On the Ontology of Action: Actors are Not “Abstractions”

McBride, Russ; Packard, Mark D.

doi:10.5465/amr.2020.0093

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, by combining social identity theory and role identity theory, we can investigate interesting role identity-based variation in social entrepreneurship that exists within the three primary social identities. (see Gruber & MacMillan, 2017) Several other critiques (e.g., Alvarez & Barney, 2013;Hwang & Colyvas, 2020;McBride & Packard, 2020) also highlighted the need for greater precision in specifying theoretical arguments' ontological and epistemological underpinnings. Such precision provides the basis for a stronger theoretical contribution by (1) setting the boundary conditions of arguments and (2) making authors "take a stand" regarding their view of reality.…”

Section: Theorizing-logic Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Trade-Offs in Entrepreneurial Theorizing

Shepherd

Patzelt

2023

Entrepreneurial Theorizing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While several editors and scholars have shared critical insights into the craft of writing a theory paper, there is an essential aspect of publishing a theory paper that is less understood: the process by which expert reviewers and authors engage in the review process, which has a significant influence on theory. We examine critiques and responses to entrepreneurship theorizing to identify three major challenges of entrepreneurship theorizing: (1) the scope of the entrepreneurship paper’s theorizing being either too narrow or too shallow; (2) the common features of the paper’s contextualization, boundary conditions, and time considerations; and (3) the “point of view” of the entrepreneurship paper’s perspective—theoretical, philosophical, level, and purpose. This chapter offers a framework that guides (1) entrepreneurship scholars to find a balance to maximize their contributions and (2) reviewers and editors on managing the revise-and-resubmit process to advance the entrepreneurship field.

show abstract

Section: Theorizing-logic Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Trade-Offs in Entrepreneurial Theorizing

Shepherd

Patzelt

2023

Entrepreneurial Theorizing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, social institutions are highly constraining ''iron cages'' and institutional theorists often take a deterministic view wherein the agency of the actor is downplayed, ignored, or outright rejected. Strict top-down determinism leaves little theoretical room for rogue entrepreneurship (Aldrich, 2010(Aldrich, , 2011Battilana et al, 2009;McBride & Packard, 2021). The essential point here is about the need to acknowledge countervailing entrepreneurial activity both within and outside of institutions.…”

Section: Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rogue Entrepreneurship

McBride

Packard

Clark

2023

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We suggest a new category of “rogue entrepreneurship,” that describes entrepreneurial activity where the core business idea violates established or expert consensus, to be contrasted with “conforming entrepreneurship,” where it does not. There are large entrepreneurial rents hidden behind a bulwark of expert consensus that predicts doom for a venture based upon a rogue and unlikely claim. The “rogue” cases, where the predominant assessment context is different from the entrepreneur’s, result in broad skepticism against the entrepreneurial claim. We explain what rogue entrepreneurship is and how it works.

show abstract

“…This formal and philosophical analysis of agency is important as the concept of agency is commonly glossed over in social theory and management studies, bypassed as being a complication that must not stand in the way for empirical research and/or theorizing (in e.g. institutional theory that struggles to formulate an operable and plausible theory of agency, while preserving the authority of the institutions being the primary object of analysis; McBride and Packard, 2021, p. 211). To overcome this concern, the Davidson/Quine proposition states that to understand people and the beliefs and preferences that justify their actions, we need to recognize that shared language is constitutive of beliefs and preferences.…”

Section: The Concept Of Agency and The Principle Of Charitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…170-171) and nor is agency the product of structure, e.g. institutions (McBride and Packard, 2021), which render agency as some secondary effects of coordinated action. In the pragmatist and externalist view of agency that Davidson advocates, agency is constituted on basis of the use of a shared language.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this view, agency is derived from institutional and structural conditions (as e.g. in the case where the sovereign state grants certain rights to its citizens, or when professional norms provide the basis for an identity), is equally problematic: “[O]ver the past decades,” McBride and Packard (2021, p. 212) write, “sociologists have incrementally theorized away human agency and the required beliefs, intentions and decisions necessary for action, placing the impetus of will increasingly within the structure of social institutions.” This debate indicated that agency as a key analytical concept needs to be better justified on basis of theoretical propositions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Agency and the principle of charity: a pragmatist theory of the interaction order

Styhre

2022

IJOA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the concept of agency on basis of a pragmatist philosophy framework of analysis. Agency is a key analytical concept in management studies, debated in terms of its theoretical elements and its degree of empirical substantiation. Agency is commonly either assumed to be the case, understood as some generic human capacity to act with integrity, or, alternatively, agency is considered to be derived from social structures, say professional norms or occupational identities acquired through socialization. In contrast, in an attempt to escape the agency/structure model, agency may be considered as what is generated in and through meso-level interactions, constituted as recurrent practices wherein accomplishments in the past serve as the template for new activities that further reinforce agential capacities. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on the work of pragmatist philosopher Donald Davidson and what he calls the principle of charity, this paper presents an analytical model wherein agency is generated on basis of a shared everyday language wherein beliefs and preferences are constituted and thereafter serve as the basis of agential action. Findings Davidson’s externalist theory of action is supportive of the theory and study of meso-level interactions and helps to overcome the question whether agency is exogenously given or the effect of social structure. Originality/value This paper reviews recent social science literature on agency and introduces pragmatist philosophy concepts to better examine under what conditions social actors can reasonably have faith in an interaction being premised on beliefs that are held on basis of rational and reasonable grounds. This adds to an integrated theory of agency, being of importance for social theory and organizational analysis more specifically.

show abstract

On the Ontology of Action: Actors are Not “Abstractions”

Cited by 9 publications

References 16 publications

Managing Trade-Offs in Entrepreneurial Theorizing

Managing Trade-Offs in Entrepreneurial Theorizing

Rogue Entrepreneurship

Agency and the principle of charity: a pragmatist theory of the interaction order

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About