O Alinhamento entre a Teoria Ator-Rede e a Sociologia Relacional: uma Discussão Onto-Epistemológica para os Estudos Organizacionais
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21714/2238-104X2019v9i1-38817Palavras-chave:
Sociologia Relacional, Sociologia Transacional, Teoria Ator-Rede, Ontologia, EpistemologiaResumo
Neste ensaio teórico busca-se explorar o alinhamento entre a sociologia relacional e a teoria ator-rede e possíveis repercussões deste alinhamento para as pesquisas em organizações. Para isso, realizou-se a revisão dos principais autores de cada abordagem, destacando o seu posicionamento ontológico, epistemológico e metodológico. Em complemento, utilizou-se uma estrutura de classificação de paradigmas sociológicos para discutir o alinhamento das abordagens, revelando convergências e divergências entre ambas. Explorou-se, ainda, como a aproximação entre essas abordagens sociológicas pode auxiliar a área de estudos organizacionais (i) no amadurecimento e inovação nas teorias da área; e (ii) na aproximação das teorias com a realidade empírica. Por fim, são apresentadas oportunidades de pesquisa que versam sobre a inclusão do tempo nas explanações teóricas da área, dar voz a materialidade e os elementos não humanos em suas observações e aproximar-se das experiências sociais das pessoas em busca de explicações que ressoam a realidade das organizações.Downloads
Referências
Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2011). Generating research questions through problematization. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 247-271.
Archer, M. S. (1995). Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs, 28(3), 801-831.
Bueger, C. (2013). Actor‐Network Theory, Methodology, and International Organization. International Political Sociology, 7(3), 338-342.
Burkitt, I. (2016). Relational agency: Relational sociology, agency and interaction. European Journal of Social Theory, 19(3), 322-339.
Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. The Sociological Review, 32(S1), 196-233.
Callon, M., & Latour, B. (1992). Don't throw the baby out with the bath school! A reply to Collins and Yearley. In: A. Pickering (ed.), Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, ,343-368.
Callon, M., & Law, J. (1995). Agency and the hybrid collectif. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 94 (2), 481-507.
Callon, M., & Law, J. (1997). After the individual in society: Lessons on collectivity from science, technology and society. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 22 (2), 165-182.
Chia, R., & Holt, R. (2006). Strategy as practical coping: A Heideggerian perspective. Organization Studies, 27(5), 635-655.
Collins, H. M., & Yearley, S. (1992) Epistemological Chicken. In: A. Pickering (ed.), Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 301-326.
Dépelteau, F. (2013). What Is the Direction of the ‘Relational Turn’?. In: C. Powell & F. Dépelteau (Ed.). Conceptualizing Relational Sociology: Ontological and Theoretical Issues, Palgrave Macmillan: New York, 163-185.
Dépelteau, F. (2015). Relational sociology, pragmatism, transactions and social fields. International Review of Sociology, 25(1), 45-64.
Dewey, J., & A. Bentley (1949) Knowing and the Known. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Donati, P. (2011). Relational sociology: a new paradigm for the social sciences. London: Routledge.
Elias, N. (1978). What Is Sociology? New York: Columbia University Press.
Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology 1. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 281-317.
Giddens, A. (1984). A Constituição da Sociedade. 3ª. ed. São Paulo: Editora WMF Martins Fontes. Versão em português de 2009.
Hassard, J., & Cox, J. (2013). Can sociological paradigms still inform organizational analysis? A paradigm model for post-paradigm times. Organization Studies, 34(11), 1701-1728.
Langley, A., & Tsoukas, H. (2017) Introduction: Process thinking, process theorizing and process researching. In: Langley, A., & Tsoukas, H. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Process Organizational Studies. London: Sage, pp. 1–25.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986) Laboratory life: the construction of scientific knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. (1990). Technology is society made durable. The Sociological Review, 38(S1), 103-131.
Latour, B. (1999). On recalling ANT. The Sociological Review, 47(S1), 15-25.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Latour, B. (2013). Jamais fomos modernos. São Paulo: Editora 34.
Law, J. (1987). Technology and heterogeneous engineering: The case of Portuguese expansion. In: Bijker, W., Hughes, T., & T. Pinch. The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. London: MIT Press, 1-134.
Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5(4), 379-393.
Law, J. (1999). After ANT: complexity, naming and topology. The Sociological Review, 47(S1), 1-14.
Marsh, D., & Furlong, P. (2002). A skin, not a sweater: ontology and epistemology in political science. In: D. Marsh, & G. Stoker, (eds.). Theory and methods in political science. New York: Pallgrave McMillan, 17-41.
McFarlane, C. (2013). Relational sociology, theoretical inhumanism, and the problem of the nonhuman. In: C. Powell & F. Dépelteau (Ed.). Conceptualizing Relational Sociology: Ontological and Theoretical Issues, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 45-66.
McNaghten, P., & J. Urry (1998) Contested Natures, London: Sage.
Mintzberg, H. & Waters, J. (1990). Studying deciding: An exchange of views between Mintzberg and Waters, Pettigrew, and Butler. Organization Studies, 11(1), 1-6.
Mützel, S. (2009). Networks as culturally constituted processes: a comparison of relational sociology and actor-network theory. Current Sociology, 57(6), 871-887.
Nayak, A., & Chia, R. (2011). Thinking becoming and emergence: process philosophy and organization studies. In: H. Tsoukas; & R. Chia (Ed.). Philosophy and Organization Theory (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Volume 32). London: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. 281 – 309.
Nicolini, D., & Monteiro, P. (2017). The practice approach in organizational e management studies. Chapter 7. In: A. Langley & H. Tsoukas (eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Process Organization Studies. London: Sage.
Nimmo, R. (2011). Actor-network theory and methodology: Social research in a more-than-human world. Methodological Innovations Online, 6(3), 108-119.
Reed, M. I. (1997). In praise of duality and dualism: rethinking agency and structure in organizational analysis. Organization Studies, 18(1), 21-42.
Rudolf, F. (2012). Questioning the human/non-human distinction.In: J. H. Passoth, B. Peuker, & M. Schillmeier (eds.). (2012). Agency without actors? new approaches to collective action (Vol. 58), New York: Routledge.
Sandberg, J., & Alvesson, M. (2011). Ways of constructing research questions: gap-spotting or problematization? Organization, 18(1), 23-44.
Sayes, E. (2014). Actor–Network Theory and methodology: Just what does it mean to say that nonhumans have agency? Social Studies of Science, 44(1), 134-149.
Seidl, D., & Whittington, R. (2014). Enlarging the strategy-as-practice research agenda: Towards taller and flatter ontologies. Organization Studies, 35(10), 1407-1421.
Suddaby, R., Hardy, C., & Huy, Q. N. (2011). Where are the new theories of organization? Academy of Management Review, 36 (2) 236–246.
Tsoukas, H. (2017). Don't simplify, complexify: from disjunctive to conjunctive theorizing in organization and management studies. Journal of Management Studies, 54 (2), 132-153.
Vosselman, E. (2014). The ‘performativity thesis’ and its critics: Towards a relational ontology of management accounting. Accounting and Business Research, 44(2), 181-203.
Weick, K.E. (1969) The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Weick, K. E. (2001). Gapping the relevance bridge: Fashions meet fundamentals in management research. British Journal of Management, 12(s1), S71-S75.
