The Video Production of Space: How Different Recording Practices Matter

Organizational Research Methods

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2018, Pages 288-315

  Mengis, Jeanne ^a,b   Nicolini, Davide ^b   Gorli, Mara ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LUGANO   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITÀ CATTOLICA DEL SACRO CUORE   (Italy)

Author keywords

ethnography; observational techniques; organizational space; qualitative research; video based research; visual methods

Indexed keywords

EID: 85041753763     PISSN: 10944281     EISSN: 15527425     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1094428116669819     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Barad K., (2001). Re (con) figuring space, time, and matter. In Dekoven M., (Ed.), Feminist locations. Global and local, theory and practice (pp. 75–109). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers.
2. Barad K., (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs, 28(3), 801–831.
3. Barad K., (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
4. Barad K., (2011). Erasers and erasures: Pinch’s unfortunate “uncertainty principle.” Social Studies of Science, 41, 443–454. doi:10.1177/0306312711406317
5. Barbash I., Taylor L., (1997). Cross-cultural filmmaking: A handbook for making documentary and ethnographic films and videos. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
6. Becker W. S., Burke M. J., (2012). The staff ride: An approach to qualitative data generation and analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 15(2), 316–335.
7. Bell E., Davison J., (2013). Visual management studies: Empirical and theoretical approaches. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(2), 167–184.
8. Berg P. O., Kreiner K., (1990). Corporate architecture: Turning physical settings into symbolic resources. In Gagliardi P., (Ed.), Symbols and artifacts: Views of the corporate landscape (pp. 41–67). Berlin: De Gruyter.
9. Beyes T., Michels C., (2011). The production of educational space: Heterotopia and the business university. Management Learning, 42(5), 521–536.
10. Beyes T., Steyaert C., (2012). Spacing organization: Non-representational theory and performing organizational space. Organization, 19(1), 45–61.
11. Bitektine A., (2008). Prospective case study design. Qualitative method for deductive theory testing. Organizational Research Methods, 11(1), 160–180.
12. Broth M., (2008). The “listening shot” as a collaborative practice for categorizing studio participants in a live TV-production. Ethnographic Studies, 10, 69–88.
13. Brown B., (2013). Cinematography theory and practice: Image making for cinematographers, directors and videographers. London: Focal Press.
14. Carroll K., Iedema R., Kerridge R., (2008). Reshaping ICU ward round practices using video-reflexive ethnography. Qualitative Health Research, 18(3), 380–390.
15. Clegg S., Kornberger M., (2006). Organizing space. In Clegg S., Kornberger M., (Eds.), Space, organizations and management theory (pp. 143–162). Malmo, Sweden: Liber and Copenhagen Business School Press.
16. Dale K., Burrell G., (2008). The spaces of organisation and the organisation of space: Power, identity and materiality at work. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
17. de Vaujany F.-X., Mitev N., (2013). Materiality and space: Organizations, artefacts and practices. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
18. de Vaujany F.-X., Vaast E., (2013). If these walls could talk: The mutual construction of organizational space and legitimacy. Organization Science, 25(3), 713–731.
19. Elden S., (2004). Understanding Henri Lefebvre. London: Continuum.
20. Feldman M. S., Orlikowski W. J., (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1240–1253.
21. Foucault M., (1975). Surveiller et punir [Discipline and punish]. Paris: Gallimard.
22. Gastelaars M., (2010). What do buildings do? How buildings-in-use affect organizations. In Marrewijk A., Yanow D., (Eds.), Organizational spaces. Rematerializing the workaday world (pp. 77–95). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
23. Gieryn T. F., (2002). What buildings do. Theory and Society, 31(1), 35–74.
24. Gorli M., Nicolini D., Scaratti G., (2015). Reflexivity in practice: Tools and conditions for developing organizational authorship. Human Relations, 68(8), 1347–1375.
25. Gray J. N., (2003). Open spaces and dwelling places: Being at home on hill farms in the Scottish borders. In Low S. M., Lawrence-Zuniga D., (Eds.), The anthropology of space and place locating culture (pp. 224–244). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
26. Hatch M. J., (1990). The symbolics of office design: An empirical exploration. In Gagliardi P., (Ed.), Symbols and artifacts: Views of the corporate landscape (pp. 129–146). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: AldineTransaction.
27. Heath C., Hindmarsh J., Luff P., (2010). Video in qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28. Hillier B., (1996). Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. Hockings P., (1995). Principles of visual anthropology (2nd ed.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. (Original work published 1974)
30. Hor S.-y., Iedema R., Manias E., (2014). Creating spaces in intensive care for safe communication: A video-reflexive ethnographic study. BMJ Quality & Safety, 23(12), 1007–1013.
31. Hultman K., Lenz Taguchi H., (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(5), 525–542.
32. Iedema R., Long D., Carroll K., (2010). Corridor communication, spatial design and patient safety: enacting and managing complexties. In Van Marrewijk A., Yanow D., (Eds.), Organizational spaces. Rematerializing the workaday world. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
33. Iedema R., Merrick E., Rajbhandari D., Gardo A., Stirling A., Herkes R., (2009). Viewing the taken-for-granted from under a different aspect: A video-based method in pursuit of patient safety. International Journal for Multiple Research Approaches, 3(3), 290–301.
34. Jarzabkowski P., Balogun J., Seidl D., (2007). Strategizing: The challenges of a practice perspective. Human Relations, 60(1), 5–27.
35. Jones G., McLean C., Quattrone P., (2004). Spacing and timing. Organization, 11(6), 723–741.
36. Jones S. E., LeBaron C. D., (2002). Research on the relationship between verbal and nonverbal communication: Emerging integrations. Journal of Communication, 52(3), 499–521.
37. Katz S. D., (1991). Film directing shot by shot: Visualizing from concept to screen. Studio City, CA: Michael Wiese Productions.
38. King N., (2012). Doing template analysis. Qualitative organizational research: Core methods and current challenges. In Symon G., Cassell C., (Eds.), Qualitative organizational research. Core methods and current challenges (pp. 426–450). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Knoblauch H., Baer A., Laurier E., Petschke S., Schnettler B., (2008). Visual analysis. New developments in the interpretative analysis of video and photography. FQS, Forum Qualitative Social Research, 9(3).
40. Kornberger M., Clegg S. R., (2004). Bringing space back in: Organizing the generative building. Organization Studies, 25(7), 1095–1114.
41. Laurier E., (2014). Capturing motion: Video set-ups for driving, cycling and walking. In Adey P., Bissell D., Hannam K., Merriman P., S. M. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of mobilities (pp. 493–502). Abingdon, NY: Routledge.
42. Laurier E., Philo C., (2006). Natural problems of naturalistic video data. In Knoblauch H., Raab J., Soefnner H.-G., Schnettler B., (Eds.), Video-analysis methodology and methods, qualitative audiovisual data analysis in sociology (pp. 181–190). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
43. Lefebvre H., (1991). The production of space. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
44. Lefebvre H., (2004). Rhythmanalysis: Space, time and everyday life. London: Continuum. (Original work published 1992)
45. Locke K., Golden-Biddle K., Feldman M. S., (2008). Making doubt generative: Rethinking the role of doubt in the research process. Organization Science, 19(6), 907–918.
46. Luff P., Heath C., (2012). Some “technical challenges” of video analysis: social actions, objects, material realities and the problems of perspective. Qualitative Research Journal, 12(3), 255–279.
47. MacBeth D., (1999). Glances, trances and their relevance for a visual sociology. In Jalbert P. L., (Ed.), Media studies: Ethnomethodological approaches (pp. 135–170). Washington, DC: University Press of America.
48. Mascelli J. V., (1965). The five C’s of cinematography. Hollywood, CA: Cine/Grafic Publications.
49. Merriman P., Jones M., Olsson G., Sheppard E., Thrift N., Tuan Y. F., (2012). Space and spatiality in theory. Dialogues in Human Geography, 2(1), 3–22.
50. Mondada L., (2003). Working with video: How surgeons produce video records of their actions. Visual Studies, 18, 58–73.
51. Mondada L., (2006). video recording as the reflexive preservation and configuration of phenomenal features for analysis. In Knoblauch H., Raab J., Soeffner H. G., Schnettler B., (Eds.), Video analysis methodology and methods. Qualitative audiovisual data analysis in sociology. Bern: Lang.
52. Mondada L., (2011). Understanding as an embodied, situated and sequential achievement in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(2), 542–552.
53. Nicolini D., (2009). Zooming in and out: Studying practices by switching lenses and trailing connections. Organization Studies, 30(12), 1391–1418.
54. Nicolini D., (2013). Practice theory, work, and organization: An introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
55. Nicolini D., Roe B., (2014). Surfacing the multiple: diffractive methods for rethinking professional practice and knowledge. In Fenwick T., Nerland M., (Eds.), Reconceptualising professional learning: Sociomaterial knowledges, practices and responsibilities (pp. 67–81). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
56. Orlikowski W., Scott S. V., (2011). Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 433–474.
57. Orlikowski W. J., Scott S. V., (2014). Exploring apparatuses of valuation in the travel sector. Organization Science, 25(3), 868–891.
58. Petani F. J., Mengis J., (2016). In search of lost space: The process of space planning through remembering and history. Organization, 23(1), 71–89.
59. Piekkari R., Welch C., Paavilainen E., (2009). The case study as disciplinary convention: Evidence from international business journals. Organizational Research Methods, 12(3), 567–589.
60. Pile S., (2010). Emotions and affect in recent human geography. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 35(1), 5–20.
61. Pink S., (2001). Visual ethnography. London: Sage.
62. Pink S., (2006). The future of visual anthropology: Engaging the senses. London: Routledge.
63. Pink S., (2007). Walking with video. Visual Studies, 22(3), 240–252.
64. Prasad A., Prasad P., (2002). The coming of age of interpretive organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 5(1), 4–11.
65. Ray J. L., Smith A. D., (2012). Using photographs to research organizations: Evidence, considerations, and application in a field study. Organizational Research Methods, 15(2), 288–315.
66. Richardson J., McKenna S., (2014). Reordering spatial and social relations: A case study of professional and managerial flexworkers. British Journal of Management, 25(4), 724–736.
67. Ripamonti S., Galuppo L., Gorli M., Scaratti G., Cunliffe A. L., (2016). Pushing action research toward reflexive practice. Journal of Management Inquiry, 25(1), 55–68.
68. Rosen M., Orlikowski W. J., Schmahmann K. S., (1990). Building buildings and living lives: A critique of bureaucracy, ideology and concrete artifacts. In Gagliardi P., (Ed.), Symbols and artifacts: Views of the corporate landscape (pp. 69–84). Berlin: De Gruyter.
69. Sewell G., Wilkinson B., (1992). “Someone to watch over me’” Surveillance, discipline and the just-in-time labour process. Sociology, 26(2), 271–289.
70. Shrum W., Duque R., Brown T., (2005). Digital video as research practice: Methodology for the millennium. Journal of Research Practice, 1(1).
71. Simonsen K., (2007). Practice, spatiality and embodied emotions: An outline of a geography of practice. Human Affairs, 17(2), 168–181.
72. Sloterdijk P., (2011a). Bubbles. Spheres I. Los Angeles, CA: Semiotext(e).
73. Sloterdijk P., (2011b). Bubbles: Spheres Volume I: Microspherology. Los Angeles, CA: Semiotext.
74. Smets M., Burke G., Jarzabkowski P., Spee P., (2014). Charting new territory for organizational ethnography: Insights from a team-based video ethnography. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 3(1), 10–26.
75. Taylor S., Spicer A., (2007). Time for space: A narrative review of research on organizational spaces. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(4), 325–346.
76. Thrift N., (2004). Movement-space: The changing domain of thinking resulting from the development of new kinds of spatial awareness Economy and Society, 33(4), 582–604.
77. Tyler M., Cohen L., (2010). Spaces that matter: Gender performativity and organizational space. Organization Studies, 31(2), 175–198.
78. Van Marrewijk A., (2009). Corporate headquarters as physical embodiments of organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 22(3), 290–306.
79. Van Marrewijk A., Yanow D., (Eds.). (2010). Organizational space. Rematerializing the workaday world. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
80. Vásquez C., Cooren F., (2013). Spacing practices: The communicative configuration of organizing through space-times. Communication Theory, 23(1), 25–47.
81. Wasserman V., Frenkel M., (2011). Organizational aesthetics: Caught between identity regulation and culture jamming. Organization Science, 22(2), 503–521.
82. Yanow D., (2010). Giving voice to space: Academic practices and the material world. In Van Marrewijk A., Yanow D., (Eds.), Organizational spaces. Rematerializing the workaday world (pp. 139–158). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.