The Experts below are selected from a list of 294 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Andrea Whittle - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Garfinkel on strategy: Using Ethnomethodology to make sense of “rubbish strategy”
    Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 2018
    Co-Authors: Daniel Neyland, Andrea Whittle
    Abstract:

    Abstract This paper has three aims. First, it presents what the term Ethnomethodology means and explains some of its central concepts and tenets. Second, the paper illustrates an ethnomethodological approach to studying strategy by drawing on a fieldwork study of the development of a waste management strategy in a UK Local Authority, conducted by the first author. Third, the distinctive approach that Ethnomethodology takes to the study of social organization is presented in order to outline what it could offer to the understanding of strategic organization in particular. The paper concludes by discussing the insights that Ethnomethodology can offer in the strategic management field, including existing applications and potential future lines of enquiry, particularly in the field known as Strategy-as-Practice. The conclusion advocates a move away from rational analytic models, proclamations and prescriptive treatments of strategy towards studying the more mundane work that enables strategic action to take place, notably the production of accounts of various kinds. It is argued that through accounts, members produce the social facts that generate ‘strategies’ of various kinds. This necessitates studying fact production ‘in flight’. Strategic organization is thereby conceptualised as an ongoing achievement of member’s ethno- methods for producing it.

  • Ethnomethodology and the production of history: studying ‘history-in-action’
    Business History, 2015
    Co-Authors: Andrea Whittle, John F. Wilson
    Abstract:

    According to Lynch, in his article Ethnomethodology and History, Ethnomethodology offers a rich and valuable resource for studying the in situ production of history. In this article, we seek to lay out a research agenda for a ‘new business history’ that uses Ethnomethodology to study ‘history-in-action’. Our aim is to show how an ethnomethodological history can be used to study the practical work of those tasked with ‘making history’. We discuss the value of Ethnomethodology for core business history methods, including the production and use of historical archives and written records, the treatment of witness memories, (auto)-biographies and testimonies, and the production of official versions of past events from diverse historical sources of evidence. We conclude by outlining the potential of Ethnomethodology as a distinct paradigm of enquiry, which marks it out from conventional social scientific approaches to the relationship between empirical evidence and theory-building, by discussing: (1) the value ...

Douglas W. Maynard - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Ethnomethodology and Social Phenomenology
    Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research, 2016
    Co-Authors: Jason Turowetz, Matthew M. Hollander, Douglas W. Maynard
    Abstract:

    Ethnomethodology (EM) is a theoretical paradigm created by American sociologist Harold Garfinkel. It is one of the twentieth century schools of sociology strongly influenced by Edmund Husserl’s philosophy of phenomenology. Although EM is similar in certain respects to the various strands of social phenomenology created and influenced by Alfred Schutz and his students, its approach to the empirical study of social action differs in several important ways, with key tenets involving indexical expressions, accountability, and reflexivity. After presenting examples of classic EM research by Garfinkel and his colleagues, and discussing the relationship between EM and the related field of Conversation Analysis, we conclude the chapter with a review of recent and ongoing developments in EM, highlighting its contemporary relevance to studies of social praxis (e.g., culture, morality), embodied action, solitary social action, and the interaction order.

  • Pragmatism and Ethnomethodology
    Qualitative Sociology, 2011
    Co-Authors: Mustafa Emirbayer, Douglas W. Maynard
    Abstract:

    Three features of pragmatist thought remain empirically underdeveloped or insufficiently explored: its call for a return to experience or recovery of concrete practices; its idea that obstacles in experience give rise to efforts at creative problem-solving; and its understanding of language in use, including conversational interaction, as an order of empirical practices in and through which problem-solving efforts are undertaken and social order ongoingly and collaboratively accomplished. Our aim in this article is to show that there exists a long-standing, theoretically informed, and empirically rich research tradition in which these pragmatist themes are further developed, albeit in ways the originators might have foreseen only in dimly programmatic form. This research tradition is Ethnomethodology. We present in bold strokes the classical pragmatist ideas of Peirce, James, Mead, Dewey, plus Addams, focusing on the three themes mentioned above. We show how Garfinkel’s work surpasses even that of the pragmatists in developing the larger implications and promise of those themes. We demonstrate how ethnomethodological studies of work and science and conversation analysis, respectively, continue as well to develop the original pragmatist impulse in unsuspected ways. Finally, we step back from this account to ponder the broader significance of the connections we have explored between pragmatism and Ethnomethodology.

  • The Diversity of Ethnomethodology
    Annual Review of Sociology, 1991
    Co-Authors: Douglas W. Maynard, Steven E. Clayman
    Abstract:

    Our purpose is to review the enormous range of ethnomethodological research from the past three decades. Periodically, scholars have produced review articles, monographs, and position papers that usually promote or critique the work of a particular ethnomethodological subfield. Also, textbook and other accounts of Ethnomethodology sometimes impose a homogeneity on the field that neglects the various theoretical and methodological strands. We attempt to articulate the diversity each of the subfields represents, to clarify distinctions between them, and to demonstrate assumptions they share. The areas we discuss include theory, phenomenology, cognition, conversation analysis, research in institutional settings, studies of science, and applied research. While debates about proper topics and methods of research will no doubt continue, underneath such debates are a shared orientation to an extant, achieved orderliness in everyday activities and a commitment to discovering organizational features of direct inte...

Peter Tolmie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Ethnography, CSCW and Ethnomethodology
    Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 2020
    Co-Authors: David Randall, Mark Rouncefield, Peter Tolmie
    Abstract:

    This paper documents some details and some examples of the influence of ethnomethodological work in the fieldwork tradition associated with European CSCW; in particular what has been termed ‘ethnomethodologically informed ethnography’. In so doing, we do not wish to downplay other perspectival and methodological contributions but to simply suggest that much of the ethnomethodological work that was done in the UK during the early development of CSCW had a distinctive character and made significant contributions to the study of complex organizational environments for design-related purposes that arguably reinvigorated the European fieldwork tradition. The distinctiveness we speak of in ‘ethnomethodologically informed ethnography’ had to do with what it owed to Wittgenstein and Winch as much as Garfinkel and Sacks, was rooted in a contempt for methodological fetishism, and emphasized the centrality of reasoning or rationale in the conduct of working and, more generally, social life. This focus and approach drew heavily on the ethnographic work of the likes of John Hughes in Lancaster, Wes Sharrock in Manchester, Bob Anderson at Xerox in Cambridge, and Christian Heath in King’s, London, where attention was focused on the actual ‘doing’ of work as opposed to work in some idealised form – and it is this that we suggest has become important to design and designers of various kinds and in various domains.

  • Ethnography, Ethnomethodology and Design
    Human–Computer Interaction Series, 2015
    Co-Authors: Graham Button, Andy Crabtree, Mark Rouncefield, Peter Tolmie
    Abstract:

    In this chapter we bring together different threads of our argument to consider the difference between Ethnomethodology and traditional forms of social science that make use of ethnography. Ethnomethodology provides for a complete respecification of how the social should be apprehended through the study of the ways in which people achieve the orderliness of their actions and interactions through the methodical use of common-sense knowledge. Thus, in ethnomethodological studies of action and interaction can be found demonstrations of members’ methodologies for doing and ordering social life. To understand this respecification we examine the ways in which social science is essentially a natural language exercise itself shot through with common-sense knowledge, common-sense understandings and common-sense reasoning. The social sciences feed off and, curiously, at the same time seek to rival common-sense thereby producing a disjuncture between the social world as known and understood by social scientists and the social world as it is known and understood by society’s members. Ethnomethodology, by contrast, recognises that common-sense knowledge of social doings is the very bedrock of social life and makes it a topic of study in its own right. The suggestion here is that the study of “members’ methods” provides a systematic means of anchoring systems design in the social.

  • Ethnomethodology at Play
    2013
    Co-Authors: Peter Tolmie, Mark Rouncefield
    Abstract:

    Contents: Introduction: overview: Garfinkel's bastards at play, Mark Rouncefield and Peter Tolmie Part I Domestic Pleasures: Cooking for pleasure, Andy Crabtree, Peter Tolmie and Mark Rouncefield Reading for pleasure: bedtime stories, Peter Tolmie and Mark Rouncefield. Part II Having a Hobby: Identifying birds by their song, Paul ten Have Seeing fish, Michael Lynch All at sea: the use of practical formalisms in yachting, Graham Button and Wes Sharrock Remixing music together: the use and abuse of virtual studio software as a hobby, Phillip Brooker and Wes Sharrock. Part III `Getting Out of the House': A day out in the country, Peter Tolmie and Andy Crabtree Playing dangerously: an ethnomethodological view upon rock-climbing, K. Neil Jenkings Distance running as play/work: training-together as a joint accomplishment, John Hockey and Jacquelyn Allen-Collinson. Part IV Doing Stuff Together: Playing in Irish music sessions, Peter Tolmie, Steve Benford and Mark Rouncefield Vine right, shimmy, shimmy! Accomplishing order in a line dancing class, Russell Kelly Encounters at the counter: the relationship between regulars and staff, Eric Laurier Bibliography Index.

  • Ethnomethodology at Work
    2012
    Co-Authors: Mark Rouncefield, Peter Tolmie
    Abstract:

    Bringing together one of the most important bodies of research into people's working practices, this volume outlines the specific character of the ethnomethodological approach to work, providing an introduction to the key conceptual resources Ethnomethodology has drawn upon in its studies, and a set of substantive chapters that examine how people work from a foundational perspective. With contributions from leading experts in the field, including Graham Button, John Hughes and Wes Sharrock, Ethnomethodology at Work explores the contribution that ethnomethodological studies continue to make to our understanding of the ways in which people actually accomplish work from day to day. As such, it will appeal not only to those working in the areas of Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis, but also to those with interests in the sociology of work and organisations.

Graham Button - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Ethnography, Ethnomethodology and Design
    Human–Computer Interaction Series, 2015
    Co-Authors: Graham Button, Andy Crabtree, Mark Rouncefield, Peter Tolmie
    Abstract:

    In this chapter we bring together different threads of our argument to consider the difference between Ethnomethodology and traditional forms of social science that make use of ethnography. Ethnomethodology provides for a complete respecification of how the social should be apprehended through the study of the ways in which people achieve the orderliness of their actions and interactions through the methodical use of common-sense knowledge. Thus, in ethnomethodological studies of action and interaction can be found demonstrations of members’ methodologies for doing and ordering social life. To understand this respecification we examine the ways in which social science is essentially a natural language exercise itself shot through with common-sense knowledge, common-sense understandings and common-sense reasoning. The social sciences feed off and, curiously, at the same time seek to rival common-sense thereby producing a disjuncture between the social world as known and understood by social scientists and the social world as it is known and understood by society’s members. Ethnomethodology, by contrast, recognises that common-sense knowledge of social doings is the very bedrock of social life and makes it a topic of study in its own right. The suggestion here is that the study of “members’ methods” provides a systematic means of anchoring systems design in the social.

  • Lifting the Mantle of Protection from Weber’s Presuppositions in His Theory of Bureaucracy
    Human Studies, 2012
    Co-Authors: Graham Button, David Martin, Jacki O’neill, Tommaso Colombino
    Abstract:

    Early reactions to the publication of Harold Garfinkel’s Studies in Ethnomethodology, which have persisted over the passing decades, was that Ethnomethodology could not address what sociology deemed to be socially significant matters such as ‘power’ and ‘the state’. This, however, is not the case. How such matters enter into the practical everyday affairs of members is of equal interest to Ethnomethodology when compared to how any matter enters into members’ everyday life, and how they display that. It just does not have more importance. Egon Bittner spelt this out with regard to Weber’s interest in bureaucracy when he reminds sociology that when Weber talked about efficiency he was not referring to an objective standard but as something that is attuned to practical interests as they emerge in the context of everyday life. This paper examines some of the actions and interactions that were encountered in a Governmental Department in one of the European countries. It makes visible how characterisations of bureaucracy such as ‘rational’, and ‘efficient’ are achieved in the actions and interactions of Department employees, and some of the practices involved in that achievement. Garfinkel, and Ethnomethodology in general, are not, in principle, to be found wanting where matters of overarching, primordial interest to sociology are concerned.

  • What does ‘work’ mean in ‘ethnomethodological studies of work?’: Its ubiquitous relevance for systems design to support action and interaction
    Design Studies, 2012
    Co-Authors: Graham Button
    Abstract:

    In computer systems design, Ethnomethodology is seen as a form of ethnography that emphasises situated work practices and the workplace. However, designers have increasingly taken an interest in developing systems to support non-work matters such as social networking, gaming, and fun, and non-work settings such as the home. Some have, therefore, suggested that ethnography driven by interests in work practice is not relevant for these new developments because they do not involve matters of work, and that, consequently, a new form of ethnography is required. This paper critically addresses this argument and contends that ethnography can be analytically grounded in Ethnomethodology as a ubiquitous method for building ‘the social’ into systems design.

  • On Technomethodologyn;: foundational relationships between Ethnomethodology and system design
    Human-Computer Interaction, 1998
    Co-Authors: Paul Dourish, Graham Button
    Abstract:

    Over the past 10 years, the use of sociological methods and sociological reasoning have become more prominent in the analysis and design of interactive systems. For a variety of reasons, one form of sociological inquiry-Ethnomethodology-has become something of a favored approach. Our goal in this article is to investigate the consequences of approaching system design from the ethnomethodological perspective. In particular, we are concerned with how Ethnomethodology can take a foundational place in the very notion of system design, rather than simply being employed as a resource in aspects of the process, such as requirements elicitation and specification. We begin by outlining the basic elements of Ethnomethodology and discussing the place that it has come to occupy in computer-supported cooperative work and, increasingly, in human-computer interaction. We discuss current approaches to the use of Ethnomethodology in systems design, and we point to the contrast between the use of Ethnomethodology for critique and for design. Currently, understandings of how to use Ethnomethodology as a primary aspect of system design are lacking. We outline a new approach and present an extended example of its use. This approach takes as its starting point a relationship between Ethnomethodology and system design that is a foundational, theoretical matter rather than simply one of design practice and process. From this foundation, we believe, emerges a new model of interaction with computer systems, which is based on ethnomethodological perspectives on everyday human social action.

Andy Crabtree - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Ethnography, Ethnomethodology and Design
    Human–Computer Interaction Series, 2015
    Co-Authors: Graham Button, Andy Crabtree, Mark Rouncefield, Peter Tolmie
    Abstract:

    In this chapter we bring together different threads of our argument to consider the difference between Ethnomethodology and traditional forms of social science that make use of ethnography. Ethnomethodology provides for a complete respecification of how the social should be apprehended through the study of the ways in which people achieve the orderliness of their actions and interactions through the methodical use of common-sense knowledge. Thus, in ethnomethodological studies of action and interaction can be found demonstrations of members’ methodologies for doing and ordering social life. To understand this respecification we examine the ways in which social science is essentially a natural language exercise itself shot through with common-sense knowledge, common-sense understandings and common-sense reasoning. The social sciences feed off and, curiously, at the same time seek to rival common-sense thereby producing a disjuncture between the social world as known and understood by social scientists and the social world as it is known and understood by society’s members. Ethnomethodology, by contrast, recognises that common-sense knowledge of social doings is the very bedrock of social life and makes it a topic of study in its own right. The suggestion here is that the study of “members’ methods” provides a systematic means of anchoring systems design in the social.

  • Taking technomethodology seriously: hybrid change in the Ethnomethodology–design relationship
    European Journal of Information Systems, 2004
    Co-Authors: Andy Crabtree
    Abstract:

    The incorporation of Ethnomethodology in professional systems development has prompted the call for the approach to move from design critique to design practice and the invention of the future. This has resulted in the development of a variety of mixing pot hybrids that have had marginal impact upon product-based development, whose needs the approach has been configured to meet. This paper suggests that a concern to fit Ethnomethodology into product-based development life cycles is a primary source of the difficulties encountered in moving Ethnomethodology from design critique to design practice. In practice, Ethnomethodology is largely employed in research rather than product development settings. Recognition of the real-world uses of Ethnomethodology in design practice opens up the possibility of devising a hybrid methodology that actively supports the invention of the future. Accordingly, this paper articulates a distinct socio-technical model that provides an iterative structure for the constructive involvement of Ethnomethodology in processes of technological innovation , the results of which may subsequently be subject to the rationalities and constraints of product development.

  • Taking technomethodology seriously: hybrid change in the Ethnomethodology-design relationship
    European Journal of Information Systems, 2004
    Co-Authors: Andy Crabtree
    Abstract:

    The incorporation of Ethnomethodology in professional systems development has prompted the call for the approach to move from design critique to design practice and the invention of the future. This has resulted in the development of a variety of mixing pot hybrids that have had marginal impact upon product-based development, whose needs the approach has been configured to meet. This paper suggests that a concern to fit Ethnomethodology into product-based development life cycles is a primary source of the difficulties encountered in moving Ethnomethodology from design critique to design practice. In practice, Ethnomethodology is largely employed in research rather than product development settings. Recognition of the real-world uses of Ethnomethodology in design practice opens up the possibility of devising a hybrid methodology that actively supports the invention of the future. Accordingly, this paper articulates a distinct socio-technical model that provides an iterative structure for the constructive involvement of Ethnomethodology in processes of technological innovation, the results of which may subsequently be subject to the rationalities and constraints of product development.