IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00660155.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Discipline and Change: How Technologies and Organizational Routines Interact in New Practice Creation

Author

Listed:
  • Julie Labatut

    (AGIR - AGroécologie, Innovations, teRritoires - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - Toulouse INP - Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) - UT - Université de Toulouse)

  • Franck Aggeri

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Nathalie N. Girard

    (AGIR - AGroécologie, Innovations, teRritoires - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - Toulouse INP - Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) - UT - Université de Toulouse)

Abstract

In this paper we study the development and implementation of a technology over a long period of time, with a particular focus on how its disciplinary effects interplay with and change organizational routines and actors' capacities, thus producing new patterns of action. To identify these processes of change and emergence of practices, we propose a combinative theoretical analysis at the interface between institutional and practice-based approaches. Drawing on a rich ethnographic case study, we show how the fact of considering technologies as the combination of three dimensions (technical substrate, managerial philosophy and organizational model) furthers our understanding of institutional change and the creation of new practices. In particular, we examine the internal dynamics between the three dimensions of these technologies and the duality of organizational routines (their ostensive and performative aspects). This enables us to reintroduce practices and agency analysis into an institutional approach to technological change, and to put social history, designers' assumptions and disciplinary effects of technologies back into the analysis of the micro-dynamics of routine changes. We identify several factors which partially explain divergent technological trajectories concerning institutionalization and emerging structures in two different settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Julie Labatut & Franck Aggeri & Nathalie N. Girard, 2012. "Discipline and Change: How Technologies and Organizational Routines Interact in New Practice Creation," Post-Print hal-00660155, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00660155
    DOI: 10.1177/0170840611430589
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Post-Print halshs-03718851, HAL.
    2. Aura Parmentier-Cajaiba & Nathalie Lazaric & Giovany Cajaiba-Santana, 2021. "The effortful process of routines emergence: the interplay of entrepreneurial actions and artefacts," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 33-63, January.
    3. Monios, Jason & Ng, Adolf K.Y., 2021. "Competing institutional logics and institutional erosion in environmental governance of maritime transport," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    4. N. Girard & D. Magda & J. Astruc & N. Couix & H. Gross & J. P Guyon & J. Labatut & Y. Poinsot & F. Saldaqui, 2015. "Analyzing indicators for combining natural resources management and production-oriented activities," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 155-172, February.
    5. Franck Aggeri, 2017. "How can performativity contribute to management and organization research? Theoretical perspectives and analytical framework [Qu'est-ce que la performativité peut apporter aux recherches en managem," Post-Print hal-01609172, HAL.
    6. Marc Fréchet & Hervé Goy, 2017. "Does strategy formalization foster innovation? Evidence from a French sample of small to medium-sized enterprises," Post-Print hal-01623788, HAL.
    7. Lukas Radwan & Sebastian Kinder, 2013. "Practising the Diffusion of Organizational Routines," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(10), pages 2442-2458, October.
    8. Jamali, Dima & Jain, Tanusree & Samara, Georges & Zoghbi, Edwina, 2020. "How institutions affect CSR practices in the Middle East and North Africa: A critical review," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(5).
    9. Julie Labatut & Germain Tesnière & Eva Boxenbaum, 2015. "The role of evaluation devices in the creation of new institutions: breeding contracts under the “genomic” era in animal genetics [Le rôle des dispositifs d'évaluation dans la création de nouvelles," Post-Print hal-01135352, HAL.
    10. Mario Le Glatin & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2018. "Can organisational ambidexterity kill innovation? A case for non-expected utility decision making," Post-Print hal-01808566, HAL.
    11. Abdelnour, Samer & Hasselbladh, Hans & Kallinikos, Jannis, 2017. "Agency and institutions in organization studies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86361, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1119-1154, September.
    13. Moreno, José C. & Berenguel, Manuel & Donaire, Julián G. & Rodríguez, Francisco & Sánchez-Molina, Jorge A. & Guzmán, José Luis & Giagnocavo, Cynthia L., 2024. "A pending task for the digitalisation of agriculture: A general framework for technologies classification in agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00660155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.