Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:55:31.417Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part I - Experiencing at Work

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2020

Edited by
Jeremy Aroles ,
François-Xavier de Vaujany  and
Karen Dale
Jeremy Aroles
Affiliation:
Durham University
François-Xavier de Vaujany
Affiliation:
Université Paris-Dauphine
Karen Dale
Affiliation:
Lancaster University
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Experiencing the New World of Work , pp. 11 - 106
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Aroles, J., Mitev, N. & de Vaujany, F.-X. 2019. Mapping themes in the study of new work practices. New Technology, Work and Employment, 34(3): 285–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aroles, J., Granter, E. & de Vaujany, F.-X. 2020. Becoming mainstream: The professionalization and corporatization of digital nomadism. New Technology, Work and Employment, 35(1): 114–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, C., Lips-Wiersma, M., Madden, A., Yeoman, R., Thompson, M. & Chalofsky, N. 2019. The five paradoxes of meaningful work. Journal of Management Studies, 56(3): 481–499.Google Scholar
Ball, K. 2005. Organization, surveillance and the body: Towards a politics of resistance. Organization 12(1): 89–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhamou, S. 2017. Imaginer le travail en 2030? Quatre types d’organisation du travail à l’horizon 2030. Paris: France Strategie.Google Scholar
Blue, S. 2019. Institutional rhythms: Combining practice theory and rhythmanalysis to conceptualise processes of institutionalisation. Time & Society, 28(3): 922–950.Google Scholar
Boyatzis, R. E. & McKee, A. 2005. Resonant Leadership. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Carter, C., Clegg, S. & Kornberger, M. 2008. Strategy as practice? Strategic Organization, 6(1): 83–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cascio, W. F. & Montealegre, R. 2016. How technology is changing work and organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3: 349–375.Google Scholar
Chen, L. & Nath, R. 2005. Nomadic culture: Cultural support for working anytime, anywhere. Information Systems Management, 22(4): 56–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coole, D. 2005. Rethinking agency: A phenomenological approach to embodiment and agentic capacities. Political Studies, 53(1): 124–142.Google Scholar
Coole, D. 2007. Merleau-Ponty and Modern Politics after Anti-Humanism. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Dale, K. 2001. Anatomising Embodiment and Organisation Theory. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, E. 2015. TechGnosis: Myth, Magic, and Mysticism in the Age of Information. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Press.Google Scholar
de Certeau, M. 1984. The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Degen, M. 2008. Sensing Cities. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Denzin, N. 2016. The Call to Performance. In Reinertsen, A. B. (ed.) Becoming Earth: A Post Human Turn in Educational Discourse Collapsing Nature/Culture Divides. Otterstad: Sense Publishers, 137–161.Google Scholar
Diprose, R. 2002. Corporeal Generosity: On Giving with Nietzsche, Merleau-Ponty, and Levinas. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Ebert, N. 2016. Individualisation at Work: The Self between Freedom and Social Pathologies. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Garrett, L. E., Spreitzer, G. M. & Bacevice, P. A. 2017. Co-constructing a sense of community at work: The emergence of community in coworking spaces. Organization Studies, 38(6): 821–842.Google Scholar
Gibson-Graham, J. K. 2006. A Post-Capitalist Politics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Hansen, M. 2006. Bodies in Code: Interfaces with New Media. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Hansen, M. 2014. Feed Forward: On the Future of 21st Century Media. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hancock, P. 2009. Management and Colonization in Everyday Life. In Hancock, P. and Tyler, M. (eds.) The Management of Everyday Life. London: Palgrave, 1–20.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1993. The Question Concerning Technology. In Heidegger, M. (ed.) Basic Writings. New York: Harper, 307–342.Google Scholar
Hoel, A. S. & Carusi, A. 2018. Merleau-Ponty and the Measuring Body. Theory, Culture and Society, 35(1): 45–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husserl, E. 1970. The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Kaushik, R. 2019. Merleau-Ponty between Philosophy and Symbolism: The Matrixed Ontology. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Kellerman, B. 2004. Bad Leadership: What It Is, How It Happens, Why It Matters. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Kemmis, S. 2012. Phronēsis, Experience, and the Primacy of Praxis. In Kinsella, E. A. & Pitman, A. (eds.) Phronēsis as Professional Knowledge. Rotterdam: Sense, 147–162.Google Scholar
Kemmis, S., Edwards-Groves, C., Wilkinson, J. & Hardy, I. 2012. Ecologies of Practices. In Hager, P., Lee, A. & Reich, A. (eds.) Practice, Learning and Change. Professional and Practice-based Learning. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Kemmis, S. & Smith, T. 2008. Prâxis and Prâxis Development. In Kemmis, S. and Smith, T. (eds.) Enabling Prâxis: Challenges for Education. Rotterdam: Sense, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Hardy, I. & Edwards-Groves, C. 2009. Leading and learning: Developing ecologies of educational practice. Paper presented at AARE (Australian Association for Research in Education) International Conference. Canberra.Google Scholar
Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboer, P. & Bristol, L. 2014. Changing Education: Changing Practices. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Kingma, S. 2019. New ways of working (NWW): Work space and cultural change in virtualizing organizations. Culture and Organization, 25(5): 383–406.Google Scholar
Kozel, S. 2007. Closer Performance, Technologies, Phenomenology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Küpers, W. 2011. Embodied pheno-pragma-practice – Phenomenological and pragmatic perspectives on creative ‘inter-practice’ in organisations between habits and improvisation. Phenomenology & Practice, 5(1): 100–139.Google Scholar
Küpers, W. 2013a. The Art of Practical Wisdom ~ Phenomenology of an Embodied, Wise Inter-Practice in Organisation and Leadership. In Küpers, W. & Pauleen, D. (eds.) A Handbook of Practical Wisdom. Leadership, Organization and Integral Business Practice. London: Routledge, 19–45.Google Scholar
Küpers, W. 2013b. Embodied Inter-Practices of Leadership. Leadership, 9(3): 335–357.Google Scholar
Küpers, W. 2015a. Phenomenology of the Embodied Organization – The Contribution of Merleau-Ponty for Organisation Studies and Practice. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Küpers, W. 2015b. Emplaced and embodied mobility in organizations. Ephemera- Theory & Politics in Organizations, 15(4): 797–823.Google Scholar
Küpers, W. 2016. Phenomenology of embodied and artful design for creative and sustainable inter-practicing in organisations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 135(1): 1436–1445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Küpers, W. 2017a. Inter-Play(ing) – Embodied possibilities of serious play at work. Journal of Organisation and Change Management, 30(7): 993–1014.Google Scholar
Küpers, W. 2017b. Embodied performance and performativity in organizations and management. M@n@gement, 20(1): 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Küpers, W. 2019. Reintegrating prâxis, practices, phrónêsis & sustainable action for processing systemic constraints in the business and society relationship. Society and Business Review, 14(4): 338–359.Google Scholar
Leder, D. 1990. The Absent Body. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lips-Wiersma, M., Haar, J. & Wright, S. 2020. The effect of fairness, responsible leadership and worthy work on multiple dimensions of meaningful work. Journal of Business Ethics, 161(1): 35–52.Google Scholar
Lips-Wiersma, M. & Morris, L. 2017. The Map of Meaningful Work: A Practical Guide to Sustaining our Humanity. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lupton, D. 1995. The Embodied Computer/User. In Featherstone, M. & Burrows, R. (eds.) Cyberspace, Cyberbodies, Cyberpunk: Cultures of Technological Embodiment. London: SAGE, 97–112.Google Scholar
Lysova, E. I., Allan, B. A., Dik, B. J., Duffy, R. D. & Steger, M. F. 2019. Fostering meaningful work in organizations: A multi-level review and integration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 110(B): 374–389.Google Scholar
Mandich, G. 2019. Modes of engagement with the future in everyday life. Time and Society. DOI: 10.1177/0961463X19883749.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1973. The Algorithm and the Mystery of Language. In Lefort, C. (ed.) The Prose of the World. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1995. The Visible and the Invisible. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 2003. Nature. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M, 2010. Institution and Passivity. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 2012. Phenomenology of Perception. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Merry, P. 2019. Why Work? Economics and Work for People and Planet. Minneapolis, MN: Amaranth Press.Google Scholar
Müller, A. 2016. The digital nomad: Buzzword or research category? Transnational Social Review, 6(3): 344–348.Google Scholar
Nicolini, D., Gherardi, S. & Yanow, D. 2003. Knowing in Organizations: A Practice-Based Approach. New York: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Petriglieri, G., Ashford, S. J. & Wrzesniewski, A. 2019. Agony and ecstasy in the gig economy: Cultivating holding environments for precarious and personalized work identities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(1): 124–170.Google Scholar
Rosa, H. 2016. Resonance. A Sociology of our Relationship to the World. Translated by Wagner, James C.. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Rosa, H. 2019. Resonance. A Sociology of Our Relationship to the World. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Rosa, H., Dörre, K. & Lessenich, S. 2017. Appropriation, activation and acceleration: The escalatory logics of capitalist modernity and the crises of dynamic stabilization. Theory, Culture and Society, 34(1): 53–73.Google Scholar
Sandberg, J. & Dall’Alba, G. 2010. Learning through and about Practice: A Lifeworld Perspective. In Billett, S. (ed.) Learning through Practice. Dordrecht: Springer, 104–119.Google Scholar
Sandberg, J. & Dall'Alba, G. 2009. Returning to practice anew: A life-world perspective. Organization Studies, 30(12): 1349–1368.Google Scholar
Scott, J. 1985. Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Susen, S. 2019. The resonance of resonance: Critical theory as a sociology of world-relations? International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 1–36.Google Scholar
Symon, G. & Whiting, R. 2019. The sociomaterial negotiation of social entrepreneurs’ meaningful work. Journal of Management Studies, 56(3): 655–684.Google Scholar
Waldenfels, B. 2008. The role of the lived-body in feeling. Continental Philosophy Review, 41(2): 127–142.Google Scholar
Wendland, C., Merwin, C. & Hadjioannou, C. 2018. Heidegger on Technology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Yakhlef, A. 2010. The corporeality of practice-based learning. Organization Studies, 31(4): 409–430.Google Scholar
Yeoman, R., Bailey, C., Madden, A. & Thompson, M. 2019. The Oxford Handbook of Meaningful Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

References

Balakrishnan, B. K., Muthaly, S. & Leenders, M. 2016. Insights from Coworking Spaces as Unique Service Organizations: The Role of Physical and Social Elements. In Petruzzellis, L. & Winer, R. (eds.) Rediscovering the Essentiality of Marketing. Cham: Springer, 837–848.Google Scholar
Beyes, T. & Steyaert, C. 2012. Spacing organization: Non-representational theory and performing organizational space. Organization, 19(1): 45–61.Google Scholar
Bilandzic, M. & Foth, M. 2013. Libraries as coworking spaces: Understanding user motivations and perceived barriers to social learning. Library Hi Tech, 31(2): 254–273.Google Scholar
Bizzarri, C. 2010. The Emerging Phenomenon of Coworking, a Redefinition of Job Market in Net-Working Society. In Müller, K., Roth, S. & Zak, M. (eds) Social Dimension of Innovation. Prague: Linde, 195–206.Google Scholar
Blagoev, B., Costas, J. & Kärreman, D. 2019. ‘We are all herd animals’: Community and organizationality in coworking spaces. Organization, 26(6): 894–916.Google Scholar
Boothby, A. 2017. Er is weer leven in de lobby. Metro. 18 April 2017.Google Scholar
Central Bureau of Statistics (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek) 2018. www.cbs.nl (accessed 20 November 2019).Google Scholar
Colbert, A., Yee, N. & George, G. 2016. The digital workforce and the workplace of the future. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3): 731–739.Google Scholar
de Vaujany, F. X. & Aroles, J. 2019. Nothing happened, something happened: Silence in a makerspace. Management Learning, 50(2), 208–225.Google Scholar
Gajendran, R. S. & Harrison, D. A. 2007. The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecom-muting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6): 1524–1541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gandini, A. 2015. The rise of coworking spaces: A literature review. ephemera, 15(1), 193–205.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. 1988. Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture. In Oakes, T. & Price, P. L. (eds.) Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science. Routledge, 213–231.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. 1963. Behavior in Public Places. Glencoe, IL: Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face to Face Behaviour. Garden City, NY: Anchor.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. 1973. La mise en scène de la vie quotidienne. Tome 1. La présentation de soi. Paris: Editions de minuit.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. 1978. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. London: Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
Gold, M. & Mustafa, M. 2013. ‘Work always wins’: Client colonisation, time management and the anxieties of connected freelancers. New Technology, Work and Employment, 28(3): 197–211.Google Scholar
Halford, S. 2005. Hybrid workspace: Re‐spatialisations of work, organisation and management. New Technology, Work and Employment, 20(1): 19–33.Google Scholar
Hatuka, T. & Toch, E. 2016. The emergence of portable private-personal territory: Smartphones, social conduct and public spaces. Urban Studies, 53(10), 2192–2208Google Scholar
Höflich, J. R. 2005. A Certain Sense of Place. In Nyiri, J. K. (ed.) A Sense of Place: The Global and the Local in Mobile Communication. Passagen Verlag, 159–168.Google Scholar
Kingma, S. 2019. New ways of working (NWW): Work space and cultural change in virtualizing organizations. Culture and Organization, 25(5), 383–406.Google Scholar
Lofland, L. 1985. A World of Strangers. Order and Action in Urban Public Space. New York: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
Merkel, J. 2015. Coworking in the city. Ephemera, 15(2): 121–139.Google Scholar
Nicolini, D. 2009. Zooming in and out: Studying practices by switching theoretical lenses and trailing connections. Organization Studies, 30(12): 1391–1418.Google Scholar
Nippert-Eng, C. 2015. Watching Closely: A Guide to Ethnographic Observation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Oldenburg, R. (1999). The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. Boston: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. 2007. Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization studies, 28(9): 1435–1448.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. & Scott, S. V. 2008. 10 sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1): 433–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, B. 2009. Everything but the Coffee: Learning about America from Starbucks. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Spinuzzi, C. 2012. Working alone together: Coworking as emergent collaborative activity. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26(4): 399–441.Google Scholar
Stravens, M. 2017. Aantal zzp’ers afgelopen tien jaar verdubbeld, vooral in de steden. De Volkskrant. 13 December 2017.Google Scholar
Tallack, D. 2001. ‘Waiting, Waiting’: The Hotel Lobby, in the Modern City. In Leach, N. (ed.) The Hieroglyphics of Space: Reading and Experiencing the Modern Metropolis. London, New York: Routledge, 139–151.Google Scholar
Torten, R., Reaiche, C. & Caraballo, E. L. 2016. Teleworking in the new milleneum. The Journal of Developing Areas, 50(5): 317–326.Google Scholar
van Dijk, V. 2011. Amsterdam Slaapt. Amsterdam: Hbmeo Publishers.Google Scholar
Vince, R. & Warren, S. 2012. Participatory Visual Methods. In Symon, G. & Cassell, C. (eds.) Qualitative Organizational Research: Core Methods and Current Challenges. London: Sage, 275–295.Google Scholar
Waters-Lynch, J., Potts, J., Butcher, T., Dodson, J. & Hurley, J. 2016. Coworking: A transdisciplinary overview. Available at SSRN 2712217.Google Scholar
Waters-Lynch, J. & Potts, J. 2017. The social economy of coworking spaces: A focal point model of coordination. Review of Social Economy, 75(4): 417–433.Google Scholar

References

Baichtal, J. 2011. Hack This: 24 Incredible Hackerspace Projects from the DIY Movement. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders.Google Scholar
Chandler, A. 1996. The changing definition and image of hackers in popular discourse. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 2(24): 229–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, G. 2016. Anonymous: Hacker, activiste, faussaire, mouchard, lanceur d’alerte. Montreal: Lux Editeur.Google Scholar
Dagiral, É. 2008. Pirates, hackers, hacktivistes: Déplacements et dilution de la frontière électronique. Critique, 6: 480–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giffard, A. 2007. (Sur) Un Manifeste Hacker. Cahier Critique de Poésie, 2(14).Google Scholar
Gunkel, D. J. 2001. Hacking Cyberspace. Boulder, CO: Perseus.Google Scholar
Hafner, K. & Markoff, J. 1995. Cyberpunk: Outlaws and Hackers on the Computer Frontier, Revised. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Halbert, D. 1997. Discourses of danger and the computer hacker. The Information Society, 13(4): 361–374.Google Scholar
Hannemyr, G. 1999. Technology and pleasure: Considering hacking constructive. First Monday, 4(2).Google Scholar
Hollinger, R. C. & Lanza‐Kaduce, L. 1988. The process of criminalization: The case of computer crime laws. Criminology, 26(1): 101–126.Google Scholar
Lallement, M. 2015. L'Âge du Faire. Hacking, travail, anarchie. Paris: Le Seuil.Google Scholar
Levy, S. 1984. Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday.Google Scholar
Lofland, J. 1974. Styles of reporting qualitative field research. The American Sociologist, 9(3): 101–111.Google Scholar
Mbodj-Pouye, A. 2008. Pages choisies. Ethnographie du cahier personnel d’un agriculteur malien. Sociologie et Sociétés, 40(2): 87–108.Google Scholar
Millar, S. 2001. For Hackers, Read Political Heroes of Cyberspace! The Guardian (8 March, p. 4).Google Scholar
Moilanen, J. 2012. Emerging hackerspaces–peer-production generation. In IFIP International Conference on Open Source Systems (pp. 94–111). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Nissenbaum, H. 2004. Hackers and the contested ontology of cyberspace. New Media & Society, 6(2): 195–217.Google Scholar
Pekka, H. 2001. L’Éthique hacker et l’esprit de l’ère de l’information. Paris: Exils.Google Scholar
Raymond, E. S. (ed.). 1996. The New Hacker's Dictionary. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Starr, A. 2000. Naming the Enemy: Anti-corporate Social Movements Confront Globalization. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Taylor, P. A. 1998. Hackers: cyberpunks or microserfs? Information Communication & Society, 1(4), 401–419.Google Scholar
Taylor, P. A. 1999. Hackers: Crime and the Digital Sublime. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Taylor, P. A. 2005. From hackers to hacktivists: Speed bumps on the global superhighway? New Media & Society, 7(5): 625–646.Google Scholar
Van Maanen, J. 1979. The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4): 539–550.Google Scholar
Van Maanen, J. 2011. Ethnography as work: Some rules of engagement. Journal of Management Studies, 48(1): 218–234.Google Scholar
Wacquant, L. 2005. Carnal connections: On embodiment, apprenticeship, and membership. Qualitative Sociology, 28(4): 445–474.Google Scholar
Wark, M. 2006. Un Manifeste Hacker: a Hacker Manifesto Francophone Dans un Design de Gallien Guibert. Paris: Criticalsecret.Google Scholar

References

Anderson, C. 2009. Makers: The New Industrial Revolution. New York: Crown Business.Google Scholar
Aroles, J., Mitev, N. & de Vaujany, F. X. 2019. Mapping themes in the study of new work practices. New Technology, Work and Employment, 34(3): 285–299.Google Scholar
Beyes, T. 2016. Art, Aesthetics and Organization. In Czarniawska, B. (ed.) A Research Agenda for Management and Organization Studies. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 115–125.Google Scholar
Bigo, V. 2018. On silence, creativity and ethics in organization studies. Organization Studies, 39(1): 121–133.Google Scholar
Blackman, D. & Sadler-Smith, E. 2009. The silent and the silenced in organizational knowing and learning. Management Learning, 40(5): 569–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borch, C. 2009. Organizational atmospheres: Foam, affect and architecture. Organization, 17(2): 223–241.Google Scholar
Bouncken, R. B. & Reusch, A. J. 2018. Coworking-spaces: How a phenomenon of the sharing economy builds a novel trend for the workplace and for entrepreneurship. Review of Managerial Science, 12(1): 317–334.Google Scholar
Böhme, G. 1993. Atmosphere as the fundamental concept of a new aesthetics. Thesis Eleven, 36(1): 113–126.Google Scholar
Brinsfield, C. 2014. Employee Voice and Silence ln Organizational Behaviour. In Wilkinson, A., Donaghey, J., Dundon, T. and Freeman, R. B. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Employee Voice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 114–131.Google Scholar
Brown, A. D. & Coupland, C. 2005. Sounds of silence: Graduate trainees, hegemony and resistance. Organization Studies, 26(7): 1049–1069.Google Scholar
Costas, J. & Grey, C. 2014. Bringing secrecy into the open: Towards a theorization of the social processes of organizational secrecy. Organization Studies, 35(10): 1423–1447.Google Scholar
Dale, K. 2005. Building a social materiality: Spatial and embodied politics in organizational control. Organization, 12(5): 649–678.Google Scholar
Davies, S. R. 2017. Characterizing hacking: Mundane engagement in US hacker and makerspaces. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 43(2): 171–197.Google Scholar
De Vaujany, F. X. & Aroles, J. 2019. Nothing happened, something happened: Silence in a makerspace. Management Learning, 50(2): 208–225.Google Scholar
De Vaujany, F. X. & Vaast, E. 2016. Matters of visuality in legitimation practices: Dual iconographies in a meeting room. Organization, 23(5): 763–790.Google Scholar
De Vaujany, F. X., Aroles, J. & Laniray, P. 2019. Towards a political philosophy of management: Performativity & visibility in management practices. Philosophy of Management, 18(2): 117-129.Google Scholar
De Vaujany, F. X., Dandoy, A., Grandazzi, A. & Faure, S. 2019. Experiencing a new place as an atmosphere: A focus on tours of collaborative spaces. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 35(2): 101030.Google Scholar
Fleming, P. 2013. Common as silence. Ephemera, 13(3): 627–640.Google Scholar
Garrett, L. E., Spreitzer, G. M. & Bacevice, P. A. 2017. Co-constructing a sense of community at work: The emergence of community in coworking spaces. Organization Studies, 38(6): 821–842.Google Scholar
Griffero, T. 2017. Quasi-things: The Paradigm of Atmospheres. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Grint, K. 2010. The sacred in leadership: Separation, sacrifice and silence. Organization Studies, 31(1): 89–107.Google Scholar
Hatch, M. 2014. The Maker Movement Manifesto. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar
Kirrane, M., O'Shea, D., Buckley, F., Grazi, A. & Prout, J. 2017. Investigating the role of discrete emotions in silence versus speaking up. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 90(3): 354–378.Google Scholar
Küpers, W. 2002. Phenomenology of aesthetic organising: Ways towards aesthetically responsive organizations. Consumption, Markets and Culture, 5(1): 21–46.Google Scholar
Küpers, W. 2014. Phenomenology of the Embodied Organization: The Contribution of Merleau-Ponty for Organizational Studies and Practice. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Lallement, M. 2015. L’âge du faire. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Law, J. 2004. After Method: Mess in Social Sciences Research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lefort, C. 2010. Foreword. In: Institution and Passivity. Course Notes from the Collège de France (1954–1955). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Mazis, G. A. 2016. Merleau-Ponty and the Face of the World: Silence, Ethics, Imagination, and Poetic Ontology. New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1945, 2013. Phénoménologie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1948. Sens et non-sens. Paris: Nagel.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1960. Signes. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1964. Le visible et l'invisible: suivi de notes de travail. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 2010. Institution and Passivity. Course Notes from the Collège de France (1954–1955). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Michels, C. 2015. Researching affective atmospheres. Geographica Helvetica, 70(4): 255–263.Google Scholar
Pallasmaa, J. 2014. Space, place and atmosphere. Emotion and peripherical perception in architectural experience. Lebenswelt. Aesthetics and Philosophy of Experience, 1934(4): 230–245.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, P. 1985. Temps et récit. Tome 3: Le temps raconté. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Spinuzzi, C. 2012. Working alone together: Coworking as emergent collaborative activity. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26(4): 399–441.Google Scholar
Strati, A. 2009. ‘Do You Do Beautiful Things?’: Aesthetics and Art in Qualitative Methods of Organization Studies. In Buchanan, D. A. and Bryman, A. (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Research Methods. SAGE, 230–245.Google Scholar
Sundararajan, A. 2017. The Sharing Economy: The End of Employment and the Rise of Crowd-based Capitalism. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Willems, T. 2018. Seeing and sensing the railways: A phenomenological view on practice-based learning. Management Learning, 49(1): 23–39.Google Scholar
Yakhlef, A. 2010. The corporeality of practice-based learning. Organization Studies, 31(4): 409–430.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×