2011
DOI: 10.1177/1350508411420196
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Actor-Network Theory, ANTi-History and critical organizational historiography

Abstract: The article describes what we have come to call ANTi-History, which entails the development of actor-network theory (ANT) as a critical approach to organizational historiography. It proceeds through four sections: 1) a review of the call for critical organizational historiography to establish the need for ANTi-History; 2) an overview of ANT to identify its potential to contribute to critical organizational historiography; 3) a development of ANT insights into an ANTi-History, through engagement with cultural t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
104
0
14

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 99 publications
(118 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
104
0
14
Order By: Relevance
“…It seeks to move the historical turn beyond accounts of knowledge of the past (and of the present) to understandings of the assembly of knowledge (Latour, 2005). This phase is exemplified in the work of Durepos and Mills (2012b) and Weatherbee et al (2012). Starting with Munslow's (2010) argument that the conflation of the past and history creates 'the-past-as-history', the focus here is on how notions of 'the-past-as-history' come to constitute knowledge; knowledge not simply of the past but of the present.…”
Section: Lessons From Historymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It seeks to move the historical turn beyond accounts of knowledge of the past (and of the present) to understandings of the assembly of knowledge (Latour, 2005). This phase is exemplified in the work of Durepos and Mills (2012b) and Weatherbee et al (2012). Starting with Munslow's (2010) argument that the conflation of the past and history creates 'the-past-as-history', the focus here is on how notions of 'the-past-as-history' come to constitute knowledge; knowledge not simply of the past but of the present.…”
Section: Lessons From Historymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, even while we draw on Munslow (2010), Jenkins (1997b) and other postructuralist historians for understandings of the past/history conundrum, our point of departure lies in the notion that historical accounts are always multiple and adjudicated by individual historians (Fish, 1994). We argue instead for an approach that draws on the sociology of knowledge to explain how history-as-knowledge held by a community is produced through an historicized actor network (Durepos and Mills, 2012b) that allows us to 'follow the actors' in the development of MOS and its history. In that process, our embedded critique of materialism should only be read as a question of balance and emphasis.…”
Section: Towards An Epistemic Phase Of the Historical Turnmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to ANT, the social nature is made of human and non-human actors (Akrich & Latour 1992;Brigham & Corbett, 1997), with both having the capacity to act upon or alter the other (Law, 1984) and each other's courses of action (Durepos & Mills, 2012). Within a MOOC perspective, ANT provides and understanding on how the social and technological dimensions are embedded in each other (Deimann, 2014).…”
Section: Actor Network Theory (Ant)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Initially, ANT was concerned with understanding how a series of disparate elements in laboratories came together to be transformed into a coherent and finished product (Durepos and Mills, 2012), and how scientists gained the support of others for their propositions about scientific facts (Van House, 2003). Since then, ANT has been used to analyze many different processes in which human and non-human actors take part to achieve particular goals so that their interests are represented.…”
Section: Antecedents Of Antmentioning
confidence: 99%