2019
DOI: 10.1108/qrom-05-2018-1645
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Critical sensemaking: challenges and promises

Abstract: Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze current literature on critical sensemaking (CSM) to assess its significance and potential for understanding the role of agency in management and organizational studies. Design/methodology/approach The analysis involves an examination of a selection of 51 applied studies that cite, draw on and contribute to CSM, to assess the challenges and potential of utilizing CSM. Findings The paper reveals the range of organizational issues that this work has been grappli… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
30
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
(103 reference statements)
0
30
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…There is a lack of theoretical perspectives that see the institutional bases of trust as emerging through micro strategies of social interaction. The critical sensemaking perspective, introduced by Mills et al [46] and eaborated further by Aaroma et al [47], addresses this research gap and provides a framework for understanding how individuals make sense of their environments at a local level while acknowledging power relations in the broader societal context. By examining contexts, the critical sensemaking framework creates space for a discussion of how different policy implementations, such as patient pathways, in which individuals operate affect the cues they extract and how they make sense of different events.…”
Section: Critical Sensemaking and Trust Bridging The Gapmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…There is a lack of theoretical perspectives that see the institutional bases of trust as emerging through micro strategies of social interaction. The critical sensemaking perspective, introduced by Mills et al [46] and eaborated further by Aaroma et al [47], addresses this research gap and provides a framework for understanding how individuals make sense of their environments at a local level while acknowledging power relations in the broader societal context. By examining contexts, the critical sensemaking framework creates space for a discussion of how different policy implementations, such as patient pathways, in which individuals operate affect the cues they extract and how they make sense of different events.…”
Section: Critical Sensemaking and Trust Bridging The Gapmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Employees may also be encouraged to draw upon cues from their work environment and reflect an identity privileged through other similar organizations or a broader social context. Critical sensemaking positions the context as a link between dominant social values and individual action [46,47] Furthermore, issues of power and identity and critical sensemaking that address these issues must be incorporated into the analysis.…”
Section: Critical Sensemaking and Trust Bridging The Gapmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An adjunct to this approach could feasibly have incorporated critical sensemaking (Aromaa et al, 2019). Based on the work of Weick (1995), critical sensemaking proposes the use of a set of properties that enable the researcher to examine identity construction, signs used to promote sensemaking within those being studied and a determination of social stimuli occurring within the studied environment that influences how sense is made.…”
Section: Critical Realism and Constructivismmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Weick et al (2005) conceptualised power as an accumulation of individual actions and the ability of individuals to mobilise sensemaking resources. Taking a different perspective, CSM approaches power in sensemaking as a systemic, masked and multi-level phenomenon and asks how structural (i.e., formative contexts and organisational rules) and poststructural (i.e., discourse) elements shape the micro-level sensemaking of organisational actors (Helms Mills, 2003;Helms Mills et al, 2010;Aromaa et al, 2019).…”
Section: Power Through the Critical Sensemaking Lensmentioning
confidence: 99%