Time, Temporality, and History in Process Organization Studies
Time, Temporality, and History in Process Organization Studies
复制标题
过程组织研究中的时间、暂时性和历史
DOI：
10.1093/oso/9780198870715.003.0010
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Hassard J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hassard J
在本章中，我们认为，社会学家历来强调可能被称为现实主义，结构或决定论的时间解释，而牺牲了民族志，解释或过程导向的（Hassard，1990）。事实上，组织时间的分析往往反映了两个现实主义传统之一：时间结构的功能主义研究和时间商品化的批判性检查。这两种传统在阐明工业或组织时间的核心问题时，尤其是在考察各种形式的生产和服务系统下的工作经验时，都主要使用线性隐喻。相比之下，社会学研究试图解释时间的异质性和递归性，调查经常求助于周期性或其他过程导向的隐喻，历史上一直很薄弱。例如，在工业和组织行为的研究中，相对较少的研究人员关注行动者如何在“社会周期”术语中象征性地体验工作时间（索罗金，1957）-换句话说，他们如何通过时间有序事件的重复获得意义，并基于这种经验构建自己的文化时间计算系统。在这方面，我们关注的是如何从社会人类学，人种学，从而定性的观点来理解工作中的时间和时间性。因此，在这一分析中，我们不仅讨论了“线性定量”传统中的社会学工作，而且还讨论了与发展了“周期定性”解释的研究有关的社会学工作。首先，在发展一个概念框架时，我们从历史的角度对工作时间和组织时间进行了解释。
In this chapter we argue that sociologists have historically emphasized what might be termed realist, structural or determinist explanations of time at the expense of ethnographic, interpretive or process-oriented ones (Hassard, 1990). Indeed, analyses of organizational time have tended to reflect one of two realist traditions: functionalist studies of time structuring and critical examinations of temporal commodification. Both traditions have invoked primarily linear metaphors when illuminating core issues of industrial or organizational time, and notably so when examining work experience under various forms of production and service systems. In contrast, sociological research seeking to account for the more heterogeneous and recursive nature of time—inquiry often taking recourse to cyclical or other process-oriented metaphors—has historically been thinner on the ground. In studies of industrial and organizational behavior, for example, relatively few researchers have focused on how actors experience working time symbolically in “social cycle” terms (Sorokin, 1957)—in other words, how they obtain meaning through the recurrence of temporally ordered events and construct their own cultural timereckoning systems based on such experience. In this regard, we are concerned analytically with how time and temporality at work can be appreciated from social anthropological, ethnographic, and thus qualitative viewpoints. In this analysis, therefore, we discuss sociological work on time not only in the “linear-quantitative” tradition but also in relation to studies which have developed “cyclical-qualitative” interpretations. Initially, on developing a conceptual framework, we offer explanations of working and organizational time from the historically