Sharing Economy: Sensegiving of Strategic Decisions …
113
the receptivity of social elements outside the organization. In this aspect, in bureaucratic dimensions that acquire relevance, both social identities and moral aspects
become issues translated from public relations (Jackall 1988). However, there are
times when decision-making processes are not what they seem to be, resulting in
the constitution of facades (Abrahamson and Baumard 2008). Specifically, reputation facades lead and reinforce the legitimacy of organizations, while demonstrating
positive principles of their activities (Abrahamson and Baumard 2008).
The gerund added to “strategy” indicates the movement and the possibility of
meaning and resignification, forming the strategizing (Jarzabkowski et al. 2007).
Thus, the strategy is reflected in the individual or organizational conduct and determines the positioning of the activities continuously under construction. As a collective and distributed activity among the most varied agents, the concept of strategizing
presupposes the use and practical manipulation of resources that form strategy over
time (Jarzabkowski 2005). For Whittington (2006), this procedural character of the
strategy is reflected in three constitutive and, although related, independent elements:
praxis, practices, and practitioners.
The praxis is characterized by covering both individual human actions, as well
as the conducts institutionally defined in the social, economic and political field
(Jarzabkowski et al. 2007). It is an activity situated at different levels: from the micro
to the macro, the concept of praxis can be operated in an institutionalized manner
as well as in a fluid mode. In this sense, the concept ensures transit between the
various levels of analysis. For instance, one can evaluate praxis by behavior from an
individual’s particular perspective of an organizational process as well as consider it
as a behavior reflected in an institutionalized way in the business sector.
In another dimension, the practices refer to the flows of activities with routine
characteristics in which associated behaviors follow a certain pattern of conduct.
The guiding element of the action is configured from the interconnection of behavioral, cognitive, procedural, discursive, and physical resources. It does not mean
that routines make organizational practices immutable; on the contrary, although the
collective organization shapes certain structures, the practices can be combined and
altered according to their use and their dynamics in the flow of activities. As a means
of strategy analysis, the practices can be used to examine the mode of construction
and development of the strategy and its pathway, as well as observe the effects on
the configuration of the praxis (Jarzabkowski et al. 2007).
Practitioners are the components that enclose the constitutive triad of strategizing
and represent the actors who conduct the activities. As a unit of analysis, the individual incorporates the agency and mobilizes resources that promote and integrate
practices and praxis (Jarzabkowski et al. 2007). Practitioners thus present themselves
as definers of strategic activity, which includes the scope of who they are, how they
act, and which practices are put into action.
The same ontological position applies to organizations, forming the context in
which Weick (1995) presents the concept of organizing. The verb denoting action,
plus the verbal form of gerund indicating the current time, represent the sense of
constant flow and transformation that makes up the organizations. The actions in
the organizational domain reproduce the institutional logics while leading to a new
113
the receptivity of social elements outside the organization. In this aspect, in bureaucratic dimensions that acquire relevance, both social identities and moral aspects
become issues translated from public relations (Jackall 1988). However, there are
times when decision-making processes are not what they seem to be, resulting in
the constitution of facades (Abrahamson and Baumard 2008). Specifically, reputation facades lead and reinforce the legitimacy of organizations, while demonstrating
positive principles of their activities (Abrahamson and Baumard 2008).
The gerund added to “strategy” indicates the movement and the possibility of
meaning and resignification, forming the strategizing (Jarzabkowski et al. 2007).
Thus, the strategy is reflected in the individual or organizational conduct and determines the positioning of the activities continuously under construction. As a collective and distributed activity among the most varied agents, the concept of strategizing
presupposes the use and practical manipulation of resources that form strategy over
time (Jarzabkowski 2005). For Whittington (2006), this procedural character of the
strategy is reflected in three constitutive and, although related, independent elements:
praxis, practices, and practitioners.
The praxis is characterized by covering both individual human actions, as well
as the conducts institutionally defined in the social, economic and political field
(Jarzabkowski et al. 2007). It is an activity situated at different levels: from the micro
to the macro, the concept of praxis can be operated in an institutionalized manner
as well as in a fluid mode. In this sense, the concept ensures transit between the
various levels of analysis. For instance, one can evaluate praxis by behavior from an
individual’s particular perspective of an organizational process as well as consider it
as a behavior reflected in an institutionalized way in the business sector.
In another dimension, the practices refer to the flows of activities with routine
characteristics in which associated behaviors follow a certain pattern of conduct.
The guiding element of the action is configured from the interconnection of behavioral, cognitive, procedural, discursive, and physical resources. It does not mean
that routines make organizational practices immutable; on the contrary, although the
collective organization shapes certain structures, the practices can be combined and
altered according to their use and their dynamics in the flow of activities. As a means
of strategy analysis, the practices can be used to examine the mode of construction
and development of the strategy and its pathway, as well as observe the effects on
the configuration of the praxis (Jarzabkowski et al. 2007).
Practitioners are the components that enclose the constitutive triad of strategizing
and represent the actors who conduct the activities. As a unit of analysis, the individual incorporates the agency and mobilizes resources that promote and integrate
practices and praxis (Jarzabkowski et al. 2007). Practitioners thus present themselves
as definers of strategic activity, which includes the scope of who they are, how they
act, and which practices are put into action.
The same ontological position applies to organizations, forming the context in
which Weick (1995) presents the concept of organizing. The verb denoting action,
plus the verbal form of gerund indicating the current time, represent the sense of
constant flow and transformation that makes up the organizations. The actions in
the organizational domain reproduce the institutional logics while leading to a new