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-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T04:30:19.302Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 8 - Ethnography and Routine Dynamics

from Part II - Methodological Issues in Routine Dynamics Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2021

By
Katharina Dittrich
Edited by
Martha S. Feldman ,
Brian T. Pentland ,
Luciana D'Adderio ,
Katharina Dittrich ,
Claus Rerup  and
David Seidl
Martha S. Feldman
Affiliation:
University of California, Irvine
Brian T. Pentland
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Luciana D'Adderio
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Katharina Dittrich
Affiliation:
University of Warwick
Claus Rerup
Affiliation:
Frankfurt School of Finance and Management
David Seidl
Affiliation:
University of Zurich
Get access

Summary

Organizational ethnography has been crucial for the development of the field of Routine Dynamics since the beginning. It has altered the grain size of analysis and shifted the focus from the firm and its routines to the routine and the people, actions and artefacts that bring it to life. The discovery-oriented nature of ethnographic research has and continues to challenge the conceived wisdom of routines and their role in organizations. The majority of work in Routine Dynamics relies on ethnographic approaches and sensibilities. In this chapter, I review 43 studies and the various ways in which they draw on ethnography. Despite the wide variety of settings these studies have explored and the evidentiary approaches they draw on, I argue that Routine Dynamics research can draw on more novel and innovative forms of ethnographic research. This will allow scholars to address hitherto neglected aspects of routines, such as their emotional and aesthetic qualities, new contemporary phenomena that are of societal concern, such as inequality, climate change and epidemics, and make Routine Dynamics research more practically relevant.

Keywords

Routinesroutine dynamicsethnographyqualitative researchobservationsinterviewsdata analysis
Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics , pp. 103 - 129
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

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

Addyman, S. (2019). The Timing of Patterning or the Patterning of Timing? Organisational Routines in Temporary Organisations, The Bartlett School of Construction and Project Management, University College London, London.Google Scholar
Addyman, S., Pryke, S. and Davies, A. (2020). Re-creating organizational routines to transition through the project life cycle: A case study of the reconstruction of London’s Bank Underground Station. Project Management Journal, 51(5), 522–537.Google Scholar
Agar, M. (2010). On the ethnographic part of the mix: A multi-genre tale of the field. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 286–303.Google Scholar
Aggerholm, H. K. and Asmuss, B. (2016). When ‘good’ is not good enough: Power dynamics and performative aspects of organizational routines. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines. How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Series: Perspectives on Process Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 140–178.Google Scholar
Alvesson, M. (2009). At-home ethnography: Struggling with closeness and closure. In Ybema, S., Yanow, D., Wels, H. and Kamsteeg, F. H., eds., Organizational Ethnography: Studying the Complexities of Everyday Life Los Angeles: Sage, pp. 156–174.Google Scholar
Anteby, M. (2013). Manufacturing Morals: The Values of Silence in Business School Education. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Aroles, J. and McLean, C. (2016). Rethinking stability and change in the study of organizational routines: Difference and repetition in a newspaper-printing factory. Organization Science, 27(3), 573–593.Google Scholar
Atkinson, P., Coffey, A., Delamont, S., Lofland, J. and Lofland, L. eds. (2007). Handbook of Ethnography. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Baldessarelli, G. (2021). Emotions and routine dynamics. In D’Adderio, L., Dittrich, K., Feldman, M. S., Pentland, B. T., Rerup, C. and Seidl, D., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bertels, S., Howard-Grenville, J. and Pek, S. (2016). Cultural molding, shielding, and shoring at Oilco: The role of culture in the integration of routines. Organization Science, 27(3), 573–593.Google Scholar
Birnholtz, J. P., Cohen, M. D. and Hoch, S. V. (2007). Organizational character: On the regeneration of Camp Poplar Grove. Organization Science, 18(2), 315–332.Google Scholar
Blanche, C. and Cohendet, P. (2019). Chapter 1, Remounting a ballet in a different context: A complementary understanding of routines transfer theories. In Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 11–30.Google Scholar
Boe-Lillegraven, S. (2019). Chapter 2, Transferring routines across multiple boundaries: A flexible approach. In Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 31–53.Google Scholar
Bruns, H. C. (2009). Leveraging functionality in safety routines: Examining the divergence of rules and performance. Human Relations, 62(9), 1399–1426.Google Scholar
Bucher, S. and Langley, A. (2016). The interplay of reflective and experimental spaces in interrupting and reorienting Routine Dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 594–613.Google Scholar
Burrell, J. (2009). The field site as a network: A strategy for locating ethnographic research. Field Methods, 21(2), 181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohendet, P. S. and Simon, L. O. (2016). Always playable: Recombining routines for creative efficiency at Ubisoft Montreal’s video game studio. Organization Science, 27(3), 614–632.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, A. L. (2010). Retelling tales of the field. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 224–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, A. L. (2015). Using ethnography in strategy as practice research. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, A. L. and Karunanayake, G. (2013). Working within hyphen-spaces in ethnographic research: Implications for research identities and practice. Organizational Research Methods, 16(3), 364–392.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2003). Configuring software, reconfiguring memories: The influence of integrated systems on the reproduction of knowledge and routines. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(2), 321–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2008). The performativity of routines: Theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routines dynamics. Research Policy, 37(5), 769–789.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2014). The replication dilemma unravelled: How organizations enact multiple goals in routine transfer. Organization Science, 25(5), 1325–1350.Google Scholar
Danner-Schröder, A. and Geiger, D. (2016). Unravelling the motor of patterning work: Toward an understanding of the microlevel dynamics of standardization and flexibility. Organization Science, 27(3), 633–658.Google Scholar
Davis, M. S. (1971). That’s interesting! Toward a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1, 309–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deken, F., Carlile, P. R., Berends, H. and Lauche, K. (2016). Generating novelty through interdependent routines: A process model of routine work. Organization Science, 27(3), 659–677.Google Scholar
den Nieuwenboer, N. A., Cunha, J. V. d. and Treviño, L. K. (2017). Middle managers and corruptive routine translation: The social production of deceptive performance. Organization Science, 28(5), 781–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dittrich, K., Guérard, S. and Seidl, D. (2016). Talking about routines: The role of reflective talk in routine change. Organization Science, 27(3), 678–697.Google Scholar
Dittrich, K. and Seidl, D. (2018). Emerging intentionality in Routine Dynamics: A pragmatist view. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 111–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doloriert, C. and Sambrook, S. (2012). Organisational autoethnography. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 1(1), 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberhard, J., Frost, A. and Rerup, C. (2019). Chapter 5, The dark side of Routine Dynamics: Deceit and the work of romeo pimps. In Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 99–121.Google Scholar
Emerson, R., Fretz, R. I. and Shaw, L. (1995). Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes 1995. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fachin, F. F. and Langley, A. (2018). Researching organizational concepts processually: The case of identity. In Cassell, L., Cunliffe, A. L. and Grandy, G., eds., SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods. London: Sage Publications, pp. 308–327.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6), 611–629.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2003). A performative perspective on stability and change in organizational routines. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(4), 727–752.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2015). Theory of Routine Dynamics and connections to strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 320–333.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2016). Routines as process: Past, present and future. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines. How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Series: Perspectives on Process Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 23–46.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Bell, J. and Berger, M. T. (2003). Gaining Access: A Practical Guide for Qualitative Researchers. Lanham, MD; Oxford: AltaMira; Oxford Publicity Partnership.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Orlikowski, W. J. (2011). Practicing theory and theorizing practice. Organization Science, 22(5), 1240–1253.Google 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.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Pentland, B. T., D’Adderio, L. and Lazaric, N. (2016). Beyond routines as things: Introduction to the special issue on Routines Dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 505–513.Google Scholar
Fine, G. A. (1993). Ten lies of ethnography: Moral dilemmas of field research. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 22(3), 267–294.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A. and Tihanyi, L. (2016). Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 1880–1895.Google Scholar
Glaser, V. (2017). Design performances: How organizations inscribe artifacts to change routines. Academy of Management Journal, 60(6), 2126–2154.Google Scholar
Goh, K. and Pentland, B. T. (2019). From actions to paths to patterning: Toward a dynamic theory of patterning in routines. Academy of Management Journal, 62(6), 1901–1929.Google Scholar
Golden-Biddle, K. and Locke, K. (1993). Appealing work: An investigation of how ethnographic texts convince. Organization Science, 4(4), 595–616.Google Scholar
Grand, S. (2016). Routines, Strategies and Management: Engaging for Recurrent Creation ‘At The Edge’. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Hales, M. and Tidd, J. (2009). The practice of routines and representations in design and development. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(4), 551–574.Google Scholar
Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in Practice, 3rd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Howard, P. N. (2002). Network ethnography and the hypermedia organization: New media, new organizations, new methods. New Media & Society, 4(4), 550–574.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16(6), 618–636.Google Scholar
Hyysalo, S., Pollock, N. and Williams, R. A. (2019). Method matters in the social study of technology: Investigating the biographies of artifacts and practices. Science & Technology Studies, 32(3), 2–25.Google Scholar
Islam, G. (2015). Practitioners as theorists: Para-ethnography and the collaborative study of contemporary organizations. Organizational Research Methods, 18(2), 231–251.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. A., Bednarek, R. and Cabantous, L. (2015). Conducting global team-based ethnography: Methodological challenges and practical methods. Human Relations, 68(1), 3–33.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. A., Bednarek, R. and Spee, A. P. (2016). The role of artifacts in establishing connectivity within professional routines: A question of entanglement. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines. How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Series: Perspectives on Process Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 117–139.Google Scholar
Kemmis, S. (2009). Action research as a practice‐based practice. Educational Action Research, 17(3), 463–474.Google Scholar
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R. and Nixon, R. (2013). The Action Research Planner: Doing Critical Participatory Action Research. Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Kho, J., Spee, A. P. and Gillespie, N. (2019). Chapter 9, Enacting relational expertise to change professional routines in technology-mediated service settings. In Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 191–213.Google Scholar
Kiwan, L. and Lazaric, N. (2019). Chapter 8, Learning a new ecology of space and looking for new routines: Experimenting robotics in a surgical team. In Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 173–189.Google Scholar
Kremser, W. and Blagoev, B. (2021). The dynamics of prioritizing: How actors temporally pattern complex role-routine ecologies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66(2), 339–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, G. (2013). Reflections on becoming an ethnographer. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 2(1), 4–22.Google Scholar
Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.Google Scholar
Law, J. (2004). After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. International Library of Sociology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
LeBaron, C., Christianson, M. K., Garrett, L. and Ilan, R. (2016). Coordinating flexible performance during everyday work: An ethnomethodological study of handoff routines. Organization Science, 27(3), 514–534.Google Scholar
Locke, K. (2011). Field research practice in management and organization studies: Reclaiming its tradition of discovery. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 613–652.Google Scholar
Locke, K., Golden-Biddle, K. and Feldman, M. S. (2008). Making doubt generative: Rethinking the role of doubt in the research process. Organization Science, 19(6), 907–918.Google Scholar
Mahringer, C. (2019). Exploring Routine Ecologies – A Characterization and Integration of Different Perspectives on Routines. PhD, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Moeran, B. (2009). From participant observation to observant participation. In Ybema, S., Yanow, D., Wels, H. and Kamsteeg, F. H., eds., Organizational Ethnography: Studying the Complexities of Everyday Life. Los Angeles: Sage, pp. 139–155.Google Scholar
Murphy, E. and Dingwall, R. (2007). The ethics of ethnography. In Atkinson, P., Delamont, S., Lofland, J. and Lofland, L., eds., Handbook of Ethnography. Los Angeles: Sage, pp. 339–351.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2007). Narrative networks: Patterns of technology and organization. Organization Science, 18(5), 781–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Mahringer, C., Dittrich, K., Feldman, M. S. and Ryan Wolf, J. (2020). Process Multiplicity and Process Dynamics: Weaving the Space of Possible Paths. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Rueter, H. H. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 484–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puri, A. (2007). The web of insights: The art and practice of webnography. International Journal of Market Research, 49(3), 387–408.Google 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.Google Scholar
Rosales, V. (2018). The Interplay of Roles and Routines Situating, Patterning, and Performances in the Emergency Department: Studier i Företagsekonomi. Serie B. Doctoral thesis, Umeå University, Umeå.Google Scholar
Rouleau, L., Rond, M. de and Musca, G. (2014). From the ethnographic turn to new forms of organizational ethnography. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 3(1), 2–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, D. F. (1959). ‘Banana Time’ Job satisfaction and informal interaction. Human Organization, 18(4), 158–168.Google Scholar
Schmidt, T., Braun, T. and Sydow, J. (2019). Chapter 3, Copying routines for new venture creation: How replication can support entrepreneurial innovation. In Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 55–78.Google Scholar
Seaver, N. (2017). Algorithms as culture: Some tactics for the ethnography of algorithmic systems. Big Data & Society, 4(2), 1–12.Google Scholar
Sele, K. and Grand, S. (2016). Unpacking the dynamics of ecologies of routines: Mediators and their generative effects in routine interactions. Organization Science, 27(3), 722–738.Google Scholar
Shotter, J. (2006). Understanding process from within: An argument for ‘withness’-thinking. Organization Studies, 27(4), 585–604.Google Scholar
Smets, M., Burke, G., Jarzabkowski, P. A. and Spee, P. (2014). Charting new territory for organizational ethnography. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 3(1), 10–26.Google Scholar
Sonenshein, S. (2016). Routines and creativity: From dualism to duality. Organization Science, 27(3), 739–758.Google Scholar
Spee, P., Jarzabkowski, P. A. and Smets, M. (2016). The influence of routine interdependence and skillful accomplishment on the coordination of standardizing and customizing. Organization Science, 27(3), 759–781.Google Scholar
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The Ethnographic Interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant Observation. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
Strathern, M. (1996). Cutting the network. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 2(3), 517–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and Situated Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Swan, J., Robertson, M. and Newell, S. (2016). Dynamic in-capabilities: The paradox of routines in the ecology of complex innovation. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines. How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Series: Perspectives on Process Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 203–229.Google Scholar
Tallberg, L., Jordan, P. and Boyle, M. (2014). The “Green Mile”: Crystallization ethnography in an emotive context. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 3(1), 80–95.Google Scholar
Tavory, I. and Timmermans, S. (2014). Abductive Analysis: Theorizing Qualitative Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Tunçalp, D. and Lê, L. P. (2014). (Re)Locating boundaries: A systematic review of online ethnography. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 3(1), 59–79.Google Scholar
van Maanen, J. (2011). Ethnography as work: Some rules of engagement. Journal of Management Studies, 48(1), 218–234.Google Scholar
van Maanen, J., Sørensen, J. B. and Mitchell, T. R. (2007). Introduction to Special Topic Forum: The interplay between theory and method. The Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1145–1154.Google Scholar
Watson, T. J. (2001). In Search of Management: Culture, Chaos and Control in Managerial Work. London: Cengage Learning EMEA.Google Scholar
Watson, T. J. (2011). Ethnography, reality, and truth: The vital need for studies of ‘how things work’ in organizations and management. Journal of Management Studies, 48(1), 202–217.Google Scholar
Wegener, F. E. and Lorino, P. (2021). Capturing the experience of living forward from within the flow: Fusing ‘withness’ approach & pragmatist inquiry. In Reinecke, J., Suddaby, R., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Perspectives on Process Organization Studies Vol. 7: About Time: Temporality and History in Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yamauchi, Y. and Hiramoto, T. (2016 ). Reflexivity of routines: An ethnomethodological investigation of initial service encounters at sushi bars in Tokyo. Organization Studies, 37(10), 1473–1499.Google Scholar
Yamauchi, Y. and Hiramoto, T. (2020). Performative achievement of routine recognizability: An analysis of order taking routines at sushi bars. Journal of Management Studies, 57(8), 1610–1642.Google Scholar
Yanow, D. (2012). Organizational ethnography between toolbox and world-making. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 1(1), 31–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ybema, S., Yanow, D., Wels, H. and Kamsteeg, F. H., eds. (2009). Organizational Ethnography: Studying the Complexities of Everyday Life. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Zbaracki, M. J. and Bergen, M. (2010). When truces collapse: A longitudinal study of price-adjustment routines. Organization Science, 21(5), 955–972.Google 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
×