There’s a very interesting post on Org Theory which discuses the converging trajectories of Organisational Theory and Social Movement Theory. As Brayden King argues, the similarities in these fields of study were obscured by the different theoretical starting points within both subfields:
Both literatures are, after all, primarily concerned with group behavior, problems of collective action and coordination, and dynamics of stability and change. Why did it take so long for the two theoretical areas to engage one another? (I should note that social movement theory has for some time borrowed ideas from org. theory, but this doesn’t really amount to full engagement in my mind.)
We argue that in the early years of American sociology, social movements and formal organizations were viewed as very distinct phenomena – social movements are irrational and disruptive and formal organizations are rational and stability-inducing – and that this characterization prevented scholars from seeing potential empirical overlap.
Categories: Rethinking The World