Organizational Creativity, Play and Entrepreneurship
Transcript of Organizational Creativity, Play and Entrepreneurship
Organizational Creativity, Play and EntrepreneurshipIntroduction and FramingHjorth, Daniel; Strati, Antonio; Dodd, Sarah Drakopoulou; Weik, Elke
Document VersionAccepted author manuscript
Published in:Organization Studies
DOI:10.1177/0170840617752748
Publication date:2018
LicenseUnspecified
Citation for published version (APA):Hjorth, D., Strati, A., Dodd, S. D., & Weik, E. (2018). Organizational Creativity, Play and Entrepreneurship:Introduction and Framing. Organization Studies, 39(2-3), 155-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617752748
Link to publication in CBS Research Portal
General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us ([email protected]) providing details, and we will remove access tothe work immediately and investigate your claim.
Download date: 05. Oct. 2021
Organizational Creativity, Play and Entrepreneurship: Introduction and Framing
Daniel Hjorth, Antonio Strati, Sarah Drakopoulou Dodd, and Elke Weik
Journal article (Accepted manuscript*)
Please cite this article as: Hjorth, D., Strati, A., Dodd, S. D., & Weik, E. (2018). Organizational Creativity, Play and Entrepreneurship:
Introduction and Framing. Organization Studies, 39(2-3), 155-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617752748
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617752748
Copyright © The Author(s) 2018. Reprinted by permission of SAGE Publications.
* This version of the article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may
lead to differences between this version and the publisher’s final version AKA Version of Record.
Uploaded to CBS Research Portal: February 2020
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
1
SpecialIssueEditorial:OrganisationalCreativity,Playand
Entrepreneurship
By
DanielHjorth,CopenhagenBusinessSchool,Denmark,andNottinghamBusinessSchool,NottinghamTrentUniversity,theUK,
AntonioStrati,UniversityofTrento,Italy,
SarahDrakopoulouDodd,UniversityofStrathclyde,Scotland,and
ElkeWeik,UniversityofLeicester,theUK
Keywords:organisationalcreativity,play,entrepreneurship,process,affect,art,aesthetics,sense,performativity
Introduction
WithourcallforthisSpecialIssue,wewantedtosummonthethemesof
organisationalcreativity,playandentrepreneurshipsothatpeopleresponding
tothecallwouldbeinclinedtocrosstheminvariousformsandways.Thecall
givesheedtostreamsofresearchoncollectivecreativity(AustinandDevin,
2003;Catmull,2008;Hessel,2013)andprocessstudies(Tsoukas&Chia,2002;
Langley,Smallman,Tsoukas,&VandeVen,2013;Helin,Hernes,Hjorth,&Holt,
2014;Hernes,2014),onplay,aestheticsandperformativity(Åkerstrøm-
Andersen,2009;Beyes&Steyaert,2011;Gherardi&Strati,2012;Höpfl,2002;
Hjorth,2005;Sørensen&Spoelstra,2012),andontheorganisationalconditions
ofentrepreneurshipandentrepreneurshipasorganisation-creation(Hjorth,
2012;Gartner,2012).Importantly,wealsowantedtogivespacetoplayasan
ethicsintheSpinozian-Levinasiansense,i.e.,asagroundingconditionforusas
relational-organisationalbodiesandsubjectivities(Huizinga,1949;Winnicott,
1971;Rhodes,2009).Wewantedtoinvitepotentialcontributorstothinkthereis
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
2
avirtualfringeforthinkingopenedupbythosethreethemes.Whatiftheywere
thoughttogether,whatwoulditmeantohavethoughtmoveinthefreedomofa
juvenileconceptualspacedelimitedbyorganisationalcreativity,playand
entrepreneurship?Whatwouldonedowithsuchaspace–asknewquestions,
bringinnewempiricalmaterialforanalysis,and/orperforminit?
WiththegenerouscontributionsfromChrisSteyaert’sandAnnaScalfi’skeynote
speeches/performances,theOSWorkshopbecameaspaceforplay
performatively,and–webelieve–astimulusfornoveldiscussionsand
questions.HundredsofpeoplejoinedusattheOSSummerWorkshoponlovely
Creteandsomeofthosediscussionsmovedintothepaper-writingprocess,while
othercontributionsweresubmittedindependentlytothisSpecialIssue,andwe
arehappytobeabletopresentaselectionofthosearticlesthathavebeen
includedinthisSpecialIssue.Almostahundredsubmissionswereceivedforthis
SpecialIssue,whichnotonlymeantagreatresponse,ahugeamountofwork,but
alsothatmanydifficultchoiceshadtobetaken.Wehastentocommendthegreat
workthathasbeendonebycontributingauthorsandallthereviewersthathave
helpedtomakethisSpecialIssuespecial.Thepointwithorganisingaprocess
aroundaspecialissuethemeorsetofthemesisofcoursethatyouseekto
achieveaparticularconcentrationonalimitedproblemdomain.Thatexplains
alsowhywepaidgreatattentionattheinternationalqualityofthereviewing
process,bycontactingforeachpapercolleaguesfromuniversitieslocatedin
differentcountriesandthereforeusedtobeworkingindifferentlanguagesand
incontactwithdiverseinternationalcultures.
However,OrganizationStudiesisalsoajournalthathasdistinguisheditselfas
onewhereauthorsarewelcometocreativelyextendtherangeofproblemsthat
havehistoricallybeenassociatedwithaparticulardomain(Tsoukas,Garud,&
Hardy,2003;Courpasson,Arellano-Gault,Brown,&Lounsbury,2008).We
believethisisthecasealsowiththisSpecialIssue,whichiswhyweconfidently
cansaythatitachievedthisbasicaim–tobecomespecial.
Whereorganisationstudiesismoving
Inthecallweconnectedtendenciesinstreamsofthinkinginthebroader
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
3
‘businessliterature’thathavetalkedforawhileaboutOpenInnovation
(Chesbrough,2006)andCrowdsourcing(Chanal,2010),apartfromthemore
‘well-established’themesoncreativity(Amabile,1998)andentrepreneurship
(Stevenson&Gumpert,1985).Playhascontinuedtohaveaguest-visitor’sstatus
inmanagement-andorganisationstudies(asindeedinsocialsciencesmore
broadly;Huizinga,1949),butwhenitlatelymakesanappearanceitisoftenin
connectionwithartandaestheticsinorganizationallife(Linstead&Höpfl,2000;
Strati,2016;Strati&GuilletdeMonthoux,2002),andwithstudiesofinnovation
(Styhre,2008).However,wedidnotwanttorehearseinnovationasathemebut
rather,inthespiritofOSasjournal,inquireintotheorganisationalconditionsfor
inventionprocessesthatmayormaynotresultinwhatuserswouldconfirmas
innovation.Thereissomethingmorechallengingabouttheelusiveconceptsof
creativity(Sternberg&Krauss,2014;Moeran&Christensen,2014),play
(Masters,2008),andentrepreneurship(Jones&Spicer,2009).Bringingthem
togetherinthecall,weinvitedstudentsandscholarsoforganizationtowork
withatleasttwoofthemintheirpapers.Webelievetheresultsarerichstudies
fromwhichwecanlearnbothhowtheseconcepts,andthepracticesthatthey
describe,sharesomethingatthesametimeastheyaredistinctanddifferent.We
returntoshortintroductionstothepapersbelow.
Excludingthiscall,thereareonlyfour(4!)previouspaperspublishedin
OrganizationStudiesthathave‘play’intheirtitle.Creativityappearsinaround
20papertitles(againexcludingforcallsandbookreviews),whichisalsoabout
thenumberofpaperswithentrepreneurshipintheirtitle.Thiswillofcoursebe
onlyaveryroughindicationsincemanypapersonthesetopicswillnot
necessarilyincludethemintheirtitles.Whatremainsinteresting,asnotedabove,
isthatplayisthemostinfrequentone,whichofcoursesayssomethingabout
playasphenomenonandconcept.Huizinga(1949)shows,inhisinquiryintothe
linguisticrootsofplayinvariouslanguages,thatitisintimatelyrelatedtofree
movement,dance,andchildren,butalsowithriskandcompetition(andeven
battle,Huizinga,1949:41).
Inprocessthinking,playcanbedescribedasanaffirmationofchance(Deleuze,
2006),aspeculativemovementtowardsthefuture,andapragmaticaction-event
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
4
(playlivesinplaying,likelightninglivesintheflash)thatembracesbecoming(cf.
Manning&Massumi,2014)andinvitesthereadertoengageinamultiple
languageexperiencethatprovidesknowledgethatisrichandnotjust
representational(Gherardi&Strati,2017;Thrift,2007).AsSteyaertandScalfi
bothshowedintheirkeynoteperformances,playisalsoproducingandaproduct
ofopennessandaffect.Playcanthusbeunderstoodasafreemovement;
movementthatisnotregulatedbyconceptsforhowtomoveorideasspecifying
thegoalofmovement.Spacesforplay,e.g.awhitecanvas,oranemptydance
floor,doaffectusintheiroverspillingofpotentiality.Youanticipateplayingin
thosespaces,byseeingnotonlywhatitisbut,aboveall,whatitmightbecome.
Formanyofus,listeningtoChrisSteyaert’sandAnnaScalfi’sopen/invitational
andaffectivepresentationsattheWorkshopgeneratedtheseimagesofwhat
mightbecome.Wewereluredintoplaying,to‘jumpin’,tomovefreely–in
thinking,insensing,writing,inacting.Wewantedtosaythatorganisational
creativity,playandentrepreneurshipcouldpotentializeanew‘whitecanvas’,an
open‘dance-floor’forusalltoplayfullyenter.
Theorganisationalconditionsforcreativity,play,andentrepreneurship
Theliteratureontheorganisationalconditionsforcreativity,entrepreneurship
andplayhasmadeitevidentthatheterogeneityandopennessareimportant
(Austin&Devin,2003;Amabile&Pillemer,2012;FloridaandGoodnight,2005;
Gotsi,Andriopoulos,Lewis,&Ingram,2010;O’Donnell,2013).Forthoughtto
moveinnewways,newrelationshipswithconceptsortheformationofnew
relationshipstonewconceptsneedtohappen(Massumi,2002).Forthisto
happenmoreoften,heterogeneityandopennesshelp,simplybecausenewin-
betweenswillresultfromincreasedheterogeneity(Hjorth,2014).In-betweens
meanopportunitiescanbecreatedinopeningsandgaps.Youcandealwithgaps
byimposingatemplate,pickedfromhabitorpractices,andthiswaycementover
thecrack,oryoucanrelatetoitaffirmativelybybendingopenthecrackand
moveintotheopenandembraceplaying.Thetensionbetweenhabitandplaying
isnotuncommoninthelifeoforganisations.Itholdstheseedstotheproblems
ofpoliticsandwellaseconomy.Thereareadvantageswithusinganestablished
habitanditstemplates.Itdoesnotupsetthereigningorder,anditwilloften
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
5
meananefficientuseofexistingresources,butcomeatthe‘cost’oflosingsight
ofplay(Nietzsche,1974;Deleuze,2006).
However,theconditionsfororganisationsandorganisinghaveradicallychanged
duringthelastfewdecades.Afterthequalityrevolutionofthe1980s,whatused
tobealong-termstrategy–namelytofocusonefficiencyandcontrol,andsee
shortperiodsofcreativityin-between–suddenlybecametheshort-term
exception.Entrepreneurshipisthenewmanagement(properlydescribedas
enterpriseratherthanentrepreneurship;Hjorth&Holt,2016)andthebiggest
riskistonotcreatenewvalue.Shorterperiodsofstabilityin-betweenthe
changesarethenewnormal.Consequently,researchersinorganisationstudies
havestartedtofocusonprocessesasmuchasstructures,becomingsasmuchas
beings,andtheproblemofthenewasmuchasmaintenanceandmanagementof
whatis(Deleuze,1991;Chia,1996;Tsoukas&Chia,2002;Hernes,2014).
ForthepurposeofthisSpecialIssue,weplacedfocusontheimplicationsofthese
tendencies–theurgetomastercreativity(andinnovation),opennessand
heterogeneityasorganisationalconditionsforcollectivecreation–andsaidthis
meanswehavetolookagaintocreativity,playandentrepreneurship.More
importantly,wehavetothinkofthemtogether,wehavetoinquireintowhatthe
relationshipsbetweenplay,creativityandentrepreneurshiplooklike.Howare
theyrelated?Whataretheorganisationalconditionsfortheiremergence?What
doesitmeanforhowwepresentlyunderstandwhatorganisation,organising,
andtheorganisationalconditionsofcreationprocessesare?Ifyouexcusethe
somewhatdramaticuseofmetaphor,wewouldsaythatthiscorrespondstoa
dramaticclimatechangeinthestudyoforganisation.Itisasifwecomefroman
eraofthesolidstateandarerapidlymovingintoaliquidone.Themetaphor–
whichshouldnotbeunderstoodasadichotomybetweensolidandliquid-has
beenusedmanytimesbeforebyBauman(firsttime2000)todescribea
Heracleitanthemeofflowandprocessuality,disengagement,andelusiveness
(Bauman,2000:120).Wecannotnotknowwaterasalsoliquid,butifitwasonly
knowntousintheformwecallice,itwouldhavebeenratherdramatictoseeit
melt,tounderstandhowitcouldmeltandfigureouttheconsequences.The
historyofstudying,analysingandtheorisingorganisationshaspredominantly
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
6
knownorganisationsasthat,asstablestructure,assomethingthatremainedas
youleftit(cf.Chia,1996).Creativity,play,andentrepreneurshipwouldthenbe
outsideoforganisationsandorganising.Onlywhenprocessthinkingprovidesus
withalanguageandconceptsfordescribingaworldbecomingisorganisation-
creationseenasimmanenttoorganisation,andcreativity,play,and
entrepreneurshiparenowatthecore(Katz&Gartner,1988;Hjorth,2014).
Processuallyrelevant
Whenthe‘climateconditions’havechanged,makingcreativity,playand
entrepreneurshipintotheprimarydriversofatemperaturerise,ithasdramatic
consequencesforwhatweunderstandorganisationtobe.Itbecomes
increasinglyawkwardtoseeorganisationfromitssteadystateside,asorganum,
asaninstrumentdesignedforaninterest.Rather,itispreciselywhenitflows,in
thelight,liquid,movingstate,thatwehavetounderstandwhatdirectsits
becoming.Thereisalwaysadifferentialelementofforce,whichNietzschecalled
‘will’;andthesenseandvalueofsomethingisalwaysaquestionofforcesand
hierarchyofforces(Deleuze,2006:7-8).Structuresareofcoursenot
unimportantforthequestionofwhatdirectsthebecomingoforganisation.Butit
iswhenitoverspills,whenitbreaches,whenorganisationallifeisrollingthe
alreadymoreitholdsintoa‘nextness’(asMassumi,2002:271describes
process)thatstructuresarerevealedasossifiedsedimentsofpreviousacts,or
tracesofthereproductionofinstitutionalendurance(Weik,2015).When
processthinkingisnotonlyacceptedbutalsoabsorbed,weareinclinedtoask
questionsabouthoworganisationsarecreated,howtheemergingorganisation
isdirectedandachievesbeing,butalsohowexperimentsinneworganisational
formsareachieved(Beyes&Steyaert,2012;Hjorth,Holt,&Steyaert,2015).If
thevirtuallynewbecomesactuallynewthroughentrepreneurialactualization,
understoodasorganization-creation(Hjorth,2012),howcantheconceptsof
playandorganisationalcreativityhelpusanalyseandunderstandsuch
processes?ThosearecentralquestionsforthisSpecialIssueandwewillfindthat
thevariouspapers,intheirdiversityandmultiplicity,provideexciting
investigationsofvariouspartsofsuchquestionsinthewaytheyareanimating
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
7
organisationallifeandorganisationstudies.
MicheldeCerteausaidcreativityiseverywhere,tacticallymakinguseofcracks,
gaps,in-betweens,fissures,wherevertheyarefound,andswarmsandthrobs,
forminginto‘polymorphouscarnivals’that‘infiltrateseverywhere’(deCerteau,
1997:139-140).Foralongtimethishasbeentheproblemthatorganisationtries
tosolve–toputalidonthis,topreventitfrommoving,toimposecontrol,a
contra-rotulus,an‘againstwhatisrolling’.Whenmovement,speed,flexibility
andcreativitybecomenecessaryasan‘environmentalrequirement’,andthe
desiretoplay,tocreateorganisationwhereitislacking(entrepreneurship)can
nolongerbelegitimatelyresistedwithreferencetoahierarchyofthehigher
needforcontrol,thecarnivalesquebreaksthrough.Wecannotlistentoanother
‘strategy-speech’abouttheimportanceofcreativityandentrepreneurshipand
pretendthatitdidn’tmeanjustthat;creativityandentrepreneurship…in
practice.ThisSpecialIssuehashadthefortunetobeabletogatheranumbera
papersthatinvariouswaysstartwiththisrealityofrapidlyevolving,morphing,
transformingorganisationsandasks–howdoesithappen,howareplay,
creativity,andentrepreneurshippartofit?Thereisanargumenthereforthe
SpecialIssuemakingacontributiontoaheretoforeunderstudiedareain
organisationstudies,onethatiscentredonthebecomingorganisation,
organisingthealreadymore(potential),makingroomforthenextnessofwhat
alreadyis(actualised),organisation-creationprocessesthatplayfullyopenup
(increasetheconnectivecapacity)tothepossibilityofaffirmingspeculationson
thefuture.Organisationstudies,thisSpecialIssueremarks,mustlearnfromthe
tacticalpracticesofmakinguseofopeningsandlearnfromprocessthinking,
sayingthat“…thein-between,assuch,isnotamiddlingbeingbutratherthe
beingofthemiddle–thebeingofarelation.”(Massumi,2002:70)Therelationis
wheretheevent-dimensionofpotentialemergesoutoftheconstantmixof
forcesthatcanbeaffirmedornegated(Massumi,2002),controlledorprorolled
(pro-rotulus,forwhatisrolling,Hjorth,2012).
Artfullyin-between,Sense,Affect
Whetherdrivenbycompetitioninamarketorpressuretomoreefficiently
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
8
handlepublicbudgets,innovationismoregenerallypartofanysloganoftoday’s
organisations.Thismeansthataninterestintheorganisationalconditionsfor
creativity,play,andentrepreneurshiphasgrown(Amabile,1998;Amabile&
Khaire,2008;Florida&Goodnight,2005;Gotsi,Andriopoulos,&Lewis,2010;
Hjorth,2005).Itseemsdifficult,however,toorganiseforormanageriallyurge
forththecreative/playful/entrepreneurial.Liketellingsomeonetotakeinitiative,
youforeclosethepossibilitybyperformativecontradiction.Forsure,thetight
place,therigidregulation,thedeeplyingrainedpracticesareallsourcesof
creativity,playandentrepreneurship(Winnicott,1971;Hernes,2004).However,
andmoreatthecentreofeverydayorganisationallife,itistheblandness(Julien,
2007),thisgreyzoneoftheindeterminate,theopennessofthevaguethatisthe
darlingconditionforentrepreneurship(Katz&Gartner,1988;Gartner,Starr,&
Bird,1992;Hjorth,2003).Thein-between(theentre-)canbeunderstoodasthe
conditionforentre-preneurshiptoemerge.Itisliketheonlyinterestinglightis
theyellowlight:greenisjust‘go!’,redisjust‘stop!’,butyellowis‘what?’An
intervention,ananalysis,adecisionandanactarerequired.Andperhapsmore
thananythingelse–senseneedstoanticipatewhatsomethingcouldbecome.
Affect,thebody,oursensorialcapacity(tobeaffectedandtoaffect)isengaged.
Imagination,theplayfulmovementofthoughtinthepostinstrumentaland
preoperative(Massumi,2002:134)isthemostappropriatewaytorespondto
thisvagueness.Andimaginationis,likeBrianMassumiputs:“…themodeof
thoughtmostpreciselysuitedtothedifferentiatingvaguenessofthevirtual.”
(2002:134).ThisiswhythecallfortheSpecialIssueexpressedthatthereare
goodreasonstoassumewecanlearnsomethingfromartandaesthetics(cf.
DrakopoulouDodd,2014).
Thisisnotanewideainorganisationstudies(GuilletdeMonthoux,2004;
GagliardiandCzarniawska,2006;King&Vickery,2013;Strati,2008).More
specificallyhowever,AustinandDevin(2003)havepointedoutthattheway
creationisorganisedasacollectiveprocessinartfulmaking-suchasintheatre
ensemblerehearsal,orinstringquartetrehearsal(Hessel,2013)–doespointto
anewconversationbetweenorganisationstudiesandart.Thecapacitytokeep
theprocessopen,therelianceondistributedorcollectiveleadership,the
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
9
relinquishingofanyindividualsovereigntyoverthecreation(AustinandDevin,
2003),andthecourageandgenerositytogive(Austin,Hjorth&Hessel,2017),
thegratuitousnessofaction(Gagliardi,2005),therefore,aswellasthepassion-
mobilizingpractices(Lindri,2007),allseemresonantwiththeconditionsfor
organisationalcreativity,playandentrepreneurshiptohappen.Inmanyways,
AnnaScalfibroughtthisintoherkeynotespeech-performanceattheWorkshop
(onCrete).Sheshowedherartworkasbeinginterestedbothintheconditions
forplayinplacesalreadytightlyconfigured–byspatial,cultural,or
administrativereasons–forsomethingelse,andinplayingasaprocessually,
open,dynamiceventwithtransformativepowers.Howcouldamuseumplace
becomeaspaceforplayofagameyettobeinvented?Howcouldanoldcity
squarebecomere-createdasaspaceforpublicmeetingsandconversations,
usingahistoricalpractice–washing–astheorganisingcentre?Scalfirealised
thatwashinghadmovedintotheprivatehomefollowingtheinventionofthe
washingmachine,whichmeansthatplacingmodernwashingmachinesonthe
oldsquare(where,atthefountain,thereusedtobepublicwashing)would
destabiliseareigningorder,bringinvagueness,putonthe‘yellowlight’andthus,
inviteimaginationsof‘play’.Thisisbeautifulmorethananythingelse.Itisalso
deeplypoliticalandethical,andprofoundlyorganisationalinitscleverwayto
makeorganisation-creationincipient.Butbeautifullikeafabulathatcuddlesup
inalongenduringsmilearoundyourlips.
WhataSpecialIssuecanhopefor
Organisationstudiesisstillshortofempiricalstudiesthathaveanalysedthe
‘knowing-in-practice’(Gherardi&Strati,2012)thatcharacterizethedynamics
betweenentrepreneurship,playandcreativity.Evenmorerarearestudiesbased
ontheembodiedand/ormaterial,ontherelationalandaestheticnatureof
everydayorganizationallife(Strati,1999).Thevariousformsofembodimentof
organizationallife(SpecialIssue,ScandinavianJournalofManagement,29(4),
2013)resoundtheaestheticandintellectualrichnessofstudiesonmanaging
creativity(Paris,2007),aesthetics,artandentrepreneurship(Beyes,2009;
Meisiek&Barry,2014),orworkandplay(Sørensen&Spoelstra,2012).
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
10
ThisSpecialIssuewillnotonlyaddtothisliterature,butdosoinacreative,
playfulandentrepreneurialway.WhenthecallsaidtheaimsoftheSpecialIssue
wereto:(a)advancestudiesofcreativity,playandentrepreneurshipin
organizationsandincontextsofeverydaylife’sorganizedconditions;(b)
stimulateinnovativetheorizingoncreativity/play/entrepreneurshipinavariety
oforganizational,spatial,andculturalsettings;(c)facilitatediscussionand
connectionswithcreativity/play/entrepreneurshipstudiesfromdiverse
disciplines;and(d)developunderstandingsofperformativescholarshipand
possibilitiesformakingadifferencethroughcreative/playful/entrepreneurial
participation–weactuallythinkalotofthis,ifnotmost/all,wasachieved.
TotheextentthattheSpecialIssueisperformative,doeswhatitaddresses,it
willprorolorganisationstudies–ifeversolittle–inthedirectionofamore
comprehensive,capable-of-grasping-movement,joyful,creative,and
entrepreneurialorganisationstudiestheory/research.And,yes,ifyou
understandorganisationsassocialobjectsofknowledge(Chia,2000),andthus
languageasnotmerelyanepistemologicalmediumofrepresentation,butas
makingtheworld(alsoaworldwhereitisassignedare-presentationalfunction),
thisbecomesatautology;Youcannotnotintervenesomehowintheworldasyou
write.“Whatthisextendstoistheethicalnotionthatknowledgeberegardednot
asanobject,butasanactivitylocatedintime—apromiseofethicsinthedoing
ratherthanthedone.”(Rhodes,2009:660).Whenwetaketheriskofopeningup
writingperformatively,totheundecidable,the‘yellowlight’ofthein-between,
werealizethatthisfreedomhasitscorrespondingintensificationof
responsibility.Aresponsibilitytowriting/knowledgeandtheworlditaddsto.
WethushopethisSpecialIssuewilladdsomethingtoyourunderstandingof
organization(s)andyourwayofresearchingorganizations/theorganised,
organizing,andorganization-creationprocesses.
Shortnotesoncontributingpapers
Therearemanywaysinwhichwecouldhavearrangedtheorderofarticlesin
thisdoublespecialissue.Wehaveoptedforarathersimpleandstraight-forward
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
11
one:wehavefollowedtheordersuggestedinthecall–creativity,playand
entrepreneurship.Toopenitall,andtorespectthefullkeynotequalityofthe
piece,westartwithAnnaScalfi’sessay.Itprovidedanimportantkeynote
functionasittunedtheworkshoparoundthebeautifullydeliverednoteson
playfulness,creativityandentrepreneurship.Itmakesalotofsensetoalsoletit
tunethereadingofthisspecialissue.Itstartsfromsilence,i.e.,withouta
summarizingintroduction(beyondwhatisalreadysaidhere).
Severalofthecontributingarticlesdealwithmorethanoneofthespecialissue
themes.Thisisindeedwhatweurgedworkshopparticipantsandsubmitting
authorstodo.Thismakesitdifficulttoclusterthemintheorderofcreativity,
playandentrepreneurship.Wearehappytohavethisproblemsinceitmeanswe
havebeensuccessfulwithourcall.Sufficetonotethatthethirdpartofthis
specialissue,wherethefocusismainlyonentrepreneurship,includessome
piecesthatcouldalsohavebeenlocatedinthepartswheremainfocusison
creativityorplay.Onearticle(Pallesen,2018),followingimmediatelyupon
Scalfi’sopening,isagoodexampleofwhenallthreethemesareenactedinthe
writing.
ArtistandresearcherAnnaScalfiopensthisspecialissue(Scalfi,2018),following
uponthiseditorialintroductionandframing,byreflectingonherkeynote
addressattheWorkshopwhereitwasinitially‘performed’.Wewrite‘performed’
withininvertedcommasassheherself,whengivingthekeynoteaddress,
hesitatedtocallitaperformance,onlytoalmostimmediatelyrevisethatto
insteadstarttoplaywiththekeynoteformat‘thathasbeenassignedtome’as
shesaid.InScalfi’swork,artandresearcharebroughtintoagenerativedialogue.
Sheinvestigates,usingartastool,andherresearchmethodstraining(sociology,
PhDinManagement)tosystematicallystudyherownprocess.Herartquite
preciselyresonateswiththethemesoforganisationalcreativity,playand
entrepreneurship,whereforesheisindeedanevidentkeynoteforthisdouble
specialissueasshewasfortheWorkshop.Playing,asanartisticpractice,is
Scalfi’swaytomaketheimplicitgameineverydaylife,hiddenbytraditionhabit,
andconvention,overtandtherebytodrawthefield-rules-playersassemblage
thatmakeseverythingpossibleagain.Itislikesheloosensupthesoilof
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
12
everydaylife,stompedhardbythemanyfeetofeverydaypractices,andmakesit
fertilefortheunexpected.
Creativity,Play,andEntrepreneurship
EvaPallesensuggeststhatwehavelimitedourconceptualisationofdiscoveryto
whattheeyecanseeorspot.Thisiscertainlytrueforentrepreneurshipresearch,
butalsofororganisationalcreativitymorebroadly.Theearisindeedanopening
thatgenerouslystaysopen,withouttheeye’sprivilegetohavealidthatshuts.
Pallesensuggeststhatanear-body-sensitiveconceptualisationof
entrepreneurshipalsoopensupourunderstandingofentrepreneurshiptonew
practices,newdomainsofinquiry.ItremindsusoftheNietzscheanclaimthat
thoughtsthatguidetheworldcomeondove’sfeet–weneedtolistencarefully.
Pallesendoessoassheseeksentrepreneurshipinplaceswherewewould
perhapsnotthinkwewouldobserveitorstudyit–intheplayfuleventina
publicsectorpre-schoolorganisation.Withamusician’searPallesenworkswith
rhythm,crescendoandcomposingassheprovidesarelational-processualre-
conceptualisationofcreativelyplayfulentrepreneurshipinthepublicsector
(Pallesen,2018).
RollandMunrobringssomethinglikeagenreinventiontousviathiscreatively
composedanalysisanddiscussionofhoworganization–inthewakeofhaving
beenre-configuredaroundbudgets,targetsandmetrics,nowinthenameof
enterprise–canstillbeopenedtopassion,carnivalandplay.Aretherestill
spacesforplayinorganizationthatsurvivestheecologicalpressofmoney-
orientationassociatedwithentrepreneurship,Munroasks?Paradigmaticcases
ofinnovation,centralinthehistoryofshapingthepresent-dayenterprising
organization–Edison’ssupplyofelectricity,Sloan’suseofROItogrant
autonomy,andJIT’sturntowardstheflexiblefactory–areanalysedand
discussedbyengagingconceptsprovidedfromprocessphilosophicalthinkers.
Munroshowshowreversethinkinggivesuswaystochallengemanagerialpower
overorganisationalplacessoastoopenspacesforplayinspiteoftheecological
pressthatamoney-orientedcontrolmeans.Inarefreshinglysurprisingway,this
article(Munro,2018)showshowexpectingthesurpriseoftheunpredictable
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
13
unleashingofthevirtuallynewisitselfawell-grounded(intimeandspace)and
playfulwayofresistingtheinstitutionalizedecologicalpressofmoney.
Creativityand…
NeilThompson’s‘ImaginationandCreativityinOrganisations’(Thompson,
2018)emphasisestheimportanceofimaginationforcreativity,anddoessovery
imaginativelybylinkingorganisationalcreativitystudieswithworkinaesthetics
andthephilosophyofimagination.DrawingonEnglishRomanticliterature,
Thompsonshowsthatdespitetheircelebrationoftheindividualgenius,the
Romanticshadaclearunderstandingofthesharedandcollectiveunderliningof
imaginationandcreativity.Thepaperisboldinmakingthisconnection-a
connectionmuchneededandmuchoverdueifwewanttocapture
entrepreneuriallifeinitsflowsandvagaries.Literature,andreflections
producedbywriters,aretwomillenniaaheadintheirunderstandingofsociallife,
anditisoftennothingbutmethodologicalarrogancethatpreventsusfrom
benefittingfromtheirinsights.Thompson’spaperisanexampleofhowthe
twaincanmeetwithintheprescriptionsofacademic(journal)discourse.Itisthis
collaborationthatenableshimtotackletheubiquitous,yetnotoriouslydifficult
toexplicate,conceptofimagination.
Iscreativity,likebeauty,asmuchintheeyeofthebeholder,asinitsown
performance?Koch,Wenzel,Senf,andMaibier(2018)arguethatcreativityis
indeedasocialconstruction,aconsensualattribution.Thedualprocessof
performingcreativity,andofbeingrecognisedassodoing,isthusanongoing
negotiationbetweentheperformerandtheiraudiences(bothinternaland
external).Suchcreative“entre-relating”succeedswhenaudiencesperceivean
organisation,itsprocesses,playersandproducts,tofullyenactfourpractices
(Jackson&Messick,1965).Theymustbeseentosurprise,throughthegenesisof
theunusual,thenovel,theunexpected.Theappropriatenessoftheircreative
manifestationsshouldalsoengenderaudiencesatisfaction.Theymustcreate,too,
atransformationofcontextualestablishedwisdom,soastoprovokea
stimulationresponsefromaudiences.Fourthly,byelicitingrecognitionthatthe
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
14
essenceoftheircreativityhasbecomeacelebratedandmuchneededexemplar
tothewidercontext,playersneedtoevokeaudienceattributionsofsavouring.
Considerabletimeandmultiplemanifestationsofevolvingcreativitymaybe
requiredfororganisationalperformerstoadaptthemselvestothedemandsof
theiraudiencesinthesefourregards,andtherebybecomeseenascreative.In
theirrevelatorycasestudyofBerlin’sRutzhautecuisinerestaurant,andits
trajectorytowardssuchattributionsofcreativity,Kochetalplayfullyillustrate
theaestheticsattheheartofcreation.Theyremindusthatapartofwinning
recognitionandlegitimationasbeingcreativedemandsactingasifonehas
alreadydoneso.Thisisinitselfanactofentre-relating,ofplayfulcreativity.They
highlighttherelationalnatureofcreativity,andimportantlydemonstratethe
ongoing–eventortuousroute–thatnegotiatingsuchattributionsofbeing
creativecandemand.
Theundergroundhaslongprovidedaplay-space,aspeilraum,fortheavant-
garde,whetherinart,inmusic,orinorganisationalinnovation.Theclandestine
glamourofcreatingbelowtheradar(evenifoftenquasi-licensedwithawink
andanod)engendersthecamaraderieofsecrecy,demandstrust,andbuilds
strongbonds.Communitiesofoccultcreativityoperatewithinaself-selected
play-space,thatisbracketedofffromthenorms,rules,policiesandpoliticsofthe
widercontext.Thereisevidencethatalltheseinter-relationalandinterrelated
phenomenaoftheundergroundalsoacttostimulatehigherlevelsofcreativity.
Whatislessclear,yet,ishowthishappens.CourpassonandYounes(2018)take
onthetaskoflayingbarethesocialmechanismsbywhichsecrecyfacilitates
creativity,throughanalysisofadetailedcasestudyfromtheworldof
pharmaceuticals,whichbeganwhenseveralscientistsrefusedtoaccepta
managementdecisiontoabandonapromisingproject.CourpassonandYounes
discoveraparalleluniversewherethisbandofrenegadescometogethertowork
insecret,re-allocatingresources,buildingdeepteamcohesion,andestablishing
theirplayroomsinhiddenplaces,bothinsideandoutwiththeorganisation.
Simultaneously,however,inthe“realworld”ofthewiderorganisation,thereare
meetingstoattend,managerstopacify,crediblefictionstomaintain,andapath
tobelaidtotheeventualrevelationofthesecretlydevelopednewproduct.The
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
15
excitementofsuchexceptionalcircumstances,andthegrowingvulnerabilityof
sharingsecrets,accompaniesadisruptionofworkplacetimeandspacenorms.
Socialinteraction,physicalco-location,andemotionalattachmentstandatthe
thrillingheartofsuchundergroundprocesses.Eventhedecisiontopursuethis
covertinnovationemergedthroughseverallatenight,off-sitediscussions,ina
socialandprocessualfashion,ratherthanthroughindividualisedleadership.
Commitment,cohesion,creativityandcompetencywereallenhancedthrough
theseclandestineinteractions,whichneverthelessremainedfocusedon
achievingbenefitfortheveryorganisationfromwhichthebandofoutlawswas
hiding,initsparalleluniverse.
Playand…
Intheirarticle,“Playingtodissent:Theaestheticsandpoliticsofplayfuloffice
design”,AnnaAlexanderssonandViktorijaKalonaityte(2018)addresstheissue
oftheincreasingaestheticizationofworkinglifeinorganizationandexplorethe
senseofplayinrelationtowork.Theirfocusgoesontheplayfulofficedesign,
thatistheofficedécorwhereworkisintegratedwithplay,andthatcanpromote
aestheticsensibilitiesatwork,envisionorganizationalcreativity,makework
practicesimaginative,enhanceentrepreneurialattitudesandskills.Thisoffice
interiordesignshowstheimportanceofartinentrepreneurshipandrevealsthe
increasedattentionattheaestheticqualitythatthespacedimensionof
organizationallifereceivesbymanagers,architects,designmagazinesandblogs,
andcorporations.But,whicharethecharacteristicsofthisaestheticquality?
Whatisthevisual,imaginativeandcognitivesenseofplay-andofart
playfulness-initsrelationtoworkinglife?AlexanderssonandKalonaityte
conductedanempiricalstudybasedonanaccurateandmethodologically
complexanalysisofphotographsofplayfulofficedesignpostedonline.An
importantresult,amongseveralothers,oftheirresearchisthat,intheplayful
officedécor,playoperatesbyevokingnon-workingtopics,thatisthattheartistic
andtheaestheticqualitiesdonotconstituteanintrinsicsideofworkinglife.
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
16
“FeelingtheReeloftheReal:FramingthePlayofCriticallyAffective
OrganizationalResearchbetweenArtandtheEveryday”(Linstead,2018)isthe
articlethroughwhichStephenLinsteadraisestheissueofart-basedresearch
methodsinorganizationstudiesandproposesanewchallengetoorganizational
research.Thischallengehighlightstherelevanceofthecreationoftextsindoing
research,andfocusonthetopicsoftheplayful,oftheartistic,andofthe
performativeinordertostimulatenewawareness,sensitivityandlearningin
theirreadership.Linsteadproposesaframethatprovidesorganizationstudents
andscholarswithanumberoflandmarksthatcansetaplayfulin-between,one
thatrelateartistichumanitiesandorganizationstudies.Thisframeismeantto
facilitatetheproductionof‘criticallyaffectiveperformativetexts’thatare
inspiredandformedbyplayandmystery,anditisarticulatedinfour
intertwinedmomentswhichstressthemovementtowardsanon-
representationalandnon-orthodoxresearchinorganizationallife.These
momentsareconstitutedbytheaesthetic–aestheticsofdirectorrelived
experience,ofrepresentation,ofrelationality,ofaffectivity–,thepoetic–when
theplayfulhighlightsthetensionknowing/not-knowing–,theethical–the
inescapablesentimentofresponsibilityfortheother–,andthepolitical–thatis
whentheplayfulispowerplayandbringstogetherthemaking,thecreation,ina
word,thepoiēsis,andthehumanity.
Entrepreneurshipand…
SaraElias,ToddChiles,CarrieDuncan,andDeniseVultee(2018)writethearticle
“Theaestheticsofentrepreneurship:Howartsentrepreneursandtheir
customersco-createaestheticvalue”,wheretheyemphasizetheimportanceof
thecustomertothepointthatentrepreneurshipinartsettingscomprehendsthe
client’sengagementintheorganizationalcreationofavaluethat,ratherthan
beingmerelyeconomic,hasanaestheticquality.Theyconsidertheaesthetic
valuetobeintersubjective–thatisneithersubjective,norobjective–,and
conceptualizetheorganizationalcreationintermsofaprocesswhere
relationalityandmaterialityinterweave,wheretheexperiencesareembodied,
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
17
andwheretheartworkisstillin-progressandhasnotreachedthestatusoffinal
artifact.Thefindingsemergedfromtheirmicro-ethnographiesshowedthat
customersco-createwithentrepreneursbyengagingthemselvesinthespaces
thatarein-betweenalongtheprocessestoimaginetheworkofart,to
contemplateandreflectonit,andtopersuadeandbuildconsensusregardingits
evolvingstatus.Aestheticentrepreneurshipresultscharacterizedbyco-creations
groundedinimaginativesensingandempathicunderstanding,inembodied
conversationsandtacitunderstanding,andininterplaysthatgenerateand
supportsenseandsignificanceoftheaestheticvalue.Anovelunderstandingof
thecreationofaestheticvaluecanbegeneratebysituatingthecustomerwithin-
ratherthanexternalto–theprocessoforganizationalcreationand
entrepreneurship.
Theconceptofliminalitylendsitselftostudiesofsuchanin-between
phenomenaasentrepreneurship.Inthisarticle,LuciaGarcia-Lorenzo,Paul
Donnelly,LuciaSell-Trujillo,andMiguelImas(2018)putsittoanoveluseby
engagingitinthestudyofentrepreneuringasacreativeeverydaypracticeof
individuals(inIreland,Spain,andtheUK)livinginconditionswheretheyneed
toimagineandexperimentwithhowlifecouldbeliveddifferently.
UnderstandingnascententrepreneurshipprocessuallyGarcia-Lorenzoetal
showhowthestudyofeverydayentrepreneurshipinconditionsofcrisismakes
attentiontoliminalitynecessary.Creativelyinsistingonfindingnewwaysto
makealivingasliminalentrepreneurs,thisstudyshowshowrenewing
themselvesaswellasthecontextsandinstitutionalconditionsfortheir
entrepreneurialcreativitybecamenecessary.Theauthorsbringusafascinating
narrativeonthebasisofananalysisoffieldworkinpost-financialcrisisinthree
nationalcontexts,fromwhichwelearntounderstandtheprocessof
entrepreneuringinnew(andempiricallysubstantiated)waysthroughtheuseof
theconceptofliminality.
Entrepreneurshiphasonlytoooftenbeenlaudedasthe(market-driven)panacea
foralltheworld’swickedproblems(Sørensen,2008).Soteriologiesofenterprise
castigatethemarginalisedforfailingtoseizecontroloftheirowndestiny
throughstart-up,whilstenvisioningfutureswhereepicentrepreneursinnovate
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
18
creativesolutionstocomplexsocio-economicthreats.Johnsen,Olaison,and
Sørensen(2018)demonstratethatdominantarticulationsofenvironmental
sustainabilityhavetendedtobebedevilledby“aninherentheroism,adogmatic
optimismandaneoliberalideology”.Tocombatthis,Johnsenetalbuildupon
Spinozaetal’s(1997)theorisationofstyle,understoodhereasmodesofsocial
comportment,cognition,andcognition.Organisationstendtostabilizestyle,
makingitdurablethroughisomorphismofsocialpractice(andmeaning)
amongstproducersandconsumeralike.Playisthepracticethroughwhichsuch
disturbingincongruitiesbecomeperceived,asorganizationsputtheirstyleat
risk.Entrepreneurshipactstoquestion,challenge,anddisruptstyle,most
particularlywhereconstellationsofpracticehavebecomedissonant,faltering,
andrivenwithanomalies.Novelco-enactedpracticesandmeaningsofstylecan
onlybecomepersistentandenduringifthecollectiveassemblageadoptand
enactthem.Allarerequired,iftheneedforstylechangeistoberecognised(in
play),fordisruptionstoemergeandbe“tested”(throughentrepreneurship),and
thenforsuccessfuldisruptionstobecomeanenactednetworkofpractices
(throughcollectiveassemblage),madedurable(viaorganisation).Usingan
illustrativeexampleofsustainableentrepreneurship–Fairphone–theauthors
showthatSEisinitselfastyle,theanomaliesofwhichdemandplayfulexposure
andentrepreneurialdisruption:“sustainableentrepreneurshipconsistsof
disruptingcurrentunderstandingsofsustainability,therebycreatingnew
environmentallyfriendlyandsociallyconsciousstyles”(Johnsenetal,2018).
Movingon
Givenwhatwehopedtoachievewiththisdoublespecialissue,launchingitasa
SummerWorkshopin2015,ourfinalwordsherearealsoofthemore
performative–‘dearreader,taketheplunge!’Wethinkthisisanexciting
numberofstudiesthatwillmoveyou.Notallwillmoveallofyou,but
multiplicityandvariationarealsoimportantelementsineverymanifestationof
thecreative,playfulandentrepreneurial.Wehaveperhapscometoaplace
wherewenolongerseecreativity,playandentrepreneurshipasmarginalor
exceptionaltopicsinorganisationstudies.Thiswouldmeanwehavemade
organisationstudiesmore‘realistic’inthesensethatithasacquiredgreater
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
19
capacityto‘converse’everydayorganisationallife,inwhichthecreative,playful
andentrepreneurialrapidlyhavebecomethenewnormal.Havewealsocometo
aplacewherewritingorganisationstudieshasitselfbecomeamorecreative,
playfulandentrepreneurialact?Weventuretosuggestthatthereareevidences
ofthisinthisspecialissue.Ifso,wewouldsaywehavemovedorganisation
studies,ifeversoslightly,whichisperhapsmorethanwecouldhavehopedfor.
Seeforyourself,moveontoreading!
References
Alexandersson,A.,andKalonaityte,V.(2018)“PlayingtoDissent:TheAestheticsandPoliticsofPlayfulOfficeDesign,”OrganizationStudies,thisissue,pp.xx-xx.
Amabile, T. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review, September-October, 77-87.
Amabile,T.M.,andKhaire,M.(2008)“Creativityandtheroleoftheleader,”HarvardBusinessReview,86(10):101-109.
Amabile,T.M.,andPillemer,J.(2012)"PerspectivesonthesocialPsychologyofCreativity,”JournalofCreativeBehavior,46(1):3–15. Austin, R. D., & Devin, L. (2003). Artful making – What managers need to know about how artists work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Austin, R., Hjorth, D., and Hessel, S. (2017) “How aesthetics and economy become conversant in creative firms,” Organization Studies, online first version (2017): https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617736940
Bauman,Z.(2000)LiquidModernity,Cambridge:Polity.
Beyes,T.(2009).Spacesofintensity-urbanentrepreneurshipasredistributionofthesensible.inD.Hjorth,&C.Steyaert(Eds.),ThePoliticsandAestheticsofEntrepreneurship:afourthmovementsinentrepreneurshipbook,Cheltenham:EdwardElgarPublishing,pp.92-112. Beyes,T.,Steyaert,C.(2011).Theontologicalpoliticsofartisticinterventions:Implicationsforperformingactionresearch.ActionResearchJournal,9(1),100–11.
Beyes,T.,Steyaert,C.(2012).Spacingorganization:Non-representational
theorizingandthespatialturninorganizationalresearch.Organization,
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
20
19(1),45–61.
Birch,D.(1979)Thejobgenerationprocess.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT
CatmullE.(2008)HowPixarfosterscollectivecreativity.HarvardBusiness
Review(September):64-72.
Chanal,V.(2010)“Thedifficultiesinvolvedindevelopingbusinessmodelsopen
toinnovationcommunities:thecaseofacrowdsourcingplatform,”
M@n@gement,13(4):318-341.
Chesbrough,H.(2006)OpenBusinessModel:Howtothriveinthenewinnovation
landscape.Cambridge,MA:HarvardBusinessSchoolPress.
Chia,R.(1996a)Organizationalanalysisasdeconstructivepractice,Berlin:deGruyter.
Chia,R.(2000)“Discourseanalysisaorganizationalanalysis,”Organization,7(3):513-518.
Courpasson,D.,Arellano-Gault,D.,Brown,A.,andLounsbury,M.(2008)“Organizationstudiesonthelook-out?:Beingread,beinglistenedto,”OrganizationStudies,29(11):1383-1390.
Courpasson,D.,andYounes,D.(2018)“DoubleorQuits:UnderstandingtheLinks
betweenSecrecyandCreativityinaProjectDevelopmentProcess,”Organization
Studies,thisissue,pp.xx-xx.
deCerteau,M.(1997)Cultureintheplural,Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesota
Press.
Deleuze,G.(1991)Empiricismandsubjectivity,Transl.byConstantinBoundas,NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.
Deleuze,G.(2006)Nietzsche&Philosophy,NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.
Drakopoulou-Dodd,S.(2014)“Rootsradical–place,powerandpracticeinpunk
entrepreneurship,”EntrepreneurshipandRegionalDevelopment,26(1-2):165-
205.
Elias,S.R.S.T.A.,Chiles,T.H.,Duncan,C.M.,andVultee,D.M.(2018)“TheAestheticsofEntrepreneurship:HowArtsEntrepreneursandtheirCustomersCo-createAestheticValue,”OrganizationStudies,thisissue,pp.xx-xx.
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
21
Florida,R.andGoodnight,J.(2005)“Managingforcreativity,”HarvardBusinessReview,83(7):124-131.
Garcia-Lorenzo,L.,Donnelly,P.,Sell-Trujillo,L.,andImas,J.M.(2018)“LiminalEntrepreneuring:TheCreativePracticesofNascentNecessityEntrepreneurs,”OrganizationStudies,thisissue,pp.xx-xx.
Gartner,W.B.(2012)“Entrepreneurshipasorganisationcreation,”inHjorth,D.(Ed.)HandbookonOrganisationalEntrepreneurship,Cheltenham:EdwardElgar,pp.21-30.
Gartner, W. B., Bird, B. J., and Starr, J. A. (1992) “Acting As If: Differentiating Entrepreneurial From Organizational Behaviour”, Entrepreneurship, Theory & Practice, Spring: 13-31.
Gagliardi,P.(2005)TheRevengeofGratuitousnessonUtilitarianism.An
InvestigationintotheCausesandConsequencesofaCollectiveRepression,
JournalofManagementInquiry,14(4):309-315.
Gagliardi,P.andCzarniawska,B.(Eds.)(2006)ManagementEducationand
Humanities,Cheltenham:EdwardElgar.
GherardiS,andStratiA.(2012)Learningandknowinginpractice-basedstudies.
Cheltenham,Gloss:EdwardElgar.
Gherardi,S.,Strati,A.,(2017)TalkingaboutCompetence:That“Something”
WhichExceedstheSpeakingSubject,inJörgenSandberg,LindaRouleau,Ann
Gotsi, M., Andriopoulos, C., Lewis, M. W., & Ingram, A. E. (2010). Managing creatives: Paradoxical approaches to identity regulation. Human Relations, 63, 781–805.
GuilletdeMonthoux,P.(2004)TheArtFirm,Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress.
Helin,J.,Hernes,T.Hjorth,D.andHolt,R.(Eds.)(2014)OxfordUniversityPresshandbookonProcessPhilosophyandOrganizationStudies,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Hernes,T.(2014)AProcessTheoryofOrganization,Oxford:OxfordUniversity
Press.
Hjorth,D.(2003)Rewritingentrepreneurship–foranewperspectiveon
organisationalcreativity,Malmö/Copenhagen/Oslo:Liber/CBSPress/Abstrakt.
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
22
Hjorth,D.(2005)“OrganizationalEntrepreneurship:withdeCerteauonCreating
Heterotopias(orspacesforplay)”,JournalofManagementInquiry,14,No.4,386-
398.
Hjorth,D.(2012)“OrganisationalEntrepreneurship-AnArtoftheWeak?”,in
Hjorth,D(Ed.)HandbookonOrganisationalEntrepreneurship,Cheltenham:
EdwardElgar,pp.169-192.
Hjorth, D. (2014). Entrepreneuring as organisation-creation. In R. Sternberg & G. Kraus (Eds.), Handbook of research on entrepreneurship
and creativity (pp. 97-121). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Huizinga,J.(1949)Homoludens,London;RoutledgeandKeganPaulLtd.
Höpfl,H(2002)”Playingthepart:Reflectionsonaspectsofmereperformanceinthecustomer-clientrelationship,”JournalofManagementStudies,39(2):255-267.
Jackson,P.W.andMessick,S(1965)“Theperson,theproduct,andtheresponse:
conceptualproblemsintheassessmentofcreativity,”JournalofPersonality,
33(3):309-329.
Johnsen,C.G.,Olaison,L.,Sørensen,B.(2018),Putyourstyleatstake:Anewuse
ofsustainableentrepreneurship,”OrganizationStudies,thisissue,pp.xx-xx.
Julien,F.(2007)InPraiseofBlandness,Cambridge:MITPress.
Katz,J.A.andGartner,W.B.(1988)“Propertiesofemergingorganizations,”
AcademyofMangementReview,13(3):429-442.
King,I.W.,Vickery,J.(Eds.)(2013)ExperiencingOrganisations:Newaesthetic
perspectives,Faringdon:LibriPublishing.
Koch,J.,Wenzel,M.,Senf,N.N.,andMaibier,C.(2018)“OrganizationalCreativity
asanAttributionalProcess:TheCaseofHauteCuisine,”OrganizationStudies,this
issue,pp.xx-xx.
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
23
Landri,P.(2007)ThePragmaticsofPassion:ASociologyofAttachmentto
Mathematics,Organization,14(3):407-429.
Langley,A.,Smallman,C.,Tsoukas,H.,&Ven,A.H.vande.(2013).Processstudies
ofchangeinorganizationandmanagement:unveilingtemporality,activity,and
flow.AcademyofManagementJournal,56(1),1-13.
Langley,A.,andTsoukas,H.(2017),SkillfulPerformance:EnactingCapabilities,
Knowledge,Competence,andExpertiseinOrganizations,inSandberg,J.,Rouleau,
L.,Langley,A.,andTsoukas,H.(Eds.),Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.103-
124.
Linstead,S.(2018)“FeelingtheReeloftheReal:FramingthePlayofCritically
AffectiveOrganizationalResearchbetweenArtandtheEveryday,”Organization
Studies,thisissue,pp.xx-xx.
Linstead,S.,Höpfl,H.(Eds.)(2000)TheAestheticofOrganization,London:Sage.
Manning,E.andMassumi,B.(2014)ThoughtintheAct,Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
Massumi,B.(2002)ParablesfortheVirtual–movement,affect,sensation,
Durham.DukeUniversityPress.
Masters,P.A.(2008),PlayTheory,Playing,andCulture.SociologyCompass,2:
856–869.doi:10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00118.x
Meisiek,S.,Barry,D.(2014)Thescienceofmakingmanagementanart,
ScandinavianJournalofManagement,30(1):134-141.
Moeran,B.andChristensen,B.T.(2014)“Exploringcreativity–evaluativepracticesininnovation,designandthearts,”Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Munro,R.(2018)“Creativity,OrganizationandEntrepreneurship:PowerandPlayintheEcologicalPressofMoney,”OrganizationStudies,thisissue,pp.xx-xx.
Nietzsche,F.(1974)ThusspokeZarathustra,London.Penguin.
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
24
O’Connor,E.S.(2011)CreatingNewKnowledgeinManagement–appropriating
thefield’slostfoundations,Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress.
O’Donnell,Shannon.(2013).MakingEnsemblePossible:Howspecialgroups
organizeforcollaborativecreativityinconditionsofspatialvariabilityand
distance(Doctoraldissertation).DoctoralSchoolofOrganisationand
ManagementStudies,CopenhagenBusinessSchool,Denmark.
Pallesen,E.(2018)“Creativity,PlayandListening:AnAuditoryRe-
ConceptualizationofEntrepreneurialCreationintheContextofNewPublic
Management,”OrganizationStudies,thisissue,pp.xx-xx.
Paris,T.(2007),“Organization,processesandstructuresofcreation,”Focuseson
CulturalTopics,5,pp.2-16
Rhodes,C.(2009)‘AfterReflexivity:EthicsandtheWritingofOrganization
Studies’,OrganizationStudies,30(6):654-672.
Scalfi,A.(2018)[Notitle],OrganizationStudies,thisissue,pp.XX-XX
SpecialIssueonBody,SensesandKnowinginOrganization,ScandinavianJournal
ofManagement,29(4),2013.
Spinosa,C.,Flores,F.,andDreyfus,H.L.(1997)DisclosingNewWorlds–
Entrepreneurship,DemocraticAction,andtheCultivationofSolidarity,Cambridge
andLondon:MITPress.
Sternberg,R.andKrauss,G.(2014)HandbookofResearchonEntrepreneurshipandCreativity,Cheltenham:EdwardElgar.
Stevenson, H.H., and D.E. Gumpert (1985), “The Heart of Entrepreneurship.” Harvard Business Review, March-April, pp. 85-94.
StratiA.(1999)OrganizationandAesthetics.London:Sage.
Strati,A.(2008)"Aestheticsinthestudyoforganizationallife"inBarry,D.and
Hansen,H.(Eds.)TheSAGEhandbookofnewapproachesinmanagementand
organization,London:Sage,p.229-238.
LaterpublishedinORGANIZATIONSTUDIES(printedversioninearly2018)
25
Strati,A.,(2016)Aestheticsanddesign:Anepistemologyoftheunseen,inRaza
Mir,HughWillmott&MichelleGreenwood(eds.),TheRoutledgeCompanionto
PhilosophyinOrganizationStudies,London:Routledge,pp.251-259.
StratiA.,GuilletdeMonthoux,P.(2002)Introduction:Organisingaesthetics,
HumanRelations,55(7):755-766.
Styhre,A.(2008)Science-basedinnovation–frommodestwitnessingtopipeline
thinking,NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan.
Sørensen,B.M.(2008).‘Behold,Iammakingallthingsnew’:Theentrepreneur
assaviorintheageofcreativity.ScandinavianJournalofManagement,24(2),85-
93.
Sørensen,B.M.&Spoelstra,S.(2012).Playatwork:continuation,intervention
andusurpation.Organization,19(1),81-97.
Thompson,N.(2018)“ImaginationandCreativityinOrganizations,”
OrganizationStudies,thisissue,XX-XX
Thrift,N.(2007)Non-RepresentationalTheory:Space,Poltics,Affect.London:
Routledge.
Tsoukas,H.,Garud,R.,Hardy,C.(2003)“ContinuityandchangeforOrganizationStudies,”OrganizationStudies,24(7):1003-1014.
Tsoukas,H.andChia,R.(2002)“Onorganizationalbecoming:Rethinkingorganizationalchange,”OrganizationScience,13(5):567-582.
Winnicott,D.(1971)PlayingandReality,London:Routledge.
Weik,Elke(2012):Introducing‘TheCreativityofAction’IntoInstitutionalist
Theory.M@n@gement,15(5),563-581.
Weik,E.2015.AReturntotheEnduringFeaturesofInstitutions:AProcess
OntologyofReproductionandEndurance.PhilosophyoftheSocialSciences,
45(3):291-314.
Åkerstrøm-Andersen,N.(2009)PoweratPlay,NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan.