'Processualizing' innovation research: a deconstructive analysis of organizing while innovating

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaper

Abstract

“How can theorizing on organization structures be aligned with the facts of the innovation journey?” Managing the innovation journey, is vexing and fraught with ambiguity. Empirical research is replete with happy accidents, serial failures, unforeseen mutations, confrontational exchanges and a gleeful determination to upset the status quo. And yet, current theories on innovating appear inadequate for capturing and explaining the dynamic process of innovating.This suggests that the theorizing process investigating organizing while innovating has been the theoretical equivalent of square pegs for round holes. Therefore, there is a need to distance ourselves from the caricaturist theories which graft mechanisms for ‘process’ onto concepts that basically are built to explain order. For this, we have to undertake a concerted effort to rebuild our theories by privileging ‘process’. In this paper, I initiate this rebuilding effort by extracting ideas from the philosophical oeuvres of William James (1909/2011), Alfred North Whitehead ([1929] 1978); and Henri Bergson ([1911]/1998); squeezing the ideas for meaning. This meaning is then infused into a theoretical reconceptualization which is sensitive to process, embraces complexity and makes links between abstract analysis and lived experiences. I then apply these insights to ‘problematize’ existing theories of organizational structures guiding innovating. Put differently, by embracing a theorizing approach which focuses on ‘organizational becoming’ as opposed to organizational ‘being’, organizational structures guiding innovating are re-conceptualized as an emergent property of change. Such an approach, I believe, would allow an integration of the creative and collective effort driving the co-creation process while innovating.
LanguageEnglish
Number of pages20
Publication statusPublished - 4 Jul 2013
Event29th EGOS Colloquium - Montreal, Canada
Duration: 4 Jul 20136 Jul 2013

Conference

Conference29th EGOS Colloquium
CountryCanada
CityMontreal
Period4/07/136/07/13

Fingerprint

Organizing
Innovation
Theorizing
Organizational structure
Status quo
Organization structure
Accidents
Emergent properties
Co-creation
Empirical research
Mutation
Dynamic process
Serials
Build-to-order

Keywords

  • processualizing
  • innovation research
  • deconstructive analysis
  • organizing

Cite this

@conference{e14dd826dec74190b044e722a8be9f1f,
title = "'Processualizing' innovation research: a deconstructive analysis of organizing while innovating",
abstract = "“How can theorizing on organization structures be aligned with the facts of the innovation journey?” Managing the innovation journey, is vexing and fraught with ambiguity. Empirical research is replete with happy accidents, serial failures, unforeseen mutations, confrontational exchanges and a gleeful determination to upset the status quo. And yet, current theories on innovating appear inadequate for capturing and explaining the dynamic process of innovating.This suggests that the theorizing process investigating organizing while innovating has been the theoretical equivalent of square pegs for round holes. Therefore, there is a need to distance ourselves from the caricaturist theories which graft mechanisms for ‘process’ onto concepts that basically are built to explain order. For this, we have to undertake a concerted effort to rebuild our theories by privileging ‘process’. In this paper, I initiate this rebuilding effort by extracting ideas from the philosophical oeuvres of William James (1909/2011), Alfred North Whitehead ([1929] 1978); and Henri Bergson ([1911]/1998); squeezing the ideas for meaning. This meaning is then infused into a theoretical reconceptualization which is sensitive to process, embraces complexity and makes links between abstract analysis and lived experiences. I then apply these insights to ‘problematize’ existing theories of organizational structures guiding innovating. Put differently, by embracing a theorizing approach which focuses on ‘organizational becoming’ as opposed to organizational ‘being’, organizational structures guiding innovating are re-conceptualized as an emergent property of change. Such an approach, I believe, would allow an integration of the creative and collective effort driving the co-creation process while innovating.",
keywords = "processualizing, innovation research, deconstructive analysis, organizing",
author = "Nair, {Anup Karath}",
year = "2013",
month = "7",
day = "4",
language = "English",
note = "29th EGOS Colloquium ; Conference date: 04-07-2013 Through 06-07-2013",

}

Nair, AK 2013, ''Processualizing' innovation research: a deconstructive analysis of organizing while innovating' Paper presented at 29th EGOS Colloquium, Montreal, Canada, 4/07/13 - 6/07/13, .

'Processualizing' innovation research : a deconstructive analysis of organizing while innovating. / Nair, Anup Karath.

2013. Paper presented at 29th EGOS Colloquium, Montreal, Canada.

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaper

TY - CONF

T1 - 'Processualizing' innovation research

T2 - a deconstructive analysis of organizing while innovating

AU - Nair, Anup Karath

PY - 2013/7/4

Y1 - 2013/7/4

N2 - “How can theorizing on organization structures be aligned with the facts of the innovation journey?” Managing the innovation journey, is vexing and fraught with ambiguity. Empirical research is replete with happy accidents, serial failures, unforeseen mutations, confrontational exchanges and a gleeful determination to upset the status quo. And yet, current theories on innovating appear inadequate for capturing and explaining the dynamic process of innovating.This suggests that the theorizing process investigating organizing while innovating has been the theoretical equivalent of square pegs for round holes. Therefore, there is a need to distance ourselves from the caricaturist theories which graft mechanisms for ‘process’ onto concepts that basically are built to explain order. For this, we have to undertake a concerted effort to rebuild our theories by privileging ‘process’. In this paper, I initiate this rebuilding effort by extracting ideas from the philosophical oeuvres of William James (1909/2011), Alfred North Whitehead ([1929] 1978); and Henri Bergson ([1911]/1998); squeezing the ideas for meaning. This meaning is then infused into a theoretical reconceptualization which is sensitive to process, embraces complexity and makes links between abstract analysis and lived experiences. I then apply these insights to ‘problematize’ existing theories of organizational structures guiding innovating. Put differently, by embracing a theorizing approach which focuses on ‘organizational becoming’ as opposed to organizational ‘being’, organizational structures guiding innovating are re-conceptualized as an emergent property of change. Such an approach, I believe, would allow an integration of the creative and collective effort driving the co-creation process while innovating.

AB - “How can theorizing on organization structures be aligned with the facts of the innovation journey?” Managing the innovation journey, is vexing and fraught with ambiguity. Empirical research is replete with happy accidents, serial failures, unforeseen mutations, confrontational exchanges and a gleeful determination to upset the status quo. And yet, current theories on innovating appear inadequate for capturing and explaining the dynamic process of innovating.This suggests that the theorizing process investigating organizing while innovating has been the theoretical equivalent of square pegs for round holes. Therefore, there is a need to distance ourselves from the caricaturist theories which graft mechanisms for ‘process’ onto concepts that basically are built to explain order. For this, we have to undertake a concerted effort to rebuild our theories by privileging ‘process’. In this paper, I initiate this rebuilding effort by extracting ideas from the philosophical oeuvres of William James (1909/2011), Alfred North Whitehead ([1929] 1978); and Henri Bergson ([1911]/1998); squeezing the ideas for meaning. This meaning is then infused into a theoretical reconceptualization which is sensitive to process, embraces complexity and makes links between abstract analysis and lived experiences. I then apply these insights to ‘problematize’ existing theories of organizational structures guiding innovating. Put differently, by embracing a theorizing approach which focuses on ‘organizational becoming’ as opposed to organizational ‘being’, organizational structures guiding innovating are re-conceptualized as an emergent property of change. Such an approach, I believe, would allow an integration of the creative and collective effort driving the co-creation process while innovating.

KW - processualizing

KW - innovation research

KW - deconstructive analysis

KW - organizing

M3 - Paper

ER -

Nair AK. 'Processualizing' innovation research: a deconstructive analysis of organizing while innovating. 2013. Paper presented at 29th EGOS Colloquium, Montreal, Canada.