Informality in organization and research: A review and a proposal

John Alfred Rooke, Lauri Koskela, Mike Kagioglou

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The growing interest in informal and emergent features of organizations has accompanied changes in both the dominant forms of organization and prevailing academic views about how best to think about and research them. It is argued here that currently espoused dichotomous characterizations of both organizations and research approaches are over-simplified and misleading. A review of types of organization research is conducted and it is suggested that the relationship between theory and data collection provides a more detailed and illuminating taxonomy than a distinction between qualitative and quantitative research. Two major distinctions are proposed: (1) between theory driven and phenomenon driven research; (2) between descriptive and prescriptive theory. It is suggested that organization theory is properly prescriptive in nature. The place of informality in organization and management studies is explicated, drawing on insights from Wittgenstein and ethnomethodology (EM). A distinction is drawn between (1) the degree of formality in particular organizational settings; and (2) the necessarily informal foundations of formal organizational schemes and methods. Finally, the organization of research itself is addressed. A prescriptive theory (TFV) is suggested as a means of organizing and explaining the research process. This suggestion serves as both (1) a proposal for research management; and (2) an illustration of the relationship between theory and organization.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)913-922
Number of pages10
JournalConstruction Management and Economics
Volume27
Issue number10
Early online date23 Nov 2009
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Informality in organization and research: A review and a proposal'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this