Can sociological paradigms still inform organizational analysis? A paradigm model for post-paradigm times

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

The Burrell and Morgan model for classifying organization theory is revisited through meta-theoretical analysis of the major intellectual movement to emerge in recent decades, post-structuralism and more broadly postmodernism. Proposing a retrospective paradigm for this movement, we suggest that its research can be characterized as ontologically relativist, epistemologically relationist and methodologically reflexive; this also represents research that can be termed deconstructionist in its view of human nature. When this paradigm is explored further, in terms of Burrell and Morgan s assumptions for the nature of society , two analytical domains emerge - normative post-structural and critical post-structural. Assessing the types of research developed within them, and focusing on actor-network theory in particular, we describe how post-structural and postmodern thinking can be classified within, rather than outside, or after, the Burrell and Morgan model. Consequently we demonstrate not only that organizational knowledge stands on meta-theoretical grounds, but also how recent intellectual developments rest on a qualitatively different set of meta-theoretical assumptions than established traditions of agency and structure.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1701 - 1728
Number of pages28
JournalOrganization Studies
Volume34
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Cite this

@article{14ed696e332740b78a84e5b2d414bf70,
title = "Can sociological paradigms still inform organizational analysis? A paradigm model for post-paradigm times",
abstract = "The Burrell and Morgan model for classifying organization theory is revisited through meta-theoretical analysis of the major intellectual movement to emerge in recent decades, post-structuralism and more broadly postmodernism. Proposing a retrospective paradigm for this movement, we suggest that its research can be characterized as ontologically relativist, epistemologically relationist and methodologically reflexive; this also represents research that can be termed deconstructionist in its view of human nature. When this paradigm is explored further, in terms of Burrell and Morgan s assumptions for the nature of society , two analytical domains emerge - normative post-structural and critical post-structural. Assessing the types of research developed within them, and focusing on actor-network theory in particular, we describe how post-structural and postmodern thinking can be classified within, rather than outside, or after, the Burrell and Morgan model. Consequently we demonstrate not only that organizational knowledge stands on meta-theoretical grounds, but also how recent intellectual developments rest on a qualitatively different set of meta-theoretical assumptions than established traditions of agency and structure.",
author = "John Hassard and {Wolfram Cox}, {Julie Rosalind}",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1177/0170840613495019",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "1701 -- 1728",
journal = "Organization Studies",
issn = "0170-8406",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "11",

}

Can sociological paradigms still inform organizational analysis? A paradigm model for post-paradigm times. / Hassard, John; Wolfram Cox, Julie Rosalind.

In: Organization Studies, Vol. 34, No. 11, 2013, p. 1701 - 1728.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Can sociological paradigms still inform organizational analysis? A paradigm model for post-paradigm times

AU - Hassard, John

AU - Wolfram Cox, Julie Rosalind

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - The Burrell and Morgan model for classifying organization theory is revisited through meta-theoretical analysis of the major intellectual movement to emerge in recent decades, post-structuralism and more broadly postmodernism. Proposing a retrospective paradigm for this movement, we suggest that its research can be characterized as ontologically relativist, epistemologically relationist and methodologically reflexive; this also represents research that can be termed deconstructionist in its view of human nature. When this paradigm is explored further, in terms of Burrell and Morgan s assumptions for the nature of society , two analytical domains emerge - normative post-structural and critical post-structural. Assessing the types of research developed within them, and focusing on actor-network theory in particular, we describe how post-structural and postmodern thinking can be classified within, rather than outside, or after, the Burrell and Morgan model. Consequently we demonstrate not only that organizational knowledge stands on meta-theoretical grounds, but also how recent intellectual developments rest on a qualitatively different set of meta-theoretical assumptions than established traditions of agency and structure.

AB - The Burrell and Morgan model for classifying organization theory is revisited through meta-theoretical analysis of the major intellectual movement to emerge in recent decades, post-structuralism and more broadly postmodernism. Proposing a retrospective paradigm for this movement, we suggest that its research can be characterized as ontologically relativist, epistemologically relationist and methodologically reflexive; this also represents research that can be termed deconstructionist in its view of human nature. When this paradigm is explored further, in terms of Burrell and Morgan s assumptions for the nature of society , two analytical domains emerge - normative post-structural and critical post-structural. Assessing the types of research developed within them, and focusing on actor-network theory in particular, we describe how post-structural and postmodern thinking can be classified within, rather than outside, or after, the Burrell and Morgan model. Consequently we demonstrate not only that organizational knowledge stands on meta-theoretical grounds, but also how recent intellectual developments rest on a qualitatively different set of meta-theoretical assumptions than established traditions of agency and structure.

U2 - 10.1177/0170840613495019

DO - 10.1177/0170840613495019

M3 - Article

VL - 34

SP - 1701

EP - 1728

JO - Organization Studies

JF - Organization Studies

SN - 0170-8406

IS - 11

ER -