Actor-Network Theory and Routine Dynamics

Actor-network theory has always been an inspiring theoretical and methodological source for Routine Dynamics research. Seeing routines as networks of actants and as a consequence rather than a cause of collective action enabled scholars to move away from a priori assumptions about the world and shift their attention to situated performances, multiplicity, and connections-in action. In this chapter, I provide a brief historical account of actor-network theory highlighting some of its central authors and their work before unravelling how Routine Dynamics scholars have appropriated it—ironically, often as an undercover actor that remains invisible at first sight—and conclude by reflecting on how actor-network theory can continue to be of use for and shape Routine Dynamics research.

Keywords

Routines routine dynamics actor-network theory actants connections translation inscriptions multiplicity relationality

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics , pp. 73 - 84
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108993340.008 [Opens in a new window]
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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abbott, A. D. (2004). Methods of Discovery: Heuristics for the Social Sciences. New York: Norton & Company.Google Scholar

Akrich, M., Callon, M. and Latour, B. (2002). The key to success in innovation part I: The art of interessement. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6(2), 187–206.CrossRef 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), 535–550.CrossRef Google Scholar

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.Google Scholar

Baron, L. F. and Gomez, R. (2016). The associations between technologies and societies: The utility of actor-network theory. Science, Technology and Society, 21(2), 129–148.CrossRef 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.CrossRef Google Scholar

Blanche, C. and Cohendet, P. (2019). Remounting a ballet in a different context: A complementary understanding of routines transfer theories. In Feldman, M. S., D’Adderio, L., Dittrich, K. and Jarzabkowksi, P., eds., Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation. Bingley: Emerald Publishing, pp. 11–30.CrossRef 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.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cacciatori, E. (2012). Resolving conflict in problem‐solving: Systems of artefacts in the development of new routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1559–1585.CrossRef Google Scholar

Callon, M. (1980). The state and technical innovation: A case study of the electrical vehicle in France. Research Policy, 9(4), 358–376.Google Scholar

Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieux Bay. In Law, J., ed., Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 196–233.Google Scholar

Callon, M. (1991). Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In Law, J., ed., A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. London: Routledge, pp. 132–161.Google Scholar

Callon, M. (1998a). An essay on framing and overflowing: Economic externalities revisited by sociology. The Sociological Review, 46(S1), 244–269.CrossRef Google Scholar

Callon, M., ed. (1998b). The Laws of the Markets. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar

Callon, M. (2007). What does it mean to say that economics is performative? MacKenzie, D., Muniesa, F. and Siu, L., eds., Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Callon, M. and Latour, B. (1981). Unscrewing the big Leviathan: How actors macro-structure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In Knorr, K. and Cicourel, A., eds., Advances in Social Theory and Methodology: Toward an Integration of Micro-and Macro-Sociologies. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 277–303.Google Scholar

Callon, M. and Law, J. (1982). On interests and their transformation: Enrolment and counter-enrolment. Social Studies of Science, 12(4), 615–625.Google 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

Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Czarniawska, B. (2014). A Theory of Organizing. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar

Czarniawska, B. (2017). Actor-network theory. In Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., The SAGE Handbook of Process Organization Studies. Los Angeles: SAGE Publishing, 160–173.Google Scholar

D’Adderio, L. (2008). The performativity of routines: Theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routine dynamics. Research Policy, 37(5), 769–789.Google Scholar

D’Adderio, L. (2011). Artifacts at the centre of routines: Performing the material turn in routines theory. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7(2), 197–230.CrossRef Google Scholar

D’Adderio, L. (2014). The replication dilemma unravelled: How organizations enact multiple goals in routine transfer. Organization Science, 25(5), 1325–1350.CrossRef Google Scholar

D’Adderio, L. and Pollock, N. (2020). Making routines the same: Crafting similarity and singularity in routines transfer. Research Policy, 49(8), 104029.Google Scholar

De Laet, M. and Mol, A. (2000). The Zimbabwe bush pump: Mechanics of a fluid technology. Social Studies of Science, 30(2), 225–263.Google 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.CrossRef Google Scholar

Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and Repetition. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 281–317.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. (2016). Routines as process: Past, present and future. In Rerup, C. and Howard-Grenville, J. A., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 23–46.CrossRef 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. and Pentland, B. T. (2005). Organizational routines and the macro-actor. In Czarniawska, B. and Hernes, T., eds., Actor-Network Theory and Organizing. Copenhagen: Liber, pp. 91–111.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 routine dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 505–513.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

Gherardi, S. (2000). Practice-based theorizing on learning and knowing in organizations. Organization, 7(2), 211–223.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gherardi, S. and Nicolini, D. (2005). Actor-networks: Ecology and entrepreneurs. In Czarniawska, B. and Hernes, T., eds., Actor-Network Theory and Organizing. Copenhagen: Liber, pp. 285–306.Google Scholar

Glaser, V. L. (2017). Design performances: How organizations inscribe artifacts to change routines. Academy of Management Journal, 60(6), 2126–2154.Google Scholar

Gond, J.-P. and Cabantous, L. (2015). Performativity: Towards a performative turn in organizational studies. Mir, R., Willmott, H. and Greenwood, M., eds., The Routledge Companion to Philosophy in Organization Studies. London: Routledge, pp. 508–516.Google Scholar

Hetherington, K. and Law, J. (2000). After networks. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 18, 127–132.Google Scholar

Jarzabkowski, P., Bednarek, R. and Spee, P. (2016). The role of artifacts in establishing connectivity within professional routines: A question of entanglement. In Rerup, C. and Howard-Grenville, J., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 117–131.Google Scholar

Kremser, W. and Schreyögg, G. (2016). The dynamics of interrelated routines: Introducing the cluster level. Organization Science, 27(3), 698–721.Google Scholar

Lannacci, F. (2014). Routines, artefacts and technological change: Investigating the transformation of criminal justice in England and Wales. Journal of Information Technology, 29(4), 294–311.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (1986). The powers of associations. In Law, J., ed., Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 264–280.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (1990). Technology is society made durable. The Sociological Review, 38(1), 103–131.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (1994). On technical mediation. Common Knowledge, 3(2), 29–64.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (1996a). Aramis, or, the Love of Technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (1996b). On actor-network theory: A few clarifications plus more than a few complications. Soziale Welt, 47(4), 369–381.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (1999a). On recalling ANT. In Law, J. and Hassard, J., eds., Actor Network Theory and After. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 15–25.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (1999b). Pandora’s Hope. Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (2004). Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern. Critical Inquiry, 30(2), 225–248.CrossRef Google Scholar

Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (2018). Down to Earth: Politics in the New Climatic Regime. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Law, J., ed. (1986). Power, Action, and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Law, J. (1987). Technology and heterogeneous engineering: The case of Portuguese expansion. In Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P. and Pinch, T., eds., The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 111–134.Google Scholar

Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5(4), 379–393.CrossRef Google Scholar

Law, J. (2002). Aircraft Stories: Decentering the Object in Technoscience. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar

Law, J. (2004). After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Law, J. and Callon, M. (1988). Engineering and sociology in a military aircraft project: A network analysis of technological change. Social Problems, 35(3), 284–297.Google Scholar

Law, J. and Hassard, J., eds. (1999). Actor Network Theory and After. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Law, J. and Singleton, V. (2014). ANT, multiplicity and policy. Critical Policy Studies, 8(4), 379–396.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lefebvre, H. (2004). Rhythmanalysis: Space, Time and Everyday Life. New York: Continuum Books.Google Scholar

MacKenzie, D. A., Muniesa, F. and Siu, L. (2007). Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

McLean, C. and Hassard, J. (2004). Symmetrical absence/symmetrical absurdity: Critical notes on the production of actor-network accounts. Journal of Management Studies, 41(3), 493–519.Google Scholar

Mitzscherling, L. (2019). Dynamiken und Entstehung von inter-organisationalen Routinen in Innovationsnetzwerken. Dissertation Freie Universität Berlin.Google Scholar

Mol, A. (2002). The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Mol, A. (2010). Actor-network theory: Sensitive terms and enduring tensions. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. Sonderheft, 50, 253–269.Google Scholar

Mol, A. and Law, J. (1994). Regions, networks and fluids: Anaemia and social topology. Social Studies of Science, 24(4), 641–671.Google Scholar

Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3(3), 398–427.Google Scholar

Parmigiani, A. and Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2011). Routines revisited: Exploring the capabilities and practice perspective. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 413–453.CrossRef Google Scholar

Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2005). Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5), 793–815.Google 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), 235–250.Google Scholar

Pentland, B. T. and Rueter, H. H. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 484–510.CrossRef Google Scholar

Salvato, C. (2009). Capabilities unveiled: The role of ordinary activities in the evolution of product development processes. Organization Science, 20(2), 384–409.CrossRef Google Scholar

Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2018). Routine regulation: Balancing conflicting goals in organizational routines. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(1), 170–209.Google Scholar

Seidl, D. and Whittington, R. (2014). Enlarging the Strategy-as-Practice research agenda: Towards taller and flatter ontologies. Organization Studies, 35(10), 1407–1421.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

Spee, P., Jarzabkowski, P. 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.CrossRef Google Scholar

Star, S. L. (1991). Power, technology and the phenomenology of conventions: On being allergic to onions. In Law, J., ed., A Sociology of Monster: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. London: Routledge, pp. 26–56.Google Scholar

Steen, J., Coopmans, C. and Whyte, J. (2006). Structure and agency? Actor-network theory and strategic organization. Strategic Organization, 4(3), 303–312.Google Scholar

Suchman, L. A. (2007). Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google 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.Google Scholar

Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning, 29(5), 731–735.Google Scholar

Whittle, A. and Spicer, A. (2008). Is actor network theory critique? Organization Studies, 29(4), 611–629.CrossRef Google Scholar

Yeow, A. and Faraj, S. (2014). Technology and sociomaterial performation. Working Conference on Information Systems and Organizations. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer, 48–65.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Book contents

Chapter 6 - Actor-Network Theory and Routine Dynamics

Summary