analyzing “unusual” cases to understand larger phenomena

Howdy, folks!  I just flew back from the annual Burning Man event located in the Nevada Black Rock Desert.  Despite a severe sleep debt and a growing backlog of tasks, I am ready to discuss orgtheory with all of my esteemed colleagues!  Thanks to the organizers of orgtheory for inviting me as a guest blogger.

While at Burning Man, fellow Burners expressed their continuing interest in understanding how organizations, including those that deviate from the “norm,” such as communes and co-ops, can function and thrive.  But some of you may wonder: what can such organizations tell us about organizations in general?

In medicine, unusual cases, such as the neurological abnormalities described by Oliver Sacks, help unveil how normal bodies function.  Likewise, “unusual” organizations can similarly shed insight into how conventional institutions operate. For example, I show how the growing organization behind the Burning Man event uses a mixture of bureaucratic and participatory/collectivist practices to navigate problems common to all organizations.

However, atypical cases can present challenges.  One practical issue involves acclimating an audience with a not-yet-taken-for-granted phenomenon. For example, in writing books or articles, researchers must decide when to introduce what and when, and how much detail to give without obscuring the central focus. Researchers also must make explicit links between their cases and a larger phenomenon; otherwise, their work will be dismissed as interesting but too narrowly focused or even worse, irrelevant.

Those who examine unusual cases face thorny issues about legitimacy.  As I was warned by one senior colleague, timing matters.  Start too far ahead or behind a curve, and you not only may have to self-fund your research, but you also may risk laboring in relative obscurity until the higher beings of your discipline smile upon you, or you form a research/writing support group, whichever comes first.  Fellow scholars may also find it difficult to categorize your work within the accepted canon, forcing you to do more legwork to establish where your research belongs and what audiences would benefit from your work.

To inspire readers to expand their horizons, I’ll showcase several researchers who have used seemingly unusual organizations to explain larger phenomena.

Before she became known for her work on tokenism (Men and Women of the Corporation, 1993, Basic Books) and for her prolific writings as a management guru, Rosabeth Moss Kanter studied communes. Her first book Commitment and Community revealed why some groups dissolved while others thrived, thus uncovering conditions that increase or decrease social cohesion. Some social movements scholars consider this to be her best work.

Similarly, before she became famous for the cultural tool kit and other writings, Ann Swidler produced Organization Without Authority: Dilemmas of Social Control in Free Schools (1979, Harvard University Press).  Swidler showed that in the absence of formal organizational authority, teachers tried – often unsuccessfully – to direct students at two free schools.  These findings are pertinent not just to alternative schools, which still exist, but also to contemporary workplaces that rely upon participatory practices.

In Opposing Ambitions: Gender and Identity in an Alternative Organization (1996, University of Chicago Press), Sherryl Kleinman revealed how gender ideologies are reproduced, even in an organization devoted to egalitarian ideals. She also discussed the difficulties of conducting such research, including her initial concerns about her study of an alternative health clinic, in Feminist Fieldwork Analysis (2007, Sage) and Emotions and Fieldwork (co-authored with Martha A. Copp, 1993, Sage).

Sociology of work scholars have also produced timely research on “unusual” organizations.  Jeff Sallaz’s research shows how workers adapt to the routines imposed by casinos.  In a similar vein, Steven H. Lopez‘s research discusses how nursing home aides reconcile time constraints and routines.

In addition, the sociology of religion has recently produced interesting research on “unusual” organizations.  For instance, Jerome P. Baggett’s research on the voluntary association Habitat for Humanity recounts the difficulties of organizing on the basis of a religion while promoting more secular purposes.

Do you have any other favorites or recommendations of past or up-and-coming research on “unusual” organizations to add? Please put them in the comments!