Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Reflection-in-Action When Designing Organizational Processes: Prototyping Workshops for Collective Reflection-in-Action

  • Frithjof Eberhard Wegener (a1), Milene Guerreiro Gonçalves (a1) and Zoë Dankfort (a1)

Abstract

In this paper on designing organizational processes, we combine insight on reflection-in-action with the role of reflection and experimenting from the organizational routine dynamics literature. Illustrated through a case at a strategy consultancy, we show how a prototyped workshop can elicit reflection-in- action when designing organizational processes. The artifacts used in the prototyped workshop made previous implicit assumptions about the work more explicit. This led to on the spot reflection-in-action of how to improve the prototype. This shows how collective reflection-action can be created by creating a space for reflection, that simultaneously allows for experimentation. Future research between design science and organizational science would thus be fruitful when studying the role of collective reflection- in-action when prototyping organizational processes.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@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 sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent 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.

      Reflection-in-Action When Designing Organizational Processes: Prototyping Workshops for Collective Reflection-in-Action
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Reflection-in-Action When Designing Organizational Processes: Prototyping Workshops for Collective Reflection-in-Action
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Reflection-in-Action When Designing Organizational Processes: Prototyping Workshops for Collective Reflection-in-Action
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.

Corresponding author

Contact: Wegener, FE, Delft University of Technology, Product Innovation Management, The Netherlands, f.e.wegener@tudelft.nl

References

Hide All
Ansell, C. (2012), “What is a ‘Democratic Experiment’?”, Contemporary Pragmatism, Brill, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 159180.
Ansell, C. and Boin, A. (2017), “Taming Deep Uncertainty: The Potential of Pragmatist Principles for Understanding and Improving Strategic Crisis Management”, Administration & Society, SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, CA, Vol. 153, pp. 134.
Bapuji, H., Hora, M., Saeed, A. and Turner, S. (2018), “How Understanding-Based Redesign Influences the Pattern of Actions and Effectiveness of Routines”, Journal of Management, Vol. 24, pp. 014920631774425–31.
Becker, M.C., Lazaric, N., Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S.G. (2005), “Applying organizational routines in understanding organizational change”, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 775791.
Boland, R.J. and Collopy, F. (Eds.) (2004), Managing as Designing, Stanford Business Books, Stanford, CA.
Brown, B., Buchanan, R., Doordan, D. and Margolin, V. (2007), “Introduction”, Design Issues, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 11.
Buchanan, R. (2007), “Introduction: Design and Organizational Change”, Design Issues, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 18.
Buchanan, R. (2015), “Worlds in the Making: Design, Management, and the Reform of Organizational Culture”, She Ji: the Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 521.
Bucher, S. and Langley, A. (2016), “The Interplay of Reflective and Experimental Spaces in Interrupting and Reorienting Routine Dynamics”, Organization Science, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 594613.
Carlile, P.R. (2002), “A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development”, Organization Science, Informs, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 442455.
Carlile, P.R. (2004), “Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: An Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries”, Organization Science, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 555568.
Cohen, M.D. (2007), “Reading Dewey: Reflections on the Study of Routine”, Organization Studies, SAGE Publications, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 773786.
Coughlan, P., Suri, J.F. and Canales, K. (2007), “Prototypes as (Design) Tools for Behavioral and Organizational Change”, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 122134.
Dankfort, Z. (2018), The Visual Storytelling Toolkit: A Way to Engage Employees with their Organization's Vision. M.Sc. Thesis. Delft University of Technology. Available at: http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:0e85ba80-77fe-4ad9-ba5f-16d39d767960 (Accessed: 7 April 2019)
Deken, F., Carlile, P.R., Berends, J.J. and Lauche, K. (2016), “Generating Novelty Through Interdependent Routines: A Process Model of Routine Work”, Organization Science, Vol. 27 No. 3, p. orsc.2016.1051-21.
Dionysiou, D.D. and Tsoukas, H. (2013), “Understanding the (Re)Creation of Routines from Within: A Symbolic Interactionist Perspective”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 181205.
Dittrich, K. and Seidl, D. (2018), “Emerging Intentionality in Routine Dynamics: A Pragmatist View”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 111138.
Dittrich, K., Guérard, S. and Seidl, D. (2016), “Talking About Routines: The Role of Reflective Talk in Routine Change”, Organization Science, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 678697.
Fachin, F.F. and Langley, A. (2018), “Researching Organizational Concepts Processually: The Case of Identity”, in Cassell, C., Cunliffe, A.L. and Grandy, G. (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods: History and Tradition, pp. 308345.
Farjoun, M., Ansell, C. and Boin, A. (2015), “PERSPECTIVE—Pragmatism in Organization Studies: Meeting the Challenges of a Dynamic and Complex World”, Organization Science, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 17871804.
Feldman, M.S. (2000), “Organizational Routines as a Source of Continuous Change”, Organization Science, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 611629.
Feldman, M.S. (2015), “Routines As Process: Past, Present And Future”, in Organizational Routines and Process Organization Studies, pp. 134.
Feldman, M.S. and Pentland, B.T. (2003), “Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 48 No. 1, p. 94.
Feldman, M.S., Pentland, B.T., D'Adderio, L. and Lazaric, N. (2016), “Beyond Routines as Things: Introduction to the Special Issue on Routine Dynamics”, Organization Science, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 505513.
Gibson, J.J. (2014), The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, Psychology Press.
Glaser, V. L. (2017), “Design Performances: How Organizations Inscribe Artifacts to Change Routines. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 60 No. 6, pp. 21262154. http://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0842
Greenwood, R. and Miller, D. (2010), “Tackling design anew: Getting back to the heart of organizational theory. The Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 7888. http://doi.org/10.5465/AMP.2010.24.4.3655970.a
Hoekzema, J. and Geiger, D. (2018), “Disentangling Routine Interdependence: Blurry Boundaries and Dynamic Patterning.”, presented at the 32th EGOS Colloquium.
Howard-Grenville, J.A. (2005), “The Persistence of Flexible Organizational Routines: The Role of Agency and Organizational Context”, Organization Science, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 618636.
Junginger, S. (2008), “Product Development as a Vehicle for Organizational Change”, Design Issues, The MIT Press, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 2635.
Junginger, S. (2015), “Organizational Design Legacies and Service Design”, The Design Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 209226.
Kellogg, K.C. (2009), “Operating Room: Relational Spaces and Microinstitutional Change in Surgery”, American Journal of Sociology, The University of Chicago Press, Vol. 115 No. 3, pp. 657711.
Kremser, W. and Schreyögg, G. (2016), “The Dynamics of Interrelated Routines: Introducing the Cluster Level”, Organization Science, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 698721.
Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H. (2010), “Introducing ‘Perspectives on Process Organization Studies’”, in Process, Sensemaking, and Organizing, Oxford University Press, pp. 126.
Langley, A., Smallman, C., Tsoukas, H. and Van de Ven, A.H. (2013), “Process Studies of Change in Organization and Management: Unveiling Temporality, Activity, and Flow”, Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 113.
Leutenegger, C., Tuckermann, H., Gutzan, S. and Ruegg-Sturm, J. (1997), “Organizational routine design in a hospital: a narrative-based study of ostensive routine dimensions in the making”, presented at the 10th International Symposium on Process Organization Studies, Halidiki, Greece.
Levina, N. and Vaast, E. (2018), “Turning Collaboration into Transaction: A Case of Intranet Use in Boundary-Spanning Practices”, presented at the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, pp. 245a245a.
Lok, J. and de Rond, M. (2013), “On the Plasticity of Institutions: Containing and Restoring Practice Breakdowns at the Cambridge University Boat Club”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 185207.
Lorino, P. and Mourey, D. (2013), “The experience of time in the inter-organizing inquiry: A present thickened by dialog and situations. Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 4862. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2012.11.011
Miller, D., Greenwood, R. and Prakash, R. (2009), “What Happened to Organization Theory? Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 273279. http://doi.org/10.1177/1056492609344672
Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S.G. (2002), “Evolutionary Theorizing in Economics”, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 2346.
Norman, D. A. and Stappers, P. J. (2015), “DesignX: Complex Sociotechnical Systems”. She Ji: the Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 83106. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2016.01.002
Orlikowski, W.J. (1992), “The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations”, Organization Science, informs, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 398427.
Orlikowski, W.J. and Scott, S.V. (2008), “10 Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization”, The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 433474.
Parmigiani, A. and Howard-Grenville, J.A. (2011), “Routines Revisited: Exploring the Capabilities and Practice Perspectives”, The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 413453.
Pentland, B.T. and Feldman, M.S. (2005), “Organizational routines as a unit of analysis”, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 793815.
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, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 235250.
Pentland, B.T., Feldman, M.S., Becker, M.C. and Liu, P. (2012), “Dynamics of Organizational Routines: A Generative Model”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 49 No. 8, pp. 14841508.
Pentland, B.T., Recker, J. and Wyner, G. (2017), “A thermometer for interdependence: Exploring patterns of interdependence using networks of affordances”, presented at the International Conference on Information Systems, pp. 113.
Peteraf, M., Di Stefano, G. and Verona, G. (2013), “The elephant in the room of dynamic capabilities: Bringing two diverging conversations together”, Strategic Management Journal, John Wiley and Sons, Ltd, Vol. 34 No. 12, pp. 13891410.
Rietveld, E. and Kiverstein, J. (2014), “A Rich Landscape of Affordances”, Ecological Psychology, Routledge, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 325352.
Romme, A. G. L. (2003), “Making a Difference: Organization as Design. Organization Science, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 558573. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.5.558.16769
Schön, D. A. (1983), Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. BasicBooks, New York.
Simone. (2018), “Organizational routine design in a hospital: a narrative-based study of ostensive routine dimensions in the making”, presented at the PROS, pp. 130.
Simpson, B. and Lorino, P. (2016), “Re-viewing Routines Through a Pragmatist Lens”, in Organizational Routines, Oxford University Press, pp. 137.
Spee, P. and Jarzabkowski, P.A. (2017), “Agreeing on What? Creating Joint Accounts of Strategic Change”, Organization Science, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 152176.
Sutton, R.I. and Staw, B.M. (1995), “What Theory is Not”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40 No. 3, p. 371.
Teece, D.J. (2007), “Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 13, pp. 13191350.
van Aken, J.E. and Romme, A.G.L. (2009), “Reinventing the future: adding design science to the repertoire of organization and management studies”, Organization Management Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 512.
van Hulst, M. and Tsoukas, H. (2018), “Patterning Practice: Stability and Change Over Time in a Teaching Routine”, presented at the 10th International Symposium on Process Organization Studies, Halidiki, Greece.
Yanow, D. and Tsoukas, H. (2009), “What is Reflection-In-Action? A Phenomenological Account. Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 46 No. 8, pp. 13391364. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00859.x
Yin, R. K. (2013), Case Study Research: Design and Methods. SAGE Publications.
Yoo, Y., Boland, R.J. Jr. and Lyytinen, K. (2006), “From Organization Design to Organization Designing”, Organization Science, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 215229.

Keywords

Reflection-in-Action When Designing Organizational Processes: Prototyping Workshops for Collective Reflection-in-Action

  • Frithjof Eberhard Wegener (a1), Milene Guerreiro Gonçalves (a1) and Zoë Dankfort (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed