Organizational Culture
Yutaka Yamauchi

Revised on 2020/9/24

Organizational Culture 組織文化論

(under construction)

This small group course will be taught in both English and Japanese.

Graduate School of Economics Fall, 2020
経済学研究科 2020年後期

Thursday 10:30-12:00
木曜2限日10:30-12:00
(There was an error on the time. I have corrected it on Sept, 20)

We will meet online (zoom), no face-to-face sessions.

Yutaka Yamauchi 山内 裕
Graduate School of Management
Kyoto University
京都大学経営管理大学院
総合研究2号館 3階東側
075-753-3536
ObscureMyEmail

このシラバスは多少変更される可能性があります。This syllabus is subject to change.

Purpose

This course covers cultural perspectives in organization studies. The topics go beyond the typical notion of organizational culture, which was a popular topic in the 80s, and include recent debates on language, practices, and materiality. In order to work in this field within organization studies, scholars need to understand some basic theories such as Bourdieu, Foucault and Deleuze; this course prepares students to work in this field.

文化という概念を理解するために、様々な文献を読み込む。文化についてあまり馴染みのない受講生が、この授業を通して様々な視座や概念類を獲得し、自らの研究の構成を定めることができるようにしたい。そのため、経営学における文化概念だけではなく、そもそも背景となる社会学、文化人類学、哲学などの多様な言説を押えながら議論していく。

Course structure

This course consists of reading assignments and in-class discussions. Students need to read the materials beforehand and prepare a short report. Bring printed copies for all the participants. Summarize the paper with your own words, using some direct quotes (quotation marks and page numbers), and include your own analysis and thoughts.

リーディングアサインメントを分担して読みレジュメをまとめる。各論文について、下記の一つ一つについてまとめる。著者の議論と自分の解釈を分離して、自分の言葉でまとめながら、都度引用を行うこと(ページ番号を含む)。全員分印刷して授業に持ってくること。

Prerequisites

None. 特になし。

Objectives

  • 多義的な文化の概念を総合的に理解し、文化について広い視野から議論できるようにする。 Understand the multiple meanings of culture in a holistic manner in order to engage in discussions on culture from a broad perspective.
  • 文化に関する研究の流れを理解し、自らの研究をどこに位置付け、どういう問いを立てるのかを考えることができるようにする。 Understand the contexts and histories of research on culture and become able to situate one's own research.

Evaluation

授業への参加・貢献度合い 50% 授業への貢献度(発言)を重視する。 Participation and discussion 50%

各授業でのレジュメと発表の質 50% Presentation (short reports on reading materials) 50%

Course website

資料のダウンロード・アップロードはPandAを通して行う。
Reading materials will be uploaded on PandA. https://panda.ecs.kyoto-u.ac.jp/portal

ただし、履修登録確定までの間の措置としてメールなどを利用する。下記よりメールアドレスを登録すること。
We will use emails until the PandA becomes available after the course registration. Submit your email address below. http://yamauchi.net/enroll

Office hours

以下のカレンダーに掲載する「Open」の時間帯をオフィスアワーとする。Openの時間を確認し、事前にメールでアポイントメントを取る。 Find an Open time on the following calendar and make an appointment. https://yamauchi.net/officehour

Topics

Week 1 Introduction

授業の目的、進め方などを説明する。 Discuss how to organize this course.

Reading assignment (if you can)
  • Williams, R. (2011). 完訳キーワード辞典. (美. 椎名, ち. 武田, 博. 越智, & 優. 松井). 東京: 平凡社. “Culture”
  • Williams, Raymond. Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. London: Fontana Press, 1976. "Culture"
References: The concept of culture
  • Elias, N. (1977). 文明化の過程. (赤井慧爾, 中村元保, 吉田正勝). 法政大学出版局. 第1章.
  • Elias, Norbert. The Civilizing Process. Revised. Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations. Wiley-Blackwell, 2000.
  • Eagleton, T. (2006). 文化とは何か. (洋. 大橋). 松柏社. 第1章.
  • Eagleton, Terry. The Idea of Culture. Oxford: Blackwell, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1369-6513.1999. Chapter 1

Week 2 Overview of organizational culture / 組織文化の概観

Reading assignments:
  • Smircich, L. (1983). Concepts of Culture and Organizational Analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3), 339–358.
  • Giorgi, S., Lockwood, C., & Glynn, M. A. (2015). The Many Faces of Culture: Making Sense of 30 Years of Research on Culture in Organization Studies. The Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 1–54.
References:
  • Hatch, M. J., & Cunliffe, A. L. (2006). Organization Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chapter 6 “Organizational Culture”.
  • Barley, S. R., Meyer, G. W., & Gash, D. C. (1988). Cultures of Culture: Academics, Practitioners and the Pragmatics of Normative Control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(1), 24–60.
  • Van Maanen, J., & Barley, S. R. (1984). Occupational communities: Culture and control in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 287–365.
  • Weber, K., & Dacin, M. T. (2011). The Cultural Construction of Organizational Life: Introduction to the Special Issue. Organization Science, 22(2), 287–298.

Week 3 Cultural struggles, fields 文化闘争、場

Reading assignments:
  • Bourdieu, P. (1990). ディスタンクシオン. (石井洋二郎). 藤原書店. 第1章 「文化貴族の肩書と血統」、第2章「社会空間とその変貌」
  • Bourdieu, Pierre. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste‎. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984. Chapter 1 and 2
References:
Culture and struggle
  • Bourdieu, P. (1995). 芸術の規則 I. (洋. 石井). 藤原書店. プロローグ & 第1章 「自律性の獲得」 Bourdieu, Pierre. The Rules of Art. Polity, 1996. Prologue and Chapter 1
  • Elias, N. (1977). 文明化の過程. (赤井慧爾, 中村元保, 吉田正勝). 法政大学出版局.
  • Elias, N. (2000). The civilizing process (Revised). Wiley-Blackwell.
  • 石井洋二郎. (1993). 差異と欲望. 藤原書店.
  • Simmel, G. (1957). Fashion. American Journal of Sociology, 62(6), 541–558.
  • Veblen, T. (1998). 有閑階級の理論. (高哲男). 筑摩書房.
  • Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class; an economic study of institutions. The Macmillan Company.
  • Peterson, R. A., & Anand, N. (2004). The Production of Culture Perspective. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 311–334.
  • Becker, H. S. (2016). アート・ワールド. (後藤). 慶應義塾大学出版会. 第4章 「アート作品を分配する」、第8章 、第12章「二五周年記念版へのエピローグ」
  • Becker, H. S. (2008). Art worlds (2nd ed.). University of California Press.Chapter 4, 8 and 12
  • Lahire, B. (2016). 複数的世界. (村井). 青弓社. 第3章 「場の限界」
  • Luhmann, N. (2012). 社会の芸術. (馬場訳). 法政大学出版局. 第4章
  • Luhmann, N. (2000). Art as a Social System. Stanford University Press.
Production of culture
  • Crane, D. (1997). Globalization, organizational size, and innovation in the French luxury fashion industry: Production of culture theory revisited. Poetics, 24(6), 393–414.
  • Peterson, R. A. (1976). The Production of Culture: A Prolegomenon. American Behavioral Scientist, 19(6), 669–684.
  • DiMaggio, P. (2000). The production of scientific change: Richard Peterson and the institutional turn in cultural sociology. Poetics, 28(2-3), 107–136.

Week 4 Tastes 趣味・テイスト

Reading assignments:
  • Holt, D. B. (1998). Does Cultural Capital Structure American Consumption? Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 1–25. (This time we won't need to talk too much about Warner.)
References:
  • Hennion, A. (2007). Pragmatics of Taste. In The Blackwell Companion to the Sociology of Culture (pp. 131–144). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
  • Peterson, R. A. (2005). Problems in comparative research: The example of omnivorousness. Poetics, 33(5-6), 257–282.
  • Peterson, R. A., & Kern, R. M. (1996). Changing highbrow taste: From snob to omnivore. American Sociological Review, 61(5), 900–907.
  • Arsel, Z., & Bean, J. (2013). Taste Regimes and Market-Mediated Practice. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(5), 899–917.
  • Atkinson, W. (2011). The context and genesis of musical tastes: Omnivorousness debunked, Bourdieu buttressed. Poetics, 39(3), 169–186.
  • Prior, N. (2011). Critique and Renewal in the Sociology of Music: Bourdieu and Beyond. Cultural Sociology, 5(1), 121–138.
  • Teil, G., & Hennion, A. (2004). Discovering quality or performing taste? A sociology of the amateur. Qualities of Food.
  • Hennion, A. (2007). Those Things That Hold Us Together: Taste and Sociology. Cultural Sociology, 1(1), 97–114.
  • Warde, A. (2014). After taste: Culture, consumption and theories of practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 14(3), 279–303.
  • Maciel, A. F., & Wallendorf, M. (2016). Taste Engineering: An Extended Consumer Model of Cultural Competence Constitution. Journal of Consumer Research, 54–21.
  • Holt, D. B. (1995). How consumers consume: A typology of consumption practices. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(1), 1–16.
  • Holt, D. B. (2002). Why Do Brands Cause Trouble? A Dialectical Theory of Consumer Culture and Branding. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(1), 70–90.
  • Shapin, S. (2012). The sciences of subjectivity. Social Studies of Science, 42(2), 170–184.

Week 5 Modernity, Postmodernity モダン、ポストモダン

Reading assignments:
  • Featherstone, M. (1999). 消費文化とポストモダニズム. (小川葉子, 川崎賢一, 池田緑). 恒星社厚生閤. 1章と2章
  • Featherstone, M. (2007). Consumer culture and postmodernism (2nd ed.). SAGE. Chapter 1 and 2
References:
Modernism and postmodernsm
  • Habermas, J. (2000). 近代未完のプロジェクト. (三島). 岩波書店. 「I 近代未完のプロジェクト」
  • Habermas, J. (1997). Modernity: An unfinished project. In Habermas and the unfinished project of modernity (pp. 38–55). MIT Press.
  • Jameson, F. (2006). カルチュラル・ターン. (合庭惇, 河野真太郎, 秦邦生). 作品社. 第1章、第2章
  • Jameson, F. (1998). The cultural turn. Verso. Chapter 1 and 2
  • Habermas, J. (2000). 近代未完のプロジェクト. (三島). 岩波書店. 「I 近代未完のプロジェクト」
  • Habermas, J. (1997). Modernity: An unfinished project. In Habermas and the unfinished project of modernity (pp. 38–55). MIT Press.
  • Eagleton, T. (1998). ポストモダニズムの幻想. (典. 森田). 大月書店.
  • Eagleton, T. (2013). The Illusions of Postmodernism. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Lyotard, J.-F. (1986). ポスト・モダンの条件. (小林). 水声社.
  • Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The postmodern condition. University of Minnesota Press.
  • Foucault, M. (1974). 言葉と物. (渡辺一民佐々木明). 新潮社.
  • Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things. Routledge.
  • Debord, G. (2003). スペクタクルの社会. (誠. 木下). ちくま学芸文庫. I「完成した分離」 II「スペクタクルとしての商品」
  • Debord, G. (2002). The society of the spectacle. Hobgoblin Press.
  • Latour, B. (2008). 虚構の「近代」. 新評論.
  • Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern. Harvard University Press.
  • Bauman, Z. (2001). リキッド・モダニティ. (森田典正). 大月書店.
  • Bauman, Z. (2010). Liquid modernity. Polity.
  • Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the Societies of Control. October, 59, 3–7.
  • Guillen, M. F. (1997). Scientific Management's Lost Aesthetic: Architecture, Organization, and the Taylorized Beauty of the Mechanical. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 682.
  • Jones, C., Maoret, M., Massa, F. G., & Svejenova, S. (2012). Rebels with a Cause: Formation, Contestation, and Expansion of the De Novo Category “Modern Architecture,” 1870–1975. Organization Science, 23(6), 1523–1545.
  • Anderson, P. (2002). ポストモダニティの起源. (史. 角田, 政. 浅見, & 人. 田中). こぶし書房. 第2章、第3章、第4章
  • Anderson, P. (1998). The origins of postmodernity. Verso. Chapters 2, 3 and 4
  • Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2013). 資本主義の新たな精神 下. ナカニシヤ出版. 第7章「芸術家的批判の試練」
  • Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. Verso. Chapter 7
Consumer culture
  • Baudrillard, J. (1995). 消費社会の神話と構造. (今西仁司塚原). 紀伊国屋書店.
  • Baudrillard, J. (1998). The consumer society. SAGE.
  • Baudrillard, J. (2008). シミュラークルとシミュレーション. (竹原). 法政大学出版局.
  • Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and simulation. University of Michigan Press.
  • Gay, du, P. (1996). Consumption and Identity at Work. London: SAGE.
Within organization studies
  • Cooper, R., & Burrell, G. (1988). Modernism, Postmodernism and Organizational Analysis: An Introduction. Organization Studies, 9(1), 91–112.
  • Smircich, L., & Calás, M. B. (1987). Organizational culture: A critical assessment. In F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H. Roberts, & L. W. Porter, Handbook of organizational communication (pp. 228–263). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Calás, M. B., & Smircich, L. (1999). Past Postmodernism? Reflections and Tentative Directions. The Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 649–671.
  • Kilduff, M., & Mehra, A. (1997). Postmodernism and Organizational Research. The Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 453–481.
  • Astley, W. G., & Zammuto, R. F. (1992). Organization science, managers, and language games. Organization Science, 3(4), 443–460.
  • Donaldson, L. (1992). The Weick stuff: Managing beyond games. Organization Science, 3(4), 461–466.
  • Weiss, R. M. (2000). Taking Science out of Organization Science: How Would Postmodernism Reconstruct the Analysis of Organizations? Organization Science, 11(6), 709–731.
  • Deetz, S. (2000). Putting the Community into Organizational Science: Exploring the Construction of Knowledge Claims. Organization Science, 11(6), 732–738.
  • Schultz, M. (2005). Postmodern Pictures of Culture. International Studies of Management and Organization, 22(2), 15–35.

Week 6 アート、モダニズム、ポストモダニズム Art, Modernism, Postmodernism

Reading assignments:
  • Greenberg, C. (1982). Modernist painting. Modern Art and Modernism: A Critical Anthology, 5(6).
  • Greenberg, C. (2005). グリーンバーグ批評選集. 勁草書房.
  • Owens, C. (2011b). The Allegorical Impulse: Toward a Theory of Postmodernism. In Beyond Recognition (pp. 52–69). University of California Press.
Arts
  • Greenberg, C. (1982). Modernist painting. Modern Art and Modernism: A Critical Anthology, 5(6).
  • Greenberg, C. (1939). Avant-garde and Kitsch. Partisan Review.
  • Greenberg, C. (2005). グリーンバーグ批評選集. 勁草書房.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1995). 芸術の規則 I. (石井). 藤原書店.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1996). The rules of art. Polity.
  • Reckwitz, A. (2017). The Invention of Creativity. London: Polity.
  • Benjamin, W. (1999). 複製技術時代の芸術. (佐々木基一). 晶文社.
  • Benjamin, W. (2008). The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Penguin UK.
  • Krauss, R. (1979). Sculpture in the expanded field. October, 8, 31-44.
  • Owens, C. (1983). The Discourse of Others: Feminists and Postmodernism. In The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture (pp. 57–82). Port Townsend: Bay Press.
  • Owens, C. (2011a). Earthwords. In Beyond Recognition (pp. 40–51). University of California Press.
  • Owens, C. (2011b). The Allegorical Impulse: Toward a Theory of Postmodernism. In Beyond Recognition (pp. 52–69). University of California Press.
  • Foster, H. (1996). The Return of the Real. MIT Press.
  • Taylor, C. (1970). ヘーゲルと近代社会. (義. 渡辺). 岩波書店.
  • Taylor, C. (2015). Hegel and Modern Society. Cambridge University Press.
  • Taylor, C. (2010). 自我の源泉. (潔. 下川, 徹. 桜井, & 智. 田中). 名古屋大学出版会.
  • Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self: The making of the modern identity. Harvard University Press.
  • Benjamin, W. (1999a). ドイツ悲劇の根源 上下. 筑摩書房.
  • Benjamin, W. (2003). The Origin of German Tragic Drama (J. Osborne, Trans.). Verso.

Week 7 Sensemaking and organizing センスメイキング、組織化

Reading assignments:
  • Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421.
  • Sandberg, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2014). Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(S1), S6–S32.
References:
  • Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. K. (2014). Sensemaking in Organizations:. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57–125.
  • Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421.
  • Weick, K. E. (2012). Organized sensemaking: A commentary on processes of interpretive work. Human Relations, 65(1), 141–153.
  • Brown, A. D., Colville, I., & Pye, A. (2015). Making Sense of Sensemaking in Organization Studies. Organization Studies, 36(2), 265–277.
  • Brown, A. D., Stacey, P., & Nandhakumar, J. (2008). Making sense of sensemaking narratives. Human Relations, 61(8), 1035–1062.
  • Holt, R., & Cornelissen, J. (2013). Sensemaking revisited. Management Learning, 45(5), 525–539.
  • Maclean, M., Harvey, C., & Chia, R. (2012). Sensemaking, storytelling and the legitimization of elite business careers. Human Relations, 65(1), 17–40.
  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Gephart, R. P., Topal, C., & Zhang, Z. (2010). Future‐oriented Sensemaking: Temporalities and Institutional Legitimation. In Process, Sensemaking, and Organizing (pp. 275–312). Oxford University Press.
  • Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sensemaking and Sensegiving in Strategic Change Initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433–448.
  • Cunliffe, A., & Coupland, C. (2012). From hero to villain to hero: Making experience sensible through embodied narrative sensemaking. Human Relations, 65(1), 63–88.
  • Cornelissen, J. P., Mantere, S., & Vaara, E. (2014). The Contraction of Meaning: The Combined Effect of Communication, Emotions, and Materiality on Sensemaking in the Stockwell Shooting. Journal of Management Studies, 51(5), 699–736.
  • Czarniawska, B. (1997). Narrating the Organization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Czarniawska, B. (2008). A theory of organizing. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. K. (2014). Sensemaking in Organizations:. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57–125.
  • Maitlis, S. (2005). The social processes of organizational sensemaking. The Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 21–49.
  • Maitlis, S., & Sonenshein, S. (2010). Sensemaking in Crisis and Change: Inspiration and Insights From Weick (1988). Journal of Management Studies, 47(3), 551–580.
  • Hultin, L., & Mähring, M. (2016). How practice makessense in healthcare operations: Studying sensemaking as performative, material-discursive practice. Human Relations, 70(5), 566–593.
  • Introna, L. D. (2018). On the Making of Sense in Sensemaking: Decentred Sensemaking in the Meshwork of Life. Organization Studies, 26(2), 017084061876557–20.

Week 8 Text, narrative, polyphony テクスト、ナラティブ、ポリフォニー

Reading assignments:
  • Boje, D. M. (1995). ‘Stories of the Storytelling Organization: A Postmodern Analysis of Disney As “Tamara-Land”’. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 997–1035.
  • Martin, J. (1990). Deconstructing organizational taboos: The suppression of gender conflict in organizations. Organization Science, 1(4), 339–359.
References:
Discourse
  • Phillips, N., & Oswick, C. (2012). Organizational Discourse: Domains, Debates, and Directions. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 435–481.
  • Alvesson, M., & Karreman, D. (2000). Varieties of Discourse: On the Study of Organizations through Discourse Analysis. Human Relations, 53(9), 1125–1149.
  • Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2011). Decolonializing discourse: Critical reflections on organizational discourse analysis. Human Relations, 64(9), 1121–1146.
  • Mumby, D. K. (2011). What’s cooking in organizational discourse studies? A response to Alvesson and Kärreman: Human Relations.
  • Fairclough, N. (2005). Peripheral Vision: Discourse Analysis in Organization Studies: The Case for Critical Realism. Organization Studies, 26(6), 915–939.
  • 清宮徹. (2019). 組織のディスコースとコミュニケーション. 同文舘出版.
  • Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Whose text? Whose context? Discourse & Society, 8(2), 165–187.
  • Wetherell, M. (1998). Positioning and interpretative repertoires: Conversation analysis and post-structuralism in dialogue. Discourse & Society, 9(3), 387–412.
  • Schegloff, E. A. (1998). Reply to Wetherell. Discourse & Society, 9(3), 413–416.
  • Billig, M. (1999). Critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis: An exchange between Michael Billig and Emanuel A. Schegloff. Discourse and Society.
  • Schegloff, E. A. (1999). Schegloff’s texts’ asBillig’s data’: A critical reply. Discourse & Society.
  • Billig, M. (1999). Conversation analysis and the claims of naivety. Discourse & Society.
  • Schegloff, E. A. (1999). Naivete vs sophistication or discipline vs self-indulgence: A rejoinder to Billig. Discourse & Society.
Text
  • Barthes, R. (1979). 作者の死. In 物語の構造分析. (花輪). みすず書房.
  • Barthes, R. (1977). Image music text. FontanaPress. Chapter The Death of the Author
  • Allen, G. (2002). 間テクスト性: 文学・文化研究の新展開. (孟. 森田). 研究社.
  • Allen, G. (2011). Intertextuality. Routledge.
  • Barthes, R. (1977). Image Music Text. (S. Heath). London: FontanaPress.
  • Kristeva, J. (1991). 詩的言語の革命. (原田邦夫). 勁草書房.
  • Kristeva, J. (1974). La Révolution du langage poétique. Editions du Seuil.
Narratives
  • Boje, D. M. (2001). Narrative Methods for Organizational & Communication Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
  • Hazen, M. A. (1993). Towards polyphonic organization. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 6(5), 15–26.
  • Shotter, J. (2005). ‘Understanding Process From Within: An Argument for “Withness-”Thinking’. Organization Studies, 27, 585–604.
  • Keenoy, T., & Oswick, C. (2004). Organizing Textscapes. Organization Studies, 25(1), 135–142.
  • Fairclough, N. (2012). ディスコースを分析する. くろしお出版.
  • Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse. Routledge.
  • Irwin, W. (2004). Against Intertextuality. Philosophy and Literature, 28(2), 227–242.
  • Martin, J. (1990). Deconstructing organizational taboos: The suppression of gender conflict in organizations. Organization Science, 1(4), 339–359.
  • Martin, J., Feldman, M. S., Hatch, M. J., & Sitkin, S. B. (1983). The Uniqueness Paradox in Organizational Stories. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3), 438.
  • Yamauchi, Y. (2015). Reflexive Organizing for Knowledge Sharing: An Ethnomethodological Study of Service Technicians. Journal of Management Studies, 52(6), 742–765.
  • 清宮徹. (2019). 組織のディスコースとコミュニケーション. 同文舘出版.
Polyphony
  • Rhodes, C. (2001). ‘D'oh the simpsons, popular culture, and the organizational carnival’. Journal of Management Inquiry, 10, 374–383.
  • Islam, G., Zyphur, M. J., and Boje, D. (2008). ‘Carnival and Spectacle in Krewe de Vieux and the Mystic Krewe of Spermes: The Mingling of Organization and Celebration’. Organization Studies, 29, 1565–1589.
  • Letiche, H. (2010). ‘Polyphony and its Other’. Organization Studies, 31, 261–277.
  • Sullivan, P., & McCarthy, J. (2008). Managing the Polyphonic Sounds of Organizational Truths. Organization Studies, 29(4), 525–541.
  • Kornberger, M., Clegg, S. R., and Carter, C. (2006). ‘Rethinking the polyphonic organization: Managing as discursive practice’. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 22, 3–30.
  • Iedema, R., Degeling, P., Braithwaite, J., & White, L. (2004). ‘It’s an Interesting Conversation I’m Hearing’: The Doctor as Manager. Organization Studies, 25(1), 15–33.

Week 9 Discourse, dispositif, power ディスコース、装置、権力

Reading assignments:
  • Raffnsøe, S., Mennicken, A., & Miller, P. (2017). The Foucault Effect in Organization Studies. Organization Studies, 38, 017084061774511–28.
References:
  • Foucault, M. (1974). 言葉と物. (渡辺一民佐々木明). 新潮社.
  • Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things. Routledge.
  • Foucault, M. (1977). 監獄の誕生—監視と処罰. (田村). 新潮社.
  • Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline & punish: The birth of the prison (2nd Vintage ed). Vintage.
  • Foucault, M. (1986). 性の歴史 Ⅰ 知への意志. (渡辺). 新潮社.
  • Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality volume 1. Vintage.
  • Foucault, M. (1986). 性の歴史 II 快楽の活用. (田村) . 新潮社.
  • Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality volume 2. Vintage.
  • Foucault, M. (1987). 性の歴史 III 自己への配慮. (田村). 新潮社.
  • Foucault, M. (1988). The history of sexuality volume 3. Vintage.
  • Foucault, M. (1988). Technologies of the Self. In Technologies of the Self (pp. 16–49). The University of Massachusetts Press.
  • Foucault, M. (1982). The Subject and Power. Critical Inquiry, 8(4), 777–795.
  • Burrell, G. (1988). Modernism, Post Modernism and Organizational Analysis 2: The Contribution of Michel Foucault. Organization Studies, 9(2), 221–235.
  • Townley, B. (1993). Foucault, Power/Knowledge, and Its Relevance for Human Resource Management. The Academy of Management Review, 18(3), 518.
  • Knights, D., & Willmott, H. (1989). Power and Subjectivity at Work: From Degradation to Subjugation in Social Relations. Sociology, 23(4), 535–558.
  • Miller, P., & O'Leary, T. (1987). Accounting and the construction of the governable person. Accounting Organizations and Society, 12(3), 235–265.
  • Munro, I. (2014). Organizational Ethics and Foucault’s “Art of Living”: Lessons from Social Movement Organizations. Organization Studies, 35(8), 1127–1148.
  • Newton, T. (1998). Theorizing Subjectivity in Organizations: The Failure of Foucauldian Studies? Organization Studies, 19(3), 415–447.
  • Raffnsøe, S., Mennicken, A., & Miller, P. (2017). The Foucault Effect in Organization Studies. Organization Studies, 38, 017084061774511–28.
  • Agamben, G. (2009). What is Apparatus? In “What Is an Apparatus?” and Other Essays. Stanford University Press.
  • Agamben, G. (2003). ホモ・サケル: 主権権力と剥き出しの生. 以文社.
  • Agamben, G. (1998). Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life (D. Heller-Roazen, Trans.; 1 edition). Stanford University Press.

Week 10 Practices and routine 実践、ルーチン

Reading assignments:
  • Nicolini, D. (2012). Practice theory, work, and organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chapter 1 Introduction
  • Schatzki, T. R. (2001). Practice mind-ed orders. In T. R. Schatzki, K. Knorr-Cetina, & E. von Savigny, The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 42–55). New York: Routledge.
References:
Practices
  • Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a Theory of Social Practices A Development in Culturalist Theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263.
  • Schatzki, T. R. (1996). Social Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Schatzki, T. R., Knorr-Cetina, K., & Savigny, von, E. (2001). The practice turn in contemporary theory. New York: Routledge.
  • Schatzki, T. R., Knorr-Cetina, K., & Savigny, von, E. (2001). The practice turn in contemporary theory. New York: Routledge. 3
  • Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. (R. Nice). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • de Certeau, M. (1987). 日常的実践のポイエティーク. (山田). 国文社. 第4章
  • de Certeau, M. (2011). The practice of everyday life. Univ of California Press.
Routines
  • Feldman, M., & Pentland, B. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94–118.
  • Feldman, M. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6), 611–629.
  • Feldman, M. S. (2016). Routines as Process Past, Present, and Future. In J. Howard-Grenville, C. Rerup, A. Langley, & H. Tsoukas, Organizational Routines (pp. 23–46). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16(6), 618–636.
  • Turner, S. F., & Rindova, V. (2012). A Balancing act: How organizations pursue consistency in routine functioning in the face of ongoing change. Organization Science, 23(1), 24–46.
  • Zbaracki, M. J., & Bergen, M. (2010). When truces collapse: A longitudinal study of price-adjustment routines. Organization Science, 21(5), 955–972.
  • Yamauchi, Y., & Hiramoto, T. (2016). Reflexivity of Routines: An Ethnomethodological Investigation of Initial Service Encounters at Sushi Bars in Tokyo. Organization Studies, 37(10), 1473–1499.

Week 11 Actor-network theory アクターネットワーク理論

Reading assignments:
  • Latour, B. (1990). Technology is Society Made Durable. The Sociological Review, 38(1_suppl), 103–131.
References:
ANT
  • Latour, B. (1986). The powers of association. The Sociological Review, 32, 264–280.
  • Latour, B. (1988). The pasteurization of france. Harvard University Press.
  • Latour, B. (2008). 虚構の「近代」. 新評論.
  • Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern. Harvard University Press.
  • Latour, B. (2007). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press, USA.
  • Latour, B. (1992). Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law, Shaping TechnologyBuilding Society Studies in Sociotechnical Change (pp. 225–258). Cambridge, MA.
  • Latour, B. (1999). On recalling ANT. In J. Law & J. Hassard, Actor Network Theory and After (Vol. 47, pp. 15–25). Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Latour, B. (2017). 近代の〈物神事実〉崇拝について. 以文社.
  • Latour, B. (2010). On the Modern Cult of the Factish Gods. Duke University Press Books.
  • Latour, B. (1999). Factures/Fractures: From the Concept of Network to the Concept of Attachment. Res: Anthropology and Aesthetics, 36, 20–31.
  • Callon, M. (2013). Qu“est-ce qu”un agencement marchand? In M. Callon, Sociologie des Agencements Marchands (pp. 325–479). Paris (北川亘太 & 須田文明訳「市場的配置とは何か [上中下]」『経済論集』2016年).
  • Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In J. Law, Power, Action and Belief (pp. 196-233). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Callon, M. (1991). Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In A Sociology of Monsters (pp. 132–161). London: Routledge.
  • Law, J. (2000). On the Subject of the Object: Narrative, Technology, and Interpellation. Configurations, 8(1), 1–29.
  • Law, J., & Hassard, J. (1999). Actor Network Theory and After. Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Law, J. (2002). Objects and spaces. Theory, Culture and Society, 19(5-6), 91–105–273.
  • Law, J. (2009). Actor network theory and material semiotics. In B. S. Turner, The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory (pp. 141–158). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
  • Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice. University of Chicago Press.
  • Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. (1989). The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. The MIT Press.
  • Czarniawska, B. (2004). On time, space, and action nets. Organization, 11(6), 773–791.
  • Bloor, D. (1999). Anti-Latour. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 30(1), 81–112.
  • Latour, B. (1999). For David Bloor… and Beyond: A Reply to David Bloor’s “Anti-Latour.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 30(1), 113–129.
  • Collins, H. M., & Yearley, S. (1992). Epistemological Chicken. In Science as Practice and Culture (pp. 301–326). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Callon, M., & Latour, B. (1992). Don't Throw the Baby Out with the Bath School! A Reply to Collins and Yearley. In Science as Practice and Culture (pp. 341–366). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Harman, G. (2009) Prince of Networks, Melbourne: Re-Press.
  • Sayes, E. (2013). Actor–Network Theory and methodology: Just what does it mean to say that nonhumans have agency? Social Studies of Science, 44(1), 134–149.

Week 12 Performativity and Agencements パフォーマティヴィティ、アセンブラージュ

Reading assignments:
  • Callon, M. (2013). Qu'est-ce qu'un agencement marchand? In M. Callon, Sociologie des Agencements Marchands (pp. 325–479). Paris (北川亘太 & 須田文明訳「市場的配置とは何か [上中下]」『経済論集』2016年).
References:
Perfomativity
  • Callon, M. (2007). What Does It Mean to Say That Economics Is Performative? In Do Economists Make Markets? (pp. 1–60). Princeton University Press.
  • Callon, M. (2005). Economic markets as calculative collective devices. Organization Studies, 26(8), 1229–1250.
  • Callon, M. (2005). Why virtualism paves the way to political impotence: A reply to Daniel Miller's critique of ‘The laws of the market’. Economic Sociology: European Electronic Newsletter.
  • Miller, D. (2002). Turning Callon the right way up. Economy and Society, 31(2), 218–233.
  • Miller, D. (2005). Reply to Michel Callon. Economic Sociology: European Electronic Newsletter.
  • MacKenzie, D., & Millo, Y. (2003). Constructing a Market, Performing Theory: The Historical Sociology of a Financial Derivatives Exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 109(1), 107–145.
  • Butler, J. (1999). ジェンダー・トラブル. (竹村和子). 青土社.
  • Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble. Routledge.
  • Butler, J. (1993). Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex (1 edition). Routledge.
  • Butler, J. (2010). Performative agency. Journal of Cultural Economy, 3(2), 147–161.
  • Gond, J.-P., Cabantous, L., Harding, N., & Learmonth, M. (2015). What Do We Mean by Performativity in Organizational and Management Theory? The Uses and Abuses of Performativity. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18(4), 440–463.
Agencement
  • Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2010). 千のプラトー.
  • Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2013). A thousand plateaus. Bloomsbury.
  • Deleuze, G. (2007). 差異と反復.
  • Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition. Columbia University Press.
  • Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2006). アンチ・オイディプス.
  • Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1983). Anti-oedipus. University of Minnesota Press.
  • DeLanda, M. (2015). 社会の新たな哲学. 人文書院.
  • DeLanda, M. (2019). A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. Bloomsbury Publishing.
  • 國分功一郎. (2013). ドゥルーズの哲学原理.
  • Callon, M. (1998). An essay on framing and overflowing: economic externalities revisited by sociology. In Laws of the markets (pp. 244–269). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Buchanan, I. (2015). Assemblage Theory and Its Discontents. Deleuze Studies, 9(3), 382–392.
  • Guattari, F. (2009). Chaosophy. Los Angeles: Semiotext(e). Balance-Sheet for "Desiring-Machines"
  • Linstead, S., & Thanem, T. (2016). Multiplicity, Virtuality and Organization: The Contribution of Gilles Deleuze. Organization Studies, 28(10), 1483–1501.
  • Sørensen, B. M. (2005). Immaculate Defecation: Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari in Organization Theory. The Sociological Review, 53(1_suppl), 120–133.
  • Hietanen, J., & Rokka, J. (2017). Companion for the videography “Monstrous Organizing—The Dubstep Electronic Music Scene.” Organization, 25(3), 320–334.
  • Hjorth, D. (2014). Entrepreneuring as organisation-creation. Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurship and Creativity (pp. 97–121). Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Ingold, T. (2014). ラインズ―線の文化史. 左右社.
  • Ingold, T. (2016). Lines: A Brief History. Routledge.
  • Badiou, A. (1998). ドゥルーズ: 存在の喧騒. (創. 鈴木). 河出書房新社.
  • Badiou, A. (2000). Deleuze. U of Minnesota Press.
  • Massumi, B. (2002). Parables for the virtual: Movement, affect, sensation. Durham: Duke University Press.
  • Leys, R. (2011). The Turn to Affect: A Critique. Critical Inquiry, 37(3), 434–472.
  • Deleuze, G., & Parnet, C. (2011). ディアローグ. (隆. 江川 & 靖. 増田). 河出書房新社. 第二章「英米文学の優位について」第二部
  • Deleuze, G., & Parnet, C. (2007). Dialogues II. Columbia University Press.
  • Marcus, G. E., & Saka, E. (2016). Assemblage. Theory, Culture and Society, 23(2-3), 101–106.
Agencement, dispositif and network
  • Müller, M., & Schurr, C. (2016). Assemblage thinking and actor-network theory: conjunctions, disjunctions, cross-fertilisations. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 41(3), 217–229.
  • Roberts, J. M. (2011). Poststructuralism against poststructuralism: Actor-network theory, organizations and economic markets. European Journal of Social Theory, 15(1), 35–53.
  • Law, J., & Mol, A. (2001). Situating Technoscience: An Inquiry into Spatialities. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 19(5), 609–621.
  • Latour, B. (1999). On recalling ANT. In J. Law & J. Hassard, Actor Network Theory and After (Vol. 47, pp. 15–25). Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Harman, G. (2009). Prince of Networks. Melbourne: Re-Press.
  • Legg, S. (2011). Assemblage/apparatus: using Deleuze and Foucault. Area, 43(2), 128–133.
Valuation
  • Hutter, M., & Stark, D. (2015). Pragmatist Perspectives on Valuation: An Introduction. In Moments of valuation: exploring sites of dissonance (pp. 1–12). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Lamont, M. (2012). Toward a Comparative Sociology of Valuation and Evaluation. Annual Review of Sociology, 38(1), 201–221.
  • Karpik, L. (2010). Valuing the Unique. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Muniesa, F. (2011). A Flank Movement in the Understanding of Valuation. The Sociological Review, 59(2_suppl), 24–38.
  • Vatin, F. (2013). Valuation as Evaluating and Valorizing. Valuation Studies, 1(1), 31–50.
  • Kornberger, M. (2017). The Values of Strategy: Valuation Practices, Rivalry and Strategic Agency. Organization Studies, 38(12), 1753–1773.

Week 13 Materiality, posthumanism, sociomateriality マテリアリティ、ポストヒューマニズム、社会物質性

Reading assignments:
  • Orlikowski, W., & Scott, S. V. (2013). What Happens When Evaluation Goes Online? Exploring Apparatuses of Valuation in the Travel Sector. Organization Science, 25(3), 868–891.
  • Leonardi, P. M. (2013). Theoretical foundations for the study of sociomateriality. Information and Organization, 23(2), 59–76.
References:
Posthumanism
  • Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.
  • Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning (pp. 1–542). Durham: Duke University Press.
  • Butler, J. (1993). Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex (1 edition). Routledge.
  • Suchman, L. A. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations. Cambridge University Press.
  • Ingold, T. (2017). メイキング. (遊. 金子, 友. 水野, & 耕. 小林) . 左右社.
  • Ingold, T. (2013). Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art and Architecture. Routledge.
  • Hultin, L., & Introna, L. (2018). On Receiving Asylum Seekers: Identity working as a process of material-discursive interpellation. Organization Studies, 9(1), 017084061878228–26.
  • Introna, L. D. (2018). On the Making of Sense in Sensemaking: Decentred Sensemaking in the Meshwork of Life. Organization Studies, 26(2), 017084061876557–20.
  • Harman, G. (2011). The Quadruple Object (Reprint edition). Zero Books.
  • Harman, G. (2017). 四方対象. 人文書院.
  • Shaviro, S. (2016). モノたちの宇宙. 河出書房新社.
  • Shaviro. (2014). The Universe of Things: On Speculative Realism (1 edition). University of Minnesota Press.
  • Meillassoux, Q. (2016). 有限性の後で. 人文書院.
  • Meillassoux, Q. (2009). After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency (R. Brassier, Trans.). Continuum.
Sociomateriality
  • Orlikowski, W. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435–1448.
  • Orlikowski, W., & Scott, S. V. (2008). Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 433–474.
  • Orlikowski, W., & Scott, S. V. (2013). What Happens When Evaluation Goes Online? Exploring Apparatuses of Valuation in the Travel Sector. Organization Science, 25(3), 868–891.
  • Scott, S. V., & Orlikowski, W. (2013). Sociomateriality — taking the wrong turning? A response to Mutch. Information and Organization, 23(2), 77–80.
  • Scott, S. V., & Orlikowski, W. (2014). Entanglements in Practice: Performing Anonymity Through Social Media. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 873–893.
  • Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., Galliers, R. D., Henfridsson, O., Newell, S., & Vidgen, R. (2014). The Sociomateriality of Information Systems: Current Status, Future Directions. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 809–830.
  • Mutch, A. (2013). Sociomateriality—Taking the wrong turning? Information and Organization, 23(1), 28–40.
  • Faulkner, P., & Runde, J. (2012). On sociomateriality. In P. M. Leonardi, B. A. Nardi, & J. Kallinikos (Eds.), Materiality and organizing (pp. 49–66). Oxford University Press.
  • Leonardi, P. M. (2011). When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 147–167.
  • Leonardi, P. M. (2013). Theoretical foundations for the study of sociomateriality. Information and Organization, 23(2), 59–76.
  • Leonardi, P. M., & Barley, S. R. (2008). Materiality and change: Challenges to building better theory about technology and organizing. Information and Organization, 18(3), 159–176.
  • Leonardi, P. M., & Barley, S. R. (2010). What’s Under Construction Here? Social Action, Materiality, and Power in Constructivist Studies of Technology and Organizing. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 1–51.
  • Nyberg, D. (2009). Computers, Customer Service Operatives and Cyborgs: Intra-actions in Call Centres. Organization Studies, 30(11), 1181–1199.
  • Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., Galliers, R. D., Henfridsson, O., Newell, S., & Vidgen, R. (2014). The Sociomateriality of Information Systems: Current Status, Future Directions. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 809–830.
  • Jones, M. (2014). A Matter of Life and Death: Exploring Conceptualizations of Sociomateriality in the Context of Critical Care. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 895–925.
  • Kautz, K., & Jensen, T. B. (2013). Sociomateriality at the royal court of IS: A jester’s monologue. Information and Organization, 23(1), 15–27.
  • Introna, L. D. (2013). Otherness and the Letting-be of Becoming: Or, Ethics Beyond Bifurcation. In P. R. Carlile, D. Nicolini, A. Langley, & H. Tsoukas (Eds.), How Matter Matters (pp. 260–287). Oxford University Press.
  • Introna, L. D., & Hayes, N. (2011). On sociomaterial imbrications: What plagiarism detection systems reveal and why it matters. Information and Organization, 21(2), 107–122.

Week 14 Ethnomethodology & conversation analysis

Reading assignments:
  • Yamauchi, Y. & Hiramoto, T. (forthcoming). Performative Achievement of Routine Recognizability: An Analysis of Order Taking Routines at Sushi Bars. Journal of Management Studies.
References:
  • Llewellyn, N, & Hindmarsh, J. (2013). The order problem: Inference and interaction in interactive service work. Human Relations, 66(11), 1401–1426.
  • Llewellyn, Nick. (2008). Organization in actual episodes of work: Harvey Sacks and organization studies. Organization Studies, 29(05), 763–791.
  • Llewellyn, Nick, & Hindmarsh, J. (2010). Organisation, interaction and practice. Cambridge University Press.
  • Llewellyn, Nick, & Spence, L. (2009). Practice as a members phenomenon. Organization Studies, 30(12), 1419–1439.
  • Hindmarsh, J., & Pilnick, A. (2007). Knowing bodies at work: Embodiment and ephemeral teamwork in anaesthesia. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1395–1416.
  • Llewellyn, N., & Whittle, A. (2018). Lies, defeasibility and morality-in-action: The interactional architecture of false claims in sales, telemarketing and debt collection work. Human Relations, 72(4), 834–858.
  • Llewellyn, N., & Whittle, A. (2018). Lies, defeasibility and morality-in-action: The interactional architecture of false claims in sales, telemarketing and debt collection work. Human Relations, 72(4), 834–858.
  • Yamauchi, Y, & Hiramoto, T. (2016). Reflexivity of routines: An ethnomethodological investigation of initial service encounters at sushi bars in tokyo. Organization Studies, 37(10), 1473–1499.
  • Yamauchi, Yutaka. (2015). Reflexive organizing for knowledge sharing: An ethnomethodological study of service technicians. Journal of Management Studies, 52(6), 742–765.
  • 山内裕, 平本毅, 泉博子, & 張承姫. (2014). ルーチンの達成における説明可能性: クリーニング店のオプション提案の会話分析. 組織科学, 49(2), 53–65.
  • 平本毅, & 山内裕. (2019). 認識実践の再特定化: 透析治療場面のエスノメソドロジー研究. 組織科学, 52(4), 61–72.

Week 15 Optional: Aesthetic

References:
  • Rancière, J. (2005). 不和あるいは了解なき了解―政治の哲学は可能か (松葉祥一, 大森秀臣, & 藤江成夫, Trans.). インスクリプト.
  • Rancière, J. (1999). Disagreement: Politics and philosophy. U of Minnesota Press.
  • Rancière, J. (2009). 感性的なもののパルタージュ (梶田裕, Trans.). 法政大学出版局.
  • Rancière, J. (2006). The Politics of Aesthetics (G. Rockhill, Trans.). Bloomsbury Academic.
  • Rancière, J. (2013). 解放された観客 (梶田裕, Trans.). 法政大学出版局.
  • Rancière, J. (2009). The emancipated spectator. Verso.
  • Rancière, J. (2019). 無知な教師 (梶田裕 & 堀容子, Trans.; 新装版). 法政大学出版局.
  • Rancière, J. (1991). The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation. Stanford University Press.
  • Schiller, F. (2017). 人間の美的教育について. 法政大学出版局.
  • Schiller, F. (2004). On the Aesthetic Education of Man (R. Snell, Trans.; Dover Books on Western Philosophy Edition). Dover Publications.
  • Benjamin, W. (1999a). ドイツ悲劇の根源 上下. 筑摩書房.
  • Benjamin, W. (2003). The Origin of German Tragic Drama (J. Osborne, Trans.). Verso.
  • Benjamin, W. (2000). 歴史哲学テーゼ.
  • Benjamin, W. (1968). Theses on the Philosophy of History. In H. Arendt (Ed.), & H. Zohn (Trans.), Illuminations: Essays and Reflections (pp. 253–264). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
  • Bishop, C. (2004). Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics. October, 110, 51–79.
  • Bishop, C. (2005). The social turn: Collaboration and its discontents. Artforum, 44(6), 178.
  • Bishop, C. (2012). Artificial Hells: Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship. Verso.
  • Bishop, C. (2016). 人工地獄 現代アートと観客の政治学 (大森俊克, Trans.). フィルムアート社.
  • Bourriaud, N. (1998). Relational Aesthetics. Les Presse Du Reel.