategy research has drawn on an ostensive lens, whilst only a few approach research from a performative perspective. Whilst the ostensive approach is beneficial and reduces the complexity and messiness of research sites, it also assumes that stability, orderliness and predictability characterise social life (e.g. strategy is “ready made” and remains constant during implementation). Furthermore, in this approach, accounting assumes a subordinate role and its main aim is to ensure “correct” implementation of predefined intents. This limits accounting to being an output of strategy, as opposed to, for example, an input and transformer. Greater diversity of definitions and new investigative approaches are needed. To this end, and as a key contribution, the paper develops an alternative approach drawing on Latour's performative theory. This proposes that strategy and accounting are somewhat fragile, even unstable, objects, which change depending on the hands through which they travel and the network within which they are located. Furthermore, accounting is not merely designed to follow or implement predefined intents. It is also a catalyst of expansion, transformation, even surprise.

The paper does not offer primary data.

The paper offers to scholars the possibility of studying accounting‐strategy as “relations” rather than “objects”, illustrates how this may be done, and proposes research questions to this end. It identifies a space of inquiry that needs further attention and that can provide new insights into the accounting‐strategy relationship.

Induction and institutions may have followed the same tracks for a long period of time, but their interaction is scarcely analyzed. On the one hand, induction prepares newcomers to work in an organization that is completely new to them. On the other hand, institutions apparently need induction processes to maintain themselves in the same time they renew their members. The purpose of the present paper is to analyze induction as a practice, and to show how this practice turns itself into an institution, in spite of the embeddedness of action scripts into rational schemes.

The paper introduces the case of a retail bank and a consulting company in France. Both have formalized induction systems, but they show enough differences to be considered as offering two complementary approaches of a same practice. The same method is applied to both fields. It consists of analyzing induction as an aggregate of ostensive (action scripts), performative (actions themselves) elements, and artefacts (material productions).

The successive steps of selections and integration of induction process appear as ways of testing the compatibility of newcomers with the immunity system of the organization. Moreover, throughout both case studies, the ostensive aspect of induction has remained stable for years, although markets and business models have changed a lot. Induction seems to be frozen as far as practicing (i.e. the implementation of action scripts) is concerned. The study of practising (i.e. the dialectic interaction of ostensive, performative elements, and artefacts) shows that constant and individually lead adaptive moves preserve the institutionalized practice without any shape of rigidity.

Stability vs change, uniformity vs diversity depends on the lens by which the paper it looks at practices. If it takes into consideration the ocean of actions that are performed day after day inside the firm, diversity and change appear. However, if it adopts a longer range look at what happens and correlate it to appropriate institutional factors, stability, and uniformity emerge from permanent change. That disqualifies both technocratic attempts to standardize performance from abstract patterns and naive designs of spontaneous emergence of “not embedded” behaviors.

Community-governed mass collaborations are virtual organizations in which volunteers self-organize to produce content of value. Given the high turnover of participants and the continual development and modification of governance modules, questions arise about how mass collaborations can succeed. Based on organizational routine theory, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how different aspects of routines can support the goals of mass collaborations.

Proposed hypotheses are developed and tested with data from a critical decision-making area of a successful community-governed mass collaboration – Wikipedia’s content review process.

The findings support the arguments that routines that reinforce governance serve important roles in enabling mass collaboration in the presence of transient participation and dynamic task demands in addition to creating a greater likelihood of success as outlined by the collaboration.

One limitation of this study is that it examines these types of routines in only one context, Wikipedia’s content review process, and Wikipedia is an unusually successful, community-governed mass collaboration. However, this can be considered a conservative test as mass collaborations in more formal contexts or in traditional organizations face fewer hurdles due to more stable social norms, routines, and participant populations.

Greater understanding of how community-governed mass collaborations “get the work done” in spite of participant transience and governance flux can guide developers in managing flourishing communities.

While routines have been studied in traditional organizations, little work has been done with routines in community-governed mass collaborations and how they enable both stability and flexibility.

The purpose of this two-part paper is to develop a process model of unlearning established organizational routines. The model traces the interactions among three unlearning sub-processes: ostensive aspects of initial destabilization of an established routine; performative aspects of ongoing discarding-from-use of old behaviors and experimenting with new ones; and ostensive aspects of eventual release of prior understandings and development of new ones.

The paper draws on evidence from psychology and cognitive science to explain the mechanisms underlying organizational processes of unlearning embedded routines.

The proposed model contributes to enriching current understanding of unlearning organizational routines without contradicting it. Consistent with prior understanding, destabilizing an old routine may lead to discarding it, and further discarding-from-use is likely required for continued destabilization of embedded routines. Again, consistent with prior understanding, experimenting with new behaviors may be a desired outcome of unlearning an old routine, and ongoing experimentation is likely required to sustain unlearning embedded routines.

The organizational unlearning literature provides many examples of organizational members relinquishing old routines to then make new learning possible and also provides little insight into the processes by which this occurs. The paper addresses this gap by modeling the mutually reinforcing nature of three unlearning sub-processes.