Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T16:05:09.438Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

18 - Theory of routine dynamics and connections to strategy as practice

from Part III - Theoretical Resources: Organization and Management Theories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2015

By
Martha S. Feldman
Edited by
Damon Golsorkhi ,
Linda Rouleau ,
David Seidl  and
Eero Vaara
Martha S. Feldman
Affiliation:
University of California, Irvine
Damon Golsorkhi
Affiliation:
Grenoble School of Management
Linda Rouleau
Affiliation:
HEC Montréal
David Seidl
Affiliation:
Universität Zürich
Eero Vaara
Affiliation:
Svenska Handelshögskolan, Helsinki
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Recent research in the fields of both routines and strategy has used practice theory to focus attention on the dynamic and generative processes that result in strategy and routines and that have previously been studied as relatively static entities (Jarzabkowski 2005; Feldman and Orlikowski 2011; Whittington, this volume). Strategy as practice and the theory of routine dynamics are, thus, distinct but related theories of organizing. In this chapter I discuss similarities and synergies between the study of routines as dynamic processes and the study of strategy as practice. I focus particular attention on the emergent and mutually constituted nature of these organizational processes. I argue that these characteristics make the a priori identification of analytical entities difficult and misleading. As a result, definitions of routines and strategy, or of processes that constitute them, need to be developed in the context of specific empirical settings and specific research questions.

This chapter is written from the perspective of routines and seeks to identify some of the ways in which routine dynamics can contribute to strategy-as-practice research. The theory of routine dynamics is not only a compatible theory but also a useful tool for the study of strategy as practice. Accordingly, I begin the chapter with a description of routine dynamics. In the second section I discuss the connections between routine dynamics and strategy as practice. The third section explores challenges that research in routine dynamics and strategy as practice have in common, specifically the issue of identifying relevant action and enacted patterns and issues of multiplicity, or the ‘problem’ of identifying a singular routine or strategy. The fourth section presents studies of routine dynamics that contribute to strategy as practice and that show how strategies emerge through routines. Methodological implications are summarized briefly in the conclusion.

Theory of routine dynamics

In recent years a theory of routines has developed through the work of many scholars. The foundational work was provided by Martha Feldman and Brian Pentland, each working independently and, later, jointly. Pentland's work developed the idea of routines as effortful accomplishments (Pentland and Reuter 1994). Feldman's work built on this idea and pointed out that routines were not only effortful but also emergent (Feldman, 2000).

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice , pp. 317 - 330
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Balogun, J., and Johnson, G. (2004), ‘Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking’, Academy of Management Journal, 47/4: 523–49.Google Scholar
Balogun, J. (2005), ‘From intended strategies to unintended outcomes: the impact of change recipient sensemaking’, Organization Studies, 26/11: 1573–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1990), The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Canales, R. (2011), ‘Rule bending, sociological citizenship, and organizational contestation in microfinance’, Regulation and Governance, 5/1: 90–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canales, R. (2014), ‘Weaving straw into gold: managing organizational tensions between standardization and flexibility in microfinance’, Organization Science, 25/1: 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chia, R., and Holt, R. (2006), ‘Strategy as practical coping: a Heideggerian perspective’, Organization Studies, 27/5: 635–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chia, R., and Holt, R. (2009), Strategy without Design: The Silent Efficacy of Indirect Action. Cambridge University Press:CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chia, R., and MacKay, B. (2007), ‘Post-processual challenges for the emerging strategy-as-practice perspective: discovering strategy in the logic of practice’, Human Relations, 60/1: 217–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, M. D., Burkhart, R., Dosi, G., Egidi, M., Marengo, L., Warglien, M., and Winter, S. G. (1996), ‘Contemporary issues in research on routines and other recurring action patterns of organizations’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 5/3: 653–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cyert, R. M., and March, J. G. (1963), A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
D'Adderio, L. (2008), ‘The performativity of routines: theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routines dynamics’, Research Policy, 37/5: 769–89.Google Scholar
D'Adderio, L. (2011), ‘Artifacts at the centre of routines: performing the material turn in routines theory’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 7/S2: 197–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Adderio, L. (2014), ‘The replication dilemma unravelled: how organizations balance multiple goals in routine transfer’, Organization Science, 25/5: 1325–50.Google Scholar
Dionysiou, D., and Tsoukas, H. (2013), ‘Understanding the (re)creation of routines from within: a symbolic interactionist perspective’, Academy of Management Review, 38/2: 181–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dittrich, K., and Seidl, D. (2014), ‘Resourcing routine change: how resources contribute to routine dynamics’, paper presented at the sixth ‘International symposium on process organization studies’, Rhodes, 20 June.
Elias, N. (1978), What Is Sociology?New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Emirbayer, M. (1997), ‘Manifesto for a relational sociology’, American Journal of Sociology, 103/2: 281–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farjoun, M. (2010), ‘Beyond dualism: stability and change as a duality’, Academy of Management Review, 35/2: 202–25.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2000), ‘Organizational routines as a source of continuous change’, Organization Science, 11/6: 611–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2003), ‘A performative perspective on stability and change in organizational routines’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 12/4: 727–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2004), ‘Resources in emerging structures and processes of change’, Organization Science, 15/3: 295–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S., and Orlikowski, W. J. (2011), ‘Theorizing practice and practicing theory’, Organization Science, 22/5: 1240–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S., and Pentland, B. T. (2003), ‘Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 48/1:94–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S., and Quick, K. S. (2009), ‘Generating resources and energizing frameworks through inclusive public management’, International Public Management Journal, 12/2: 137–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S., and Worline, M. W. (2012), ‘Resources, resourcing, and ampliative cycles in organizations’, in Cameron, K., and Spreitzer, G. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship: 629–41. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Worline, M. W., Baker, N., and Lowerson, V. (2013), ‘Routines, disruption and the temporalities of continuity’, paper presented at the twenty-ninth European Group for Organizational Studies colloquium, Montreal, 4 July.
Gherardi, S. (2006), Organizational Knowledge: The Texture of Workplace Learning. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984), The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., and Vaara, E. (2010), ‘Introduction: what is strategy as practice?’, in Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice: 1–20. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grand, S. (2012), ‘Routines, strategies and management: engaging for recurrent creation “at the edge”’, Habilitation manuscript. University of St. Gallen, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Hendry, K. P., Kiel, G. C., and Nicholson, G. (2010), ‘How boards strategise: a strategy as practice view’, Long Range Planning, 43/1: 33–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendry, J., and Seidl, D. (2003), ‘The structure and significance of strategic episodes: social systems theory and the routine practices of strategic change’, Journal of Management Studies, 40/1: 175–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2005), ‘The persistence of flexible organizational routines: the role of agency and organizational context’, Organization Science, 16/6: 618–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2007), ‘Developing issue-selling effectiveness over time: issue selling as resourcing’, Organization Science, 18/4: 560–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2003), ‘Strategic practices: an activity theory perspective on continuity and change’, Journal of Management Studies, 40/1: 23–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2005), Strategy as Practice: An Activity-Based Approach. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2010), ‘An activity-theory approach to strategy as practice’, in Golshorski, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., and Vaara, E. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice: 127–40. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J., and Seidl, D. (2007), ‘Strategizing: the challenges of a practice perspective’, Human Relations, 60/1: 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Lê, J., and Feldman, M. S. (2012), ‘Toward a theory of coordinating: creating coordinating mechanisms in practice’, Organization Science, 23/4: 907–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., and Seidl, D. (2008), ‘The role of meetings in the social practice of strategy’, Organization Studies, 29/11: 1391–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., and Spee, P. (2009), ‘Strategy-as-practice: a review and future directions for the field’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 11/1: 69–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joas, H. (1996), The Creativity of Action. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, G., Melin, L., and Whittington, R. (2003), ‘Guest editors’ introduction: micro strategy and strategizing: towards an activity-based view’, Journal of Management Studies, 40/1: 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, G., Langley, A., Melin, L., and Whittington, R. (2007), Strategy as Practice: Research Directions and Resources. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M. (2007), ‘“The stone that was cast out shall become the cornerstone”: the bodily aesthetics of human meaning’, Journal of Visual Art Practice, 6/2: 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (1986), ‘The powers of association’, in Law, J. (ed.), Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge?: 264–80. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Lave, J. (1988), Cognition in Practice. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinthal, D. A., and Rerup, C. (2006), ‘Crossing an apparent chasm: bridging mindful and less mindful perspectives on organizational learning’, Organization Science, 17/4: 502–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mantere, S. (2010), ‘A Wittgensteinian perspective on strategizing’, in Golshorski, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., and Vaara, E. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice: 155–67. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Merton, R. K. (1968), Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Michel, A. (2014), ‘The mutual constitution of persons and organizations: an ontological perspective on organizational change’, Organization Science, 25/4: 1082–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, R. R., and Winter, S. G. (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Nicolini, D. (2012), Practice Theory, Work, and Organization: An Introduction. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nicolini, D., Gherardi, S., and Yanow, D. (eds.) (2003), Knowing in Organizations: A Practice-Based Approach. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (2002), ‘Knowing in practice: enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing’, Organization Science, 13/3: 249–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (2007), ‘Sociomaterial practices: exploring technology at work’, Organization Studies, 28/9: 1435–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J., and Scott, S. V. (2008), ‘Sociomateriality: challenging the separation of technology, work and organization’, Academy of Management Annals, 2/1: 433–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pentland, B. T., and Feldman, M. S. (2008), ‘Designing routines: on the folly of designing artifacts, while hoping for patterns of action’, Information and Organization, 18/4: 235–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Feldman, M. S., Lui, P., and Becker, M. (2012), ‘Dynamics of organizational routines: a generative model’, Journal of Management Studies, 49/8: 1484–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Haerem, T., and Hillison, D. (2011), ‘The (n)ever changing world: stability and change in organizational routines’, Organization Science, 22/6: 1369–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pentland, B. T., and Reuter, H. H. (1994), ‘Organizational routines as grammars of action’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 39/3: 484–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rerup, C., and Feldman, M. S. (2011), ‘Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: the role of trial-and-error learning’, Academy of Management Journal, 54/3: 577–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rouleau, L. (2005), ‘Micro-practices of strategic sensemaking and sensegiving: how middle managers interpret and sell change every day’, Journal of Management Studies, 42/7: 1413–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvato, C. (2003), ‘The role of micro-strategies in the engineering of firm evolution’, Journal of Management Studies, 40/1: 83–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvato, C. (2009), ‘Capabilities unveiled: the role of ordinary activities in the evolution of product development processes’, Organization Science, 20/2: 384–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvato, C., and Rerup, C. (2011), ‘Beyond collective entities: multilevel research on organizational routines and capabilities’, Journal of Management, 37/2: 468–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandberg, J., and Tsoukas, H. (2011), ‘Grasping the logic of practice: theorizing through practical rationality’, Academy of Management Review, 36/2: 338–60.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. R. (2012), ‘Primer on practice’, in Higgs, J., Barnett, R., Billett, S., Hutchings, M., and Trede, F. (eds.), Practice-Based Education: 13–26. Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
Sevón, G. (1996), ‘Organizational imitation in identity transformation’, in Czarniawska, B, and Sevón, G. (eds.), Translating Organizational Change: 49–68. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sonenshein, S. (2014), ‘How organizations foster the creative use of resources’, Academy of Management Journal, 57/3: 814–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stene, E. (1940), ‘An approach to a science of administration’, American Political Science Review, 34/6: 1124–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suchman, L. (2007), Human–Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions,. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H., and Chia, R. (2002), ‘On organizational becoming: rethinking organizational change’, Organization Science, 13/5: 567–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, S. F., and Rindova, V. (2012), ‘A balancing act: how organizations pursue consistency in routine functioning in the face of ongoing change’, Organization Science, 23/1: 24–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaara, E., and Whittington, R. (2012), ‘Strategy-as-practice: taking social practices seriously’, Academy of Management Annals, 6/1: 285–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (2006), ‘Completing the practice turn in strategy research’, Organization Studies, 27/5: 613–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (2010), ‘Giddens, structuration theory and strategy as practice’, in Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., and Vaara, E. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice: 109–26. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. (2001 [1951]), Philosophical Investigations,. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Zbaracki, M. J., and Bergen, M. (2010), ‘When truces collapse: a longitudinal study of price-adjustment routines’, Organization Science, 21/5: 955–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×