34877

Daniel S. Lacerda

Organizações & Sociedade

One of the most debated choices in every social research design is the adoption of either a realist (objective) or an idealist (subjective) worldview of sociological problems. As argued in this paper, this dichotomy can be bridged by the dialectical approach of historical space production according to Marxist traditions in human geography. Therefore, this paper explores the philosophical grounds of this debate and previous attempts to conciliate the dichotomy and finally proposes a rejection of this dichotomy by adopting the categories of ‘space’ and ‘time’ as central in organizational analysis. Space is a historical production of social relations, and the same relations are defined in terms of their surrounding space. Thus, organization studies can benefit from a spatial view of organizations to overcome epistemological constraints by interpreting organizations as historically produced and producers of their spatial context.

dichotomy, epistemology, Marxism, production, space

LACERDA, D.Overcoming dichotomies through space: the contribution of dialectical materialism to organization studies. Organizações & Sociedade, v. 22, n. 73, p. 223-235, 2015.

Lacerda, D.(2015). Overcoming dichotomies through space: the contribution of dialectical materialism to organization studies. Organizações & Sociedade, 22(73), 223-235.

10.1590/1984-9230732

https://www.spell.org.br/documentos/ver/34877/overcoming-dichotomies-through-space--the-contribution-of-dialectical-materialism-to-organization-studies/i/en

Artigo

Inglês

ADLER, P. S. Marx and organization studies today. In: ADLER, P. S. The Oxford handbook of sociology and organization studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. p. 63-91.

AL-AMOUDI, I.; WILLMOTT, H. C. Where constructionism and critical realism converge: interrogating the domain of epistemological relativism. Organization Studies, v. 32, p. 27-46, Jan. 2011.

ARCHER, M. For structure: Its reality, properties and powers: a reply to Anthony King. Sociological Review, v. 48, n. 3, p. 464-472, June. 2000.

ARENDT, H. The human condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.

BARLEY, S.; KUNDA, G. Design and devotion: surges of rational and normative ideologies in management discourse. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 37, n. 3, p. 363-399, Sep. 1992.

BOULDING, K. General systems theory: the skeleton of science. Management Science, v. 2, n. 3, p. 197-208, Apr. 1956.

BOURDIEU, P. Practical reason: on the theory of action. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998.

BURRELL, G.; MORGAN, G. Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. London: Heinemann, 1979.

CLARK, P. A. Organisations in action : competition between contexts. Abingdon: Routledge, 2002.

CLEGG, S. R.; KORNBERGER, M. Space, organizations and management theory. Slovenia: CBS, 2006.

COOKE, B. The deceptive illusion of multi-paradigm development practice. Public Administration and Development, v. 17, n. 5, p. 479-486, 1997.

COSTA, C. F.; GOULART, S. O jogo social e a produção de acontecimentos no território: o caso da Rede Arrozeiras do Sul. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, v. 9, n. 4, p. 998-1014, dez. 2011.

DALE, K. Building a social materiality: spatial and embodied politics in organizational control. Organization, v. 12, n. 5, p. 649-678, Sept. 2005.

DALE, K.; BURRELL, G. The spaces of organisation and the organisation of space: power, identity and materiality at work. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.

DEETZ, S. Disciplinary power, conflict supression and human resources management. In ALVESSON, M.; WILMOTT, H. (Eds.). Studying management critically. London: Sage. p. 23-45. 2003.

FLEETWOOD, S. Ontology in organization and management studies: a critical realist perspective. Organization, v. 12, n. 2, p. 197-222, Mar. 2005.

FOUCAULT, M. Ordem do discurso. São Paulo: Loyola, 1996.

GIDDENS, A. The constitution of society.Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.

HARVEY, D. Social justice and the city. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1973.

HASSARD, J. Multiple paradigms and organizational analysis: a case study. Organization Studies, v. 12, n. 2, p. 275-299, Apr. 1991.

HESSEN, J. Teoria do conhecimento. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2000.

JACKSON, N. ; CARTER, P. In defense of paradigm incommensurability. Organization Studies, v. 12, n. 1, p. 109-127, 1991.

JOHNSON, P.; DUBERLEY, J. Understanding management research. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2000.

KING, A. Against structure: a critique of morphogenetic social theory. Sociological Review, v. 47, n. 2, p. 199-227, May. 1999.

LEFEBVRE, H. The production of space. London: Blackwell, 1991.

LEWIS, M. W.; GRIMES, A. J. Metatriangulation: building theory from multiple paradigms. Academy of Management Review, v. 24, n. 4, p. 672-690, Oct. 1999.

LUKÁCS, G. Prolegomini a un’estetica marxista. Roma: Riuniti, 1971.

LUKÁCS, G. Reification and the consciousness of the proletariat. In: KARAGEORGIS, S. N. (Ed.). History & class consciousness. Pontypool: Merlin, 1967. p. 1-35.

MARREWIJK, A.; YANOW, D. Organizational spaces: rematerializing the workaday world. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2010.

MARX, K.; ENGELS, F. The german ideology. [1968?]. Available from: . Accessed: 2014 Jan 15.

MORENTE, M. G. Fundamentos de filosofia. São Paulo: Mestre Jou, 1980

NIETZSCHE, F. The gay science. New York: Vintage, 1974.

PAÇO-CUNHA, E. Rearticulação categorial ao pensamento marxiano: produção em geral, trabalho abstrato e burocracia. CSOnline (UFJF), v. 1, n. 14, p. 175-201, 2012.

PECI, A. Além da dicotomia objetividade-subjetividade: a nova teoria institucional em estudos organizacionais: uma abordagem crítica. In: VIEIRA, M. M. F.; ZOUAIN, D. M. Pesquisa qualitativa em administração. Rio de Janeiro: FGV, 2004. p. 71-96.

PECI, A. Estrutura e ação nas organizações: algumas perspectivas sociológicas. Revista de Administração de Empresas, v. 43, n. 1, jan. /mar. p. 24-35. 2003.

REED, M. I. In praise of duality and dualism: rethinking agency and structure in organizational analysis.Organization Studies, v. 18, n. 1, p. 21-42, Jan. 1997.

SANTOS, M. A natureza do espaço: técnica e tempo, razão e emoção. 4. ed. São Paulo: Universidade de São Paulo, 2009.

SEWELL, W. A theory of structure: duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, v. 98, n. 1, p. 1-29, July. 1992.

SRINIVAS, N. The possibility of the past: two routes to a past and what they tell us about professional power. Management & Organizational History, v. 7, n. 3, p. 237-249, 2012.

VAN MAANEN, J. The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 24, n. 4, p. 539-550, Dec. 1979.

WEATHERBEE, T. G. Caution! This historiography makes wide turns: historic turns and breaks in management and organization studies. Management & Organizational History, v. 7, n. 3, p. 203-218, Ago. 2012.