Trance-forming Collective Attention: How Interactions Can Support Attentional Structures. The Case of Hypnosis in Hospitals

Annick Valette; Cyrille Mennessier; Pauline Fatien

doi:10.37725/mgmt.2023.5609

Annick Valette Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble INP, CERAG, 38000 Grenoble France
Cyrille Mennessier Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble INP, CERAG, 38000 Grenoble France
Pauline Fatien Grenoble Ecole de Management, Grenoble, France

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37725/mgmt.2023.5609

Keywords: ABV, Attention, Interactions, Structuring, Hypnosis

Abstract

How does a collective succeed in practicing the same kind of attention together? This is an essential question for organizations that need to develop a common focus of attention, but it is difficult to address because the objects are multiple and in competition with one another. The attention-based view (ABV) highlights the central role of organizational structures (roles, working spaces, social representation, etc.) in the formation of collective attention, whilst simultaneously acknowledging their limitations. Attention-based view thus encourages scholars to explore the complementary role of social interactions. The objective of this paper is to study precisely how interactions relate to structures in the formation of collective attention. To achieve this, we interviewed and observed professionals at a French university hospital over the course of 18 months. Using hypnosis techniques, the professionals sought to pay closer attention to patients’ psychological states. We conducted 52 interviews, studied six observation sequences, and participated in a number of meetings; from this research, we selected and analyzed 29 situations in which hypnosis was practiced. Our results show that whilst cognitive, political, spatiotemporal, and material structures can contribute to the sharing of a collective focus of attention, they are in themselves not sufficient and at times even hinder such sharing. When structures enable, which is to say, when they facilitate sharing, interactions can complete or strengthen them to compensate for their insufficiency. When structures hinder, interactions can play a correctional role. By showing that structures do not act alone but are supported by social interactions that act either alongside or upon them, our research helps to expand the ABV model and contribute to better integrating structures and interactions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aubineau, L. H., Vandromme, L. & Le Driant, B. (2015). L’attention conjointe, quarante ans d’évaluations et de recherches de modélisations. L’Année Psychologique, 115(1), 141–174. doi: 10.3917/anpsy.151.0141

Barley, S. R. & Tolbert, P. S. (1997). Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the links between action and institution. Organization Studies, 18(1), 93–117. doi: 10.1177/017084069701800106

Barnett, M. L. (2008). An attention-based view of real options reasoning. The Academy of Management Review, 33(3), 606–628. doi: 10.2307/20159427

Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge University Press.

Boltanski, L. (2012). Énigmes et complots. Une enquête à propos d’enquêtes. Gallimard.

Cannon-Bowers, J. A. & Salas, E. (2001). Reflections on shared cognition. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 195–202. doi: 10.1002/job.82

Cicourel, A. (1987). Cognitive and organizational aspects of medical diagnostic reasoning. Discourse Processes, 10, 347–367. doi: 10.1080/01638538709544682

Cicourel, A. (1994). La cognition distribuée dans le diagnostic médical. Sociologie du Travail, 36(4), 427–449. doi: 10.3917/puf.grosj.1999.01.0219

Citton, Y. (2016). Attention collective et vigilance médiatique. Intellectica. Revue de l’Association pour la Recherche Cognitive, 66(2), 61–180. doi: 10.3406/intel.2016.1823

Crilly, D. & Sloan, P. (2014). Autonomy or control? Organizational architecture and corporate attention to stakeholders. Organization Science, 25(2), 339–355. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2013.0849

Dany, F., Louvel, L. & Valette, A. (2011). Academic careers: The limits of the ‘boundaryless approach’ and the power of promotion scripts. Human Relations, 64(7), 971–996. doi: 10.1177/0018726710393537

Denis, J.-L., Lamothe, L. & Langley, A. (2001). The dynamics of collective leadership and strategic change in pluralistic organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 809–837. doi: 10.2307/3069417

Dewey, J. (1993). Logique : La théorie de l’enquête. PUF.

Dutton, J. E. & Ashford, S. J. (1993). Selling issues to top management. The Academy of Management Review, 18(3), 397–428. doi: 10.2307/258903

Feldman, M. S. & Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94–118. doi: 10.2307/3556620

Gagnon, J. H. (1973). Scripts and the coordination of sexual conduct. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 21, 27–59. doi: 10.4000/lectures.826

Gebauer, H. (2009). An attention-based view on service orientation in the business strategy of manufacturing companies. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(1), 79–98. doi: 10.1108/02683940910922555

Gherardi, S. & Rodeschini, G. (2016). Caring as a collective knowledgeable doing: About concern and being concerned. Management Learning, 47(3), 266–284. doi: 10.1177%2F1350507615610030

Gioia, D. A. & Poole, P. (1984). Scripts in organizational behaviour. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 449–459. doi: 10.2307/258285

Girin, J. (1990). L’analyse empirique des situations de gestion : Eléments de théorie et de méthodes. In A.-C. Martinet (Ed.), Epistémologies et sciences de gestion (pp. 141–181). Economica.

Girin, J. (2011). Empirical analysis of management situations: Elements of theory and method. European Management Review, 8, 197–212. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-4762.2011.01022.x

Goffman, E. (1983). The interaction order. American Sociological Review, 48(1), 1–17. doi: 10.2307/2095141

Grover, S. L. (2014). Unraveling respect in organization studies. Human Relations, 67(1), 27–51. doi: 10.1177%2F0018726713484944

Harris, S. G. (1994). Organizational culture and individual sensemaking: A schema-based perspective. Organization Science, 5(3), 309–321. doi: 10.1287/orsc.5.3.309

Holm, D. B., Drogendijk, R. & ul Haq, H. (2020). An attention-based view on managing information processing channels in organizations. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 36(2), 101–106. doi: 10.1016/j.scaman.2020.101106

Hutchins, E. (1994). Comment le ‘cockpit’ se souvient de ses vitesses. Sociologie du Travail, 36(4), 427–449. doi: 10.3406/sotra.1994.2190

Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. MIT Press.

Joseph, J. & Wilson, A. J. (2018). The growth of the firm: An attention-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 39(6), 1779–1800. doi: 10.1002/smj.2715

Kolbe, M., Grote, G., Waller, M. J., Wacker, J. et al. (2014). Monitoring and talking to the room: Autochthonous coordination patterns in team interaction and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(6), 1254–1267. doi: 10.1037/a0037877

Laszczuk, A. & Mayer, J. C. (2020). Unpacking business model innovation through an attention-based view. M@n@gement, 23(1), 38–60. doi: 10.37725/mgmt.v23.4426

Levinthal, D. & Rerup, C. (2006). Bridging mindful and less-mindful perspectives on organizational learning. Organization Science, 17(4), 502–513. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1060.0197

March, J. G. & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25. doi: 10.2307/2392088

March, J. G. & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. Wiley.

Mayer, J. (2017). De l’attention au risque: une perspective attentionnelle de la construction sociale du risque par les organisations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Paris Sciences and Lettres, Paris.

Mayer, J. C. (2016). Influencer l’attention des décideurs : Les pratiques d’‘issue-selling’ des risk managers. Revue Française de Gestion, 2(255), 75–88. doi: 10.3166/rfg.2016.00023

Ocasio, W. (1997). Towards an attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18(1), 187–206. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199707)18:1+<187::AID-SMJ936>3.0.CO;2-K

Ocasio, W. (2011). Attention to attention. Organization Science, 22(5), 1286–1296. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0602

Ocasio, W. (2012). Situated attention, loose and tight coupling, and the garbage can model. In A. Lomi & J. R. Harrison (Eds.), The garbage can model of organizational choice: Looking forward at forty (research in the sociology of organizations, Vol. 36) (pp. 293–317). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Ocasio, W. & Joseph, J. (2018). The attention-based view of great strategies. Strategy Science, 3(1), 289–294. doi: 10.1287/stsc.2017.0042

Ocasio, W., Joseph, J., Laureiro-Martinez, D., Nigam, A. et al. (2021). Call for papers: Special issue of Strategic Organization: Research frontiers on the attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Organization, 19(1), 176–180. doi: 10.1177%2F1476127020985095

Ocasio, W., Laamanen, T. & Vaara, E. (2018). Communication and attention dynamics: An attention-based view of strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 39(1), 155–167. doi: 10.1002/smj.2702

Ocasio, W. & Wohlgezogen, F. (2010). Attention and control. In S. Sitkin, L. Cardinal & K. Bijlsma-Frankema (Eds), Control in organizations: New directions for research (pp. 191–221). Cambridge University Press.

Orvain, J. (2014). Le Qui-Vive organisationnel : Une forme de structuration du lien attention-action. M@n@gement, 17(5), 346. doi: 10.3917/MANA.175.0346

Pascuci, L., Meyer, V., Nogueira, E. & Forte, L. (2017). Humanization in a hospital: A change process integrating individual, organizational and social dimensions. Journal of Health Management, 19(2), 1–20. doi: 10.1177%2F0972063417699668

Paugam, S. (2010). L’enquête sociologique. PUF.

Rerup, C. (2009). Attentional triangulation: Learning from unexpected rare crises. Organization Science, 20(5), 876–893. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1090.0467

Rogers, K. M. & Ashforth, B. E. (2017). Respect in organizations: Feeling valued as ‘We’ and ‘Me’. Journal of Management, 43(5), 1578–1608. doi: 10.1177/0149206314557159

Schank, R. C. & Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Scheytt, S. K., Sahlin-Andersson, K. & Power, M. (2006). Introduction: Organizations, risk and regulation. Journal of Management Studies, 43(6), 1331–1337. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00646.x

Seo, M. G. & Creed, W. E. (2002). Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 222–247. doi: 10.2307/4134353

Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organization. The Free Press.

Soderstrom, B. & Weber, K. (2020). Organizational structure from interaction: Evidence from corporate sustainability efforts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 65(1), 226–271. doi: 10.1177%2F0001839219836670

Stevens, R., Moray, N., Brunee, J. L. & Clarysse, B. (2015). Attention allocation to multiple goals: The case of for-profit social enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 1006–1016. doi: 10.1002/smj.2265

Tillement, S., Cholez, C. & Reverdy, T. (2009). Assessing organizational resilience: An interactionist approach. M@n@gement, 4(12), 230–264. doi: 10.3917/mana.124.0230

Théron, C. & Cabantous, L. (2018). Attention as a local performance: Towards a practice-based view of attention in organizations. Paper presented at 2018 AIMS Conference, Montpellier, France.

Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W. C. & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure and process. Oxford University Press.

Vogus, T. & Welbourne, T. (2003). Structuring for high reliability: HR practices and mindful processes in reliability-seeking organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 877–903. doi: 10.1002/job.221

Vuori, T. O. & Huy, Q. N. (2016). Distributed attention and shared emotions in the innovation process. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(1), 9–51. doi: 10.1177/0001839215606951

Weick, K. E. (1996). Enactment and the boundaryless career: Organizing as we work. In M. B. Arthur & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organization’s era (pp. 40–57). Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1108/CDI-05-2014-0068

Weick, K. E. (2003). Enacting an environment: The infrastructure of organizing. In R. Westwoodet & S. Clegg (Eds.), Debating organization: Point-counterpoint in organization studies (pp. 184–194). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Weick, K. E. (2009). Making sense of the organization: The impermanent organization (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons.

Weick, K. E. & Roberts, K. G. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 357–338. doi: 10.2307/2393372

Weick, K. E. & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2003). Hospitals as cultures of entrapment: A re-analysis of the Bristol Royal Infirmary. California Management Review, 45(2), 73–84. doi: 10.2307%2F41166166

Weick, K. E. & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2006). Mindfulness and the quality of organizational attention. Organization Science, 17(4), 514–524. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1060.0196