Comparative Study of Sensemakinng Schools in Organization and Management Studies

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Allameh Associate Professor, Department of Business Management, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran.'i University

2 Associate Professor, Department of Business Management, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran.

3 PhD Candidate in Business Management, Allameh Tabataba’iUniversity, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Abstract
 In the new world, the methods that managers use to make policies are derived from how they making sense to the environment, and how managers interpret the existing phenomena, has a significant role on the quality and adaptation with their policies. In fact, understanding and making sense to the messages paves the way for the next steps to respond these symptoms. Accordingly, this article uses the Beredy model of comparative study to survey the existing theories and schools of sensemakinng and seeks to answer this question that how sensemakinng provides a framework for policy making in the organization? and in the  organization and management studies, which of the existing sensemakinng frameworks provides a better explanation for conditions and phenomena? For this purpose, after examining the existing organizational sensemakinng schools, these two questions have been answered. Based on the research findings, by understanding the sensemakinng in the policy-making, it can be hoped that policymakers' efforts to control their environment are better evaluated and uses to guide organizational actions and shape the reactions of people in their environment.
Introduction
The increasing use of sensemakinng in organization and management research, has made it a relatively new theoretical structure in the research literature. Sensemaking activities are particularly critical in dynamic and turbulent contexts, where the need to create and maintain coherent understandings that sustain relationships and enable collective action is especially important and challenging. In this study, the concept of sensemakinng in different studies of organization and management is focused from the point of view of different researchers. scholars believe that in the literature that focuses on issues related to communication and organization, five different approaches to sensemakinng have a high position, which are:

Karl Weick's Sensemaking in Organizational Communication
Daniel Russell's Sensemaking in Human-Computer Interaction
Gary Klein's Sensemaking in Cognitive Systems Engineering
Brenda Dervin Sense-making in User Studies
Dave Snowden and Organizational Sense-making in Knowledge Management

Based on this, the current research studies and compares existing theories and schools of sensemakinng and tries to answer the question, how does sensemakinng provide a framework for policy-making in the organization, and which of the existing sensemakinng frameworks provides a better explanation for conditions and phenomena in the policy-making?
Case study
As mentioned, in the literatures of organization and management, five typologies of schools of Sensemaking have been introduced. These schools have been given the attention of researchers individually and separately, but as far as researchers have searched, these five schools have not been compared in a comparative study, and sometimes in some studies, a brief comparative review of at least two theories has been presented. Therefore, this study compares these schools Therefore, this study examines Comparative study of these schools.
Materials and Methods
The current comparative study has been done by using George Beredy's model in four stages: description, interpretation, Juxtaposition, comparison. according to this means sensemakinng was investigated from the perspective of different schools, and the texts taken from the existing theories were coded using the qualitative content analysis method and analyzed based on the Brady model, and after classifying the obtained information, the similarities and differences of sensemakinng schools were compared.
Discussion and Results
All sensemakinng schools have a purposeful effort towards better interactions to solve complex problems and reduce existing ambiguities. In all schools, sensemakinng is considered as a dynamic and continuous process, a dynamic process in which a person creates meaning in interaction with his environment, and this process does not stop and continues with the passage of time. Also, all schools emphasize the continuous interaction of the sensemaker with the environment. In addition, it is considered as a recurring cycle that the sensemaker makes efforts to reduce uncertainty and gain a deeper understanding of the phenomenon and the conditions. On the other hand, in all theories of sensemakinng, the individual has a key role. It is the person who decides to start, finish, or ignore the process. In fact, sensemakinng in all schools strongly depends on the perspective and interpretation of the participant.
However, based the findings of the present study, despite the mentioned similarities, the five schools of sensemakinng have differences from each other. Differences in the activity, unit of analysis, concept of sensemakinng, conflict style, Scope of influence, metaphors of sensemakinng, emphasis element, duration of conflict and …, which were discussed in this study.
Conclusion
sensemakinng as a new and specific approach to study organizational phenomena including policy-making has been described as a theory in various ways, and it should be seriously considered in organization and management studies. Therefore, in this article, the schools and theories of organizational sensemakinng were examined, and the commonalities and differences of the five schools were examined. According to the findings of the current study, all 5 schools of sensemakinng have a dynamic process in which sensemakinng is done through a repeating cycle during interaction with the environment in order to communicate more effectively, depends on the perspective of participant and sensemaker has a key role in the sensemakinng process. Nevertheless, Based on the time period, context, specific theory and ontology that each of the theorists of the five schools have conceptualized, sensemakinng will have different meanings and functions. Differences caused by the activity, unit of analysis, style of conflict, sphere of influence, emphasis element, duration of different conflict and etc., which causes the way of working in each school to be different. The findings of this study shown that in the organizational studies, where facing ambiguity is considered one of the inherent characteristics of organization and management, that in order to receive strategic information, managers must provide methods to reduce these uncertainties, Weick and Snowden's theories provide a better explanation of conditions and phenomena.

Keywords

References

منابع فارسی
آقازاده، احمد. (1382). آموزش و پرورش تطبیقی، تهران: سمت.
دروین،  برندا،  افشار،  ابراهیم.  (1992).  از نگاه استفاده‌کننده: معرفی روش‌شناسی کیفی ـ کم‍ّی معنابخشی. کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی،  7)شماره 1 (پیاپی 25))،  81-102.
زرین بال، مرضیه. (1398). طراحی مدل مفهومی پیاده سازی معنابخشی به خدمات ارائه شده در سامانه «گنج» پژوهشگاه علوم و فناوری اطلاعات ایران، نشریه پژوهشنامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات، دوره 35، شماره 1 (پیاپی 99).
عابدین،  بهاره. (1394).  طراحی و تبیین فرآیند شکل‌گیری مسائل استراتژیک و ورود آن‌ها به دستور کار تصمیم‌گیرندگان سازمان ، رساله دکترای تخصصی: اسدالله کردنائیج ،  دانشگاه تربیت مدرس - دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد.
عارف، هادی؛ سیدجوادین، سیدرضا؛ پورعزت، علی اصغر؛  محمد الیاسی، قنبر. (1398). معناسازی: تحلیل مفهومی و کاربست‌ها در مدیریت منابع انسانی . مدیریت دولتی. 11(3)، 509-529.
عارف، هادی؛ سیدجوادین، سیدرضا؛ پورعزت، علی اصغر؛ محمدی الیاسی، قنبر. (1398) .(معناسازی: تحلیل مفهـومی و کاربسـتهـا در مدیریت منابع انسانی. مدیریت دولتی، (11)3 ،509 -529
قلی‌پور رحمت الله و غلام‌پور آهنگر،  ابراهیم.  (1389).   فرایند سیاست‌گذاری عمومی در ایران.  تهران: مرکز پژوهش های مجلس شورای اسلامی.
محمدپور، احمد. (1397). ضدروش: زمینه های فلسفی و رویه های عملی در روش شناسی کیفی، قم: لوگوس.
References
Abedin, B. (2014). Designing and explaining the process of formation of strategic issues and their entry into the agenda of the organization's decision makers, PhD Thesis: Asadollah Kurdanaij, Tarbiat Modares University - Faculty of Management and Economics. (In Persian).
Aghazadeh, A. (2008) Comparative Education, Tehran: Samit, 5th edition. (In Persian).
Arabi, S.M. (1997). Comparative analysis method in management, cultural research office, first edition. (In Persian).
Aref, H., Seyyed Javadin, S.R., Pourezzat, A.A., & Mohammad Elyasi, GH. (2019). Sensemaking: Concept Analysis and Implications for Human Resource Management. Journal of Public Administration, 11(3), 509-529. (In Persian)
Blandford, A., & Attfield, S.  (2010).  Interacting with information.  Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 3(1), 1-99. ‏
Brown, A.D., Colville, I. , & Pye, A.  (2015).  Making sense of sensemaking in organization studies.  Organization studies, 36(2), 265-277.
Budescu, D.V., & Wallsten, T.S. (1987). Subjective estimation of precise and vague uncertainties.
Calvard, T.S. (2016). Big data, organizational learning, and sensemaking: Theorizing interpretive challenges under conditions of dynamic complexity. Management learning, 47(1), 65-82.
Choo, C.W. (1996). The knowing organization: How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge and make decisions. International journal of information management, 16(5), 329-340.
Darvin, B., Afshar, I. (1992). From the user's point of view: introducing the qualitative-quantitative methodology of meaningfulness. Librarianship and information, 7) number 1 (series 25), 81-102. (In Persian).
Dervin, B.  (1983, January).  An overview of sense-making research: concepts, methods and results to date.  INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION ANNUAL MEETING. ‏
Dervin, B.  (2005).  Libraries reaching out with health information to vulnerable populations: guidance from research on information seeking and use.  Journal of the Medical Library Association, 93(4 Suppl), S74. ‏
Dervin, B. (2015). Dervin's sense-making theory.  In Information seeking behavior and technology adoption: Theories and trends (pp.  59-80).  IGI Global.
Dervin, B., Glazier, J.D., & Powell, R.R. (1992). Qualitative research in information management.  Libraries Unlimited, Englewood Cliffs, CO, 61-84.
Dougherty, D., & Smythe, M.J. (2004). Sensemaking, organizational culture, and sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 32(4), 293-317.
Dougherty, D., Borrelli, L., Munir, K., & O’Sullivan, A. (2000). Systems of organizational sensemaking for sustained product innovation. Journal of Engineering and technology management, 17(3-4), 321-355.
Garfinkel, H. (1996). Ethnomethodology's program. Social psychology quarterly, 59(1), 5-21.
Ito, K., & Inohara, T.  (2015).  A model of sense-making process for adapting new organizational settings; Based on case study of executive leaders in work transitions.  Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 142-149.
Jones, P.H. (2015). Sensemaking methodology: A liberation theory of communicative agency. EPIC: Advancing the Value of Ethnography in Industry
Klein, G. (2013). Seeing what others don't: The remarkable ways we gain insights.  Public Affairs. ‏
Klein, G., Moon, B., & Hoffman, R.R.  (2006a).  Making sense of sensemaking 1: Alternative perspectives.  IEEE intelligent systems, 21(4), 70-73. 
Klein, G., Moon, B., & Hoffman, R.R.  (2006b).  Making sense of sensemaking 2: A macrocognitive model.  IEEE Intelligent systems, 21(5), 88-92. ‏
Kolko, J. (2010). Sensemaking and framing: A theoretical reflection on perspective in design synthesis. ‏ Design and Complexity - DRS International Conference 2010, 7-9 July, Montreal, Canada.
Kurtz, C.  F., & Snowden, D.  J. (2003).  The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated world.  IBM systems journal, 42(3), 462-483.
Littlejohn, S.W., & Foss, K.A. (2009). Encyclopedia of communication theory (Vol.  1). Sage. ‏
Louis, M.R. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational settings.  Administrative science quarterly, 226-251. ‏
 Lynam, T., & Fletcher, C. (2015). Sensemaking: a complexity perspective. Ecology and Society, 20(1).
Maitlis, S. (2005). The social processes of organizational sensemaking.  Academy of management journal, 48(1), 21-49. ‏
Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M.  (2014).  Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward.  Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57-125. ‏
Maitlis, S., & Sonenshein, S. (2010). Sensemaking in crisis and change: Inspiration and insights from Weick (1988). Journal of management studies, 47(3), 551-580.
Mohammadpour, A. (2017) counter-Method, Qom: Logos.
Norton, R.W. (1975). Measurement of ambiguity tolerance.  Journal of personality assessment, 39(6), 607-619. ‏
Odden, T.O.B., & Russ, R.S. (2019).  Defining sensemaking: Bringing clarity to a fragmented theoretical construct.  Science Education, 103(1), 187-205.
Olson, E.  M., Slater, S.F., & Hult, G.T.M. (2005). The importance of structure and process to strategy implementation.  Business horizons, 48(1), 47-54.
Peters, B.  G., & Pierre, J.  (Eds.).  (2006).  Handbook of public policy. ‏
Pirolli, P., & Russell, D.M. (2011).  Introduction to this special issue on sensemaking. ‏
Polanyi, M. (1967). Sense-giving and sense-reading. Philosophy, 42(162), 301-325.
Qolipour, R., Gholampour Ahangar, I. (2010). Public policy process in Iran. Tehran: Islamic Council Research Center. (In Persian).
Rigin, Charles (2008) comparative method; Beyond quantitative and qualitative strategies, translated by Mohammad Fazli, Tehran: Age Publishing House. (In Persian).
Russell, D.  M., Stefik, M.J., Pirolli, P., & Card, S.K. (1993, May).  The cost structure of sensemaking.  In Proceedings of the INTERACT'93 and CHI'93 conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp.  269-276). 
Sandberg, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2014). Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development.  Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(S1), S6-S32. ‏
Shin, S. J., Yuan, F., & Zhou, J. (2017). When perceived innovation job requirement increases employee innovative behavior: A sensemaking perspective. Journal of Organizational behavior, 38(1), 68-86.
Snowden, D. (2002). Complex acts of knowing: paradox and descriptive self‐awareness.  Journal of knowledge management.
Snowden, D. (2005). Multi-ontology sense making: a new simplicity in decision making.  Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics, 13(1), 45-53.
Snowden, D.J., & Boone, M.E. (2007). A leader's framework for decision making.  Harvard business review, 85(11), 68. 
Snowden, Dave. (2021a). Twelvetide 20:10 The fifth school.  Available at: https://www. cognitive-edge. com/twelvetide-2010-the-science-question/
Termeer, C.J. (2008).  Why it is so hard to adjust to new ways of policymaking? Barriers for new modes of horizontal governance: a sensemaking perspective. Newsletter of the Institute of Public Governance & Management, 2008(December). ‏
Turner, J.R., Allen, J., Hawamdeh, S., & Mastanamma, G. (2023). The multifaceted sensemaking theory: A systematic literature review and content analysis on sensemaking. Systems, 11(3), 145.
Weick, K.  (1969).  E. (1979).  The social psychology of organizing. ‏
Weick, K.E.  (1995).  Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3).  Sage. ‏
Weick, K.E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (Topics in social psychology series). Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill Humanities.
Weick, K.E. (2010).  Reflections on enacted sensemaking in the Bhopal disaster.  Journal of management studies, 47(3), 537-550. ‏
Weick, K.E. (2012).  Organized sensemaking: A commentary on processes of interpretive work.  Human relations, 65(1), 141-153. ‏
Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking.  Organization science, 16(4), 409-421.
Wen, C.T., & Chen, Y.W. (2007). The innovation process of entrepreneurial teams in dynamic business plan competition: from sense-making perspective.  International Journal of Technology Management, 39(3-4), 346-363.
Werkman, R. (2010). Reinventing organization development: How a sensemaking perspective can enrich OD theories and interventions. Journal of Change Management, 10(4), 421-438.
Whittle, A., Vaara, E., & Maitlis, S. (2023). The role of language in organizational sensemaking: An integrative theoretical framework and an agenda for future research. Journal of Management, 49(6), 1807-1840.
Zarinbal, M. (2019). Designing a conceptual model of sensemaking strategy for services provided in Ganj. Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management, 35(1), 77-106. doi: 10.35050/JIPM010.2019.003 (In Persian)

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics