The Dynamics of Prioritizing: How Actors Temporally Pattern Complex Role–Routine Ecologies

Abstract

This paper examines the emergence of temporal coordination among multiple interdependent routines in a complex work setting that does not allow for up-front scheduling. We propose that when actors continuously have to prioritize their expected contributions to multiple interdependent routines, they address this challenge by orienting not just toward routines but also toward person-roles. Drawing on an ethnographic study of an agile consulting project team confronted with continued scheduling failures, we demonstrate how the dynamics of prioritizing enabled the actors to resolve what at first appeared to be an irresolvable and highly complex problem of temporal coordination. We add to the literature on routine dynamics and temporality by setting forth the dynamics of prioritizing as an explanation for the temporal patterning of complex work settings. We introduce the notion of role–routine ecologies as a novel way to conceptualize such complex work settings and contribute to developing a performative theory of person-roles and their significance for coordinating.

Getting Ahead of Time—Performing Temporal Boundaries to Coordinate Routines under Temporal Uncertainty

“…An organizational routine can be defined as a ''repetitive, recognizable pattern of interdependent actions, involving multiple actors'' (Feldman and Pentland, 2003: 96). The pattern of a routine is oriented toward the accomplishment of a ''day-to-day operational task'' (Rerup and Feldman, 2011: 584) and emerges as its constituent actions become reflective of each other (Kremser, Pentland, and Brunswicker, 2019). A routine dynamics perspective focuses the researcher on the processual nature of routines as emergent and generative action patterns (Feldman, 2000;Feldman and Pentland, 2003;Pentland et al, 2012;Feldman et al, 2016).…”

“…A routine dynamics perspective focuses the researcher on the processual nature of routines as emergent and generative action patterns (Feldman, 2000;Feldman and Pentland, 2003;Pentland et al, 2012;Feldman et al, 2016). Specific attention is paid to processes of patterning (Danner-Schrö der and Geiger, 2016;Feldman, 2016;Goh and Pentland, 2019), whereby actors perform situated actions so that they ''fit together to form joint action'' (Dionysiou and Tsoukas, 2013: 186), accomplishing coordination within and among routines (Jarzabkowski, Le, and Feldman, 2012;Turner and Rindova, 2012;Kremser and Schreyö gg, 2016;Kremser and Blagoev, 2020). In our efforts to better understand the accomplishment of temporal coordination under conditions of temporal uncertainty, a routine dynamics perspective can help us in describing important temporal features of organizational work and analyzing how they can be accomplished in practice.…”

“…When you cannot know how long it takes to complete one routine performance in a given situation (e.g., to extinguish a fire), it is impossible to properly schedule and prepare for performances of subsequent or parallel routines (e.g., searching for survivors). Recent research in the field of routine dynamics has thus highlighted the importance of boundaries in addressing dynamically evolving coordination challenges within and among routines (Quick and Feldman, 2014;Bucher and Langley, 2016;Salvato and Rerup, 2018;Kremser, Pentland, and Brunswicker, 2019).…”

“…A routine dynamics perspective, however, generally focuses on actions, not actors (Feldman, 2016). Hence routine boundaries refer to differences between action patterns rather than between actors (Kremser, Pentland, and Brunswicker, 2019).…”

“…Bucher and Langley (2016) analyzed how hospital workers perform boundaries by establishing physical distance between different sets of activities. Using the example of a passenger service routine on a transatlantic flight, Kremser, Pentland, and Brunswicker (2019) discussed how performing boundaries enables the coordination of actions within and among routines. They highlighted how boundaries were performed through signaling behaviors that established certain contextual cues as important, thus establishing a ''difference between situational relevance and irrelevance'' (Kremser, Pentland, and Brunswicker, 2019: 89).…”