Anna Essén

The mutual constitution of sensuous and discursive understanding in scientific practice : An autoethnographic lens on academic writing

The research process and production of scientific knowledge has traditionally been understood to be based on abstract analysis and intellectual capacity rather than physical and emotional resources, promoting an understanding of academic practice as a detached, non-emotional and objective activity. Lately, several researchers have bemoaned this lack of recognition of the bodiliness of our work. In this study, we attempt to address this gap by exploring and conceptualizing some of the ways in which the embodied dimensions of academic research practices are intertwined with the articulation of ideas in the writing of scientific texts. In order to pursue our aim, we draw on experiences explicated through an autoethnographic approach, including the generation of personal narratives and in-depth conversations with 18 researchers from different universities in Europe and the US. The article contributes to the sociology of science and academic literacy literature, by conceptualizing the interconnectedness between sensuous and discursive understandings in this context. With the advancement of this theoretical approach, we illuminate how scientific practice is bound up with emotional, embodied, material, social, political and institutional forces. We also challenge the dichotomy between ‘knowledge work’ or theoretical tasks on the one hand, and ‘body work’ or physical labor on the other.

Practice innovation as bodily skills: the example of elderly home care service delivery

The Heideggerian strand of organization studies has highlighted important aspects of organizational practices. Because of the emphasis of the practice-oriented approach on routine practice, researchers have taken a special interest in how innovative, improvised action arises. One of the dominant views is that innovative action is the outcome of different variations in everyday practices. Insightful though these studies are, they do not recognize the role of the body in their conceptualization. This article seeks to redress this imbalance by drawing on Merleau-Ponty’s (1962) phenomenology, suggesting that the body, as a carrier of practices, is the locus of innovative action. The article proposes that innovative action emerges in our bodily expressive-responsive skilful coping mode. In illustrating this argument, we make use of case study material focusing on practices involving elderly care service provision. We show how the care workers under consideration cope with the demands of their unpredictable work by adapting their bodily expressive-responsive abilities innovatively to emerging situational calls. Practice innovation emerges as the outcome of a tension between what it makes sense for the care workers to do based on the practical intelligibility underlying their own practices, on the one hand, and bureaucratic rules and requirements inscribed in terms of economic rationality and cost-efficiency, on the other. Because bureaucratic rules are perceived as alienating and unethical, innovation would inevitably be a form of resistance. The article specifies this form of practical resistance, concluding with some implications of this approach for organization studies.

Co-production in chronic care: exploitation and empowerment

Purpose Many scholars have urged firms to empower consumers to become co-producers, arguing that this empowerment leads to a win-win situation that benefits consumers and providers alike. However, critical voices have emphasised that co-production is a way to exploit rather than empower consumers and hence represents a win–lose idea that benefits providers only. Regrettably, these polarised positions remain disconnected and lack empirical investigation. The aim of the present study is to move the debate beyond this stalemate by integrating these perspectives using an empirical study to explore enabling and constraining implications of the attempts to “empower” consumers. Design/methodology/approach This paper is based on a qualitative empirical study of an internationally unique example of a long-term co-production process in rheumatology care. Data were collected using both focused interviews and observations. Findings The study indicates that both the optimistic and the critical perspectives of co-production are valid and the implications of “empowering” consumers are two-edged. Research Limitations/implications The study highlights the need to zoom in and analyse how empowering and disempowering mechanisms relate to specific aspects of particular co-production processes rather than to co-production as a general phenomenon. Practical Implications The empirical data illustrate the feasibility of employing patients in everyday healthcare production through simple means while raising numerous issues related to, for example, traditional healthcare roles and process design. Originality/value The present study of a unique, long-term co-production illustrates how both perspectives of co-production are valid.