Reflections on actor-network theory, governance networks, and strategic outcomes

Abstract

In an attempt to instigate discussion in the areas of organizational studies and strategy, this essay focuses on themes related to Governance, Actor-Network Theory, and Strategic Outcomes. We seek to expand understanding of the Governance Network Theory by proposing the inclusion of human and non-human actors from the Actor-Network Theory in its scope. Recent studies concerning the notion of heterogeneous networks have demonstrated the importance of non-human actors for understanding social and organizational phenomena. When combined with a network perspective, strategy is seen as something that people within organizations do and not something that organizations have (Johnson, Langley, Melin, & Whittington, 2007). Networks require interaction, movement, and process; i.e., the active participation of actors involved. Decision making and activities are continuously realized based on the ties between actors and the content they deal with. We believe that this theoretical framework will reveal aspects and issues taken for granted that should be incorporated in the Governance Network Theory's empirical scope of analysis, primarily for research in plural and complex organizations permeated with ambiguous and power-related issues.

Actor networks in specialized accounting inspection: an analysis in the light of the Actor-Network Theory

“…we found that, through hybrid relationships of certain central actants with other human and non-human actors, networks and relationships are being created in an intense process of overcoming interest conflicts (Montenegro & Bulgacov, 2014). Through the four stages of the translation process, the problems to be faced and the objectives to be achieved are exposed; the main actors and their interests are identified; the attribution and roles of each element are outlined; and the allies are mobilized to then form networks among the actants in the field of specialized accounting inspection.…”

“…The human and non-human actors in relationships, according to Montenegro and Bulgacov (2014), are equally relevant, and should be considered in the process of social study and investigation. In the sphere of the specialized accounting inspection, the human actors, represented by the accounting expert, expert's assistant, judge and courts, are the main actants of the relationships, acting in the design of networks.…”

“…The Actor-Network Theory applied to accounting and related fields has been studied more in foreign literature, investigating aspects of information systems (Bloomfield & Best, 1992), economic markets (Callon, 1998) and organizational studies (White & Bradshaw, 2004;Czarniawska & Hernes, 2005;Woolgar, Coopmans, & Neyland, 2009;Steen, 2010;Pollack, Costello, & Sankaran, 2013), than in Brazil, which investigated as to information technology (Martins, 2011), process management (Albuquerque, 2012), governance and strategic outcomes (Montenegro & Bulgacov, 2014).…”

“…According to Montenegro and Bulgacov (2014), the materiality in relationships is relevant to understanding networks among humans, because they involve objects that will act and generate reflections on the networks created.…”

A Longitudinal Analysis of Territorial Social Innovations in a Touristic Route

“…The Actor-Network Theory enables the analysis or the interrelationship between the technical choice and the social destiny of the innovations, through the point of view of different entities that surround the human, non-human, technical and social world. Another important factor is mentioned by Montenegro and Bulgacov (2014), when they state that actors are constantly involved with each other in the formation and the destruction of groups and in their attempt to provide explanations to their actions.…”