English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Practice theory seems to be both a very influential and at the same time a rather neglected source of influence on working life studies. It is only with this special issue on practice-based approaches to working life studies that this journal deals explicitly with practice theoretical perspectives on working life. But a more thorough review of working life studies soon revels that many investigations have been inspired by the works of Anthony Giddens, Pierre Bourdieu, discourse analysis, cultural historical activity theory (CHAT), ethnomethodology or Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger’s studies of learning in communities of practice. Although different sources and theoretical strands inspire these studies, they seem to have one thing in common: They have an interest in understanding and describing actors’ activity, interactions and performances. In short, they seek to understand the practices that actors (re)produce in working life. Viewed from this perspective, it is a warranted claim that working life studies are immensely inspired by theories of practice. However, one could claim that such a perspective just juxtaposes loosely related and random coupled theories. Is it useful, or of interest at all, to couple such diverse theories just because they all—in one way or another—deal with practice? Davide Nicolini thinks so. Nicolini sets out to demonstrate that all the before-mentioned theoretical stands do not only have in common that they deal with activity, action, and work, but they also have much more in common. The theories are also united in stressing that social life must be understood and investigated as a material and corporeal reality where activity transpires. They are all preoccupied with allowing room for the individual actions of actors, and they are all skeptic about rationalist and reductionist explanations of conduct (homo economicus) and sociological accounts that see action as rule or norm governed (homo sociologicus). Instead, they strive to understand individual action as both structured and emergent and creative. All the mentioned theories object to representationalist construals of knowledge, meaning, and discourse. Our access to reality is always mediated through our social and corporeal activities. Finally, Nicolini makes Book Review

Davide Nicolini (2013): Practice Theory, Work, and Organization. An Introduction, Oxford University Press, x + 222 pages, ISBN 978-0-19-923159-1