Sociomaterialism, Practice Theory, and Workplace Learning

Abstract

This chapter provides a detailed overview of contemporary sociomaterial and practice-based approaches, focusing in particular on their implications for conceiving workplace learning. It lays the theoretical foundations for the analysis and arguments developed in Parts II and III. It sets out an ontological position, and key concepts that are not so much applied in the subsequent empirical work, but tangled up in it (including in the approach to ethnographic fieldwork. These foundations are set in a broader context, namely sociomaterial approaches. The way in which contemporary theorists are 'rethinking the thing' is highlighted, based on performative, diffractive and non-representational ontologies. The 'practice turn' is located within these wider, diverse, traditions, and Schatzki's practice theory is presented as an overarching framework for this book. Next, research on workplace learning is considered, highlighting the metaphor of emergence and its links to concepts of knowledge. Here Gherardi and others' practice-based studies are significant, emphasising knowing in practice and aesthetics. The chapter then shifts gear introducing the key arguments that are developed in the remainder of the book. Times, spaces, bodies and things are introduced as four essential dimensions of professional practice and learning, and then a distinctive view of professional learning in an asymmetrical and non-reversible relationship with practice is presented. Learning and practice are viewed as entangled, but analytically distinguishable, and criteria for specifying this distinction are presented.

Healthcare professionals learning when implementing a digital artefact identifying patients’ cognitive impairment

“…Gherardi (2010) states that technology in practice reflects the way professionals learn the interaction between humans and technology, based on the organizational learning approach from a practice-based perspective. Thus, knowing and learning are seen as socio-material enactments (Hopwood, 2016).…”

“…Professionals need to be involved in activities in practice to know how to work and to learn in practice (Nicolini, 2011). Activities are related to practice, and they are governed by the same practical understandings, general understandings, rules and teleoaffective structures (Hopwood, 2016).…”

“…In this paper, we take a practice-based and socio-material perspective, implying that knowing and doing, thus learning, are seen as entangled and emerging in the work practice (Gherardi, 2011, 2017; Hopwood, 2016). It is assumed that the social and material (human beings and digital artefacts) exist as separate entities that interact and have emergent impact on each other as an entanglement of technology, work and knowledge (Orlikowski and Scott, 2016).…”

“…It is assumed that the social and material (human beings and digital artefacts) exist as separate entities that interact and have emergent impact on each other as an entanglement of technology, work and knowledge (Orlikowski and Scott, 2016). The concept of socio-materiality can be used to connect all the elements in practice that continually assemble and reassemble in emergent and indeterminant ways (Fenwick, 2015; Gherardi, 2017; Hopwood, 2016). The socio-material interactions influence and reconfigure what is emerging in reality, which then shifts understanding and makes learning possible (Hopwood, 2016; Mol, 2010; Orlikowski and Scott, 2016).…”

“…The concept of socio-materiality can be used to connect all the elements in practice that continually assemble and reassemble in emergent and indeterminant ways (Fenwick, 2015; Gherardi, 2017; Hopwood, 2016). The socio-material interactions influence and reconfigure what is emerging in reality, which then shifts understanding and makes learning possible (Hopwood, 2016; Mol, 2010; Orlikowski and Scott, 2016). Thus, we adopt a performative approach in this paper.…”