Graduate Employability as Social Suitability: Professional Competence from a Practice Theory Perspective

The article addresses the complex relationship between practice theory and actor-network theory (ANT). It closely examines the similarities and differences between the two and asks how the ANT perspective can be beneficial for practice theory. Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu, Anthony Giddens and Theodore Schatzki’s work, this study briefly identifies the theoretical and methodological standpoint of practice theory. It then turns to Bruno Latour’s ANT, discussing his methodological approach towards the social. Next, it identifies the differences between the two approaches, offering a critique of ANT from the perspective of practice theory. In the conclusion, the contribution identifies the potential of ANT approaches for practice theory at the methodological level. It argues that the methodological principles of ANT can integrate with practice theory to form what I call a ‘transitive methodology’. This analytical perspective does not locate subjectivity and agency at a single spot. Instead, it situates them in a heterogeneous network of practices and materialities.

In this essay, I explore a disagreement with my friend Theodore (Ted) Schatzki about learning. Specifically, the dispute is between views of learning presented in the (2017) book edited by Peter Grootenboer, Christine Edwards-Groves and Sarojni Choy, Practice Theory Perspectives on Pedagogy and Education: Praxis, diversity, and contestation, specifically Schatzki’s ‘Chapter 2: Practices and learning’ and Kemmis, Edwards-Groves, Lloyd, Grootenboer, Hardy and Wilkinson ‘Chapter 3: Learning as being ‘stirred in’ to practices’. Schatzki thinks practice theory can accept the ‘standard’ view of learning as the acquisition of knowledge. I aim to secure an alternative view: that practice theory offers a different conception of learning as happening in the reproduction (with variation) and transformation of practices, and the production of new practices – but the argument also leads me to conclude that learning itself is not a practice.

Abstract. Conceptualised from a practice theory perspective, "landscape" can be employed as an overarching term encompassing otherwise divergent perspectives within geographies of memory: landscape of memory can denote social practice, meaningful materiality, individual experience, and collective imaginations as constituent of localised memory. Using Theodore Schatzki's practice theory, landscapes of memory are described as a social phenomenon: practices of memory contextualise certain places as meaningful in relation to the past. In turning to small Cold War munitions bunkers, by way of example, it is demonstrated how this perspective broadens the scope of geographies of memory to include everyday practices and their relation to collective memories.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is primarily methodological. This paper aims to complement the novel sociological argument of Hendrik Vollmer’s paper on tacit coordination of accounting practices with a more familiar theory of accounting practice nexuses that has been stimulating an emerging stream of accounting research. The intention is to suggest some ways in which Vollmer’s ideas can be given traction, especially in field studies of accounting.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses Theodore Schatzki’s practice theory to explore some of the ways in which elements of tacit coordination might be researched in accounting field studies.FindingsTacit coordination can be understood as a background practice that could operate as a dispersed practice in Schatzki’s sense. A practice theory perspective on tacit coordination is suggestive of a number of ways of studying the meaningful cultural contexts as part of which accounting operates. It emphasises, in particular, the active nature of silent, tacit coordination; attending to general knowledge practical know-how, rules and teleoaffectivity as four determinants of practices as specified by Schatzki; and the materiality of coordination.Research limitations/implicationsIt has implications for field research insofar as it heightens the researcher’s awareness of tacit coordination as a potentially important set of practices and suggests a number of approaches for studying them. The main suggestions address some of the ways in which tacit coordination can be identified in field research.Originality/valueThis study reflects on the dispersed or integrated nature of tacit coordination practices in accounting.

Emotional agency navigates a world of practices

Purpose Despite the growing interest in the field of supply chain sustainability (SCS), little exploration of new theories exists. Therefore, this paper aims to introduce practice theories to SCS studies through a practice turn. Design/methodology/approach This is a conceptual paper in nature. Hence, based on theoretical arguments, the authors elaborate on how the practice turn can arise in the SCS field. Findings The theoretical elaboration is rooted in the understanding that sustainability is not limited to the materiality of environmental and social issues, as often observed. Instead, there is a need to include immaterial, emotional and intangible elements to better comprehend SCS practice. The authors argue that a continuum exists for a practice turn, including practice-based view, practice-based studies and critical practice theory. Research limitations/implications The authors provide a research agenda with a comprehensive perspective of understanding the application and implications of practice theories to SCS. Practical implications The practice turn in SCS studies can support managers to better understand their practices not only through recognizing explicit activities but also mainly by reflecting on hidden elements that affect their performance. Social implications SCS studies can better engage with grand challenges through a practice turn, which helps increase its contribution to solving social problems. Originality/value Unlike previous literature, the paper elaborates on how practice theories are powerful in supporting both scholars and practitioners in moving away from an extremely economic focus to genuinely embrace sustainability practice. In doing so, the practice turn appears as an important phase for SCS field maturity.

이 글의 목적은 반야부 경전에 나타난 공개념은 분석적으로 접근해서는 그 의미를 온전히 파악하기 어렵다는 점을 밝히는 데에 있다. 이에 대한 대안으로 이 글에서는, 공개념은 그야말로 수행론의 관점 또는 교육이론―보다 엄밀하게는 메타프락시스―의 관점에서 해석되어야 그 의미가 온전하게 드러난다는 점을 명확히 하고자 하였다. 이러한 이해에는 공의 의미가 단순히 無 또는 허무(虛無)를 가리키는 것이 아니라는 점이 전제되어 있으며, 이는 곧 空이 우리 ‘마음의 성격’과 관련된다는 점이 함의되어 있다. 이와 관련하여, 대승불교에서의 보살(菩薩)개념은 수행론과 관련하여, 우리의 마음을 관념적으로 파악할 수 없다는 점이 반영된 것임을 보이고자 하였다. 이에 대한 근거는 불교 ‘수행론의 관점’을 구체적으로 고찰하면서 마련하고자 하였으며, 이에 따르면, 보살의 수행인 ‘자리행의 과정’은 곧 ‘이타행의 확립’의 과정과 별개의 것이 아니라는 점이 확인된다.The purpose of this study is to show that the meaning of Sunya[空] in a head of Mahaprajnaparamitasutra can not be fully understood with an analytical approach. As an alternative to this, this study tries to clarify the meaning of Sunya is entirely demonstrated when it is interpreted from the perspective of practice theory or the theory of education-more precisely, metapraxis. This understanding assumes that the meaning of Sunya is not simply about nothing or nihility, which implies that Sunya is related to our ‘characteristics of mind’. Regarding this, Bodisattva in Mahayana Buddihsm reflects that our mind can not be understood ideologically when it comes to practice theory. The reason for this was to provide considering in detail ‘the perspective of practice theory’ of Buddhism. According to this, it is confirmed that the process of ‘only practice of oneself’[自利行], which is the practice of Bodisattva, is not separate from the process of ‘establishing of practice of ourselves’[利他行].

There has been a prominent trend in recent decades for theorising within the arts and social sciences to appeal to human practices as the fundamental bearers of understanding, intelligibility and meanings. This effect of this ‘practice turn’ is that the once-favoured mental entity concepts of earlier theorising (beliefs, desires, emotions and purposes) are displaced by concepts associated with human practices (embodied capacities, know-how, skills, tacit understanding and dispositions). The practice turn has a strong philosophical lineage including Hubert Dreyfus (inspired significantly by Heidegger), Alasdair MacIntyre (strongly influenced by Aristotle) and Theodore Schatzki (strongly influenced by Wittgenstein). Other philosophers influential amongst practice theorists are Dewey, Brandom and Charles Taylor. As well, leading social theorists (e.g. Bourdieu, Giddens) have also produced detailed accounts of practice.

This article outlines a theoretical understanding of competence as the inferred potential for desirable activity within a professional practice. By employing the concept of ‘teleoaffective structure’ as developed in Schatzki’s practice theory, our study investigates how notions of competent and excellent professionals are defined in two separate practices in which highly qualified professionals share formal qualifications. The study is comparative and based on a total of 39 interviews carried out in the Swedish National Police Counter-Terrorist Unit (police) and with recruiters of medical interns (doctors) in Swedish healthcare. Results indicate that, despite obvious differences between the professional groups in the study, some remarkable similarities are apparent in what are regarded as high levels of competence. Surprisingly, technical expertise was downplayed as an indicator of high levels of competence in both practices. The professional groups emphasized flexibility, drive/ambition and social competence, as well as the ability to balance between being highly capable and being humble before others, including other groups of professionals as characteristics of excellence. Based on the results, the authors discuss a ‘logic of excellence’ that can be used to describe mechanisms of competence differentiation in professional practices from a practice theory perspective.

Practice theory is a diverse and constantly evolving body of ideas regarding the nature of social action, transcending a variety of disciplines in the social sciences. This chapter traces the evolution of the practice turn, from the seminal work in The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory (Schatzki et al, 2001) to a more recent application in the field of International Relations (Pouliot, 2010; Adler and Pouliot 2011) and EU studies (Adler-Niessen, 2016). This chapter illustrates the different debates and discussions that have guided the path of practice theory towards an application within IR and EU scholarship. It particularly emphasises the importance of Raymond D. Duvall and Arjun Chowdhury’s contribution to the field, which highlights the emergence of two distinct approaches that the practice turn facilitates, namely the focus on behaviour/conduct on one hand and the discursive/linguistic on the other. While the former seems to have found greater support in the discipline of IR, this chapter argues that the ontological foundations upon which the practice turn rests allude to the utility and even necessity for a discursive practice approach. The book serves as a contribution to the linguistic approaches within the practice turn.

This short article introduces the Special Issue ‘Renewing Theories of Practice and Reappraising the Cultural’. We first discuss the ‘practice turn’ in the sociology of consumption. We introduce three lacunae that advocates have identified in contemporary theories of practice that animate the contributions of the Special Issue: around the theorisation of culture, economy and the reflexive individual. We go on to discuss the place of culture in the ‘practice turn’, and its relations to cultural sociology. We then appraise some recent attempts at resolution. Lastly, we summarise the individual contributions to the Special Issue.

This chapter offers a (different) way of thinking about the relationship between bodies and practice in professional education. It explores what it means to think the body in such circumstances, to think about the body, to draw the body into Thought. It begins by reviewing, specifically in the context of addressing the question of the body in professional practice, learning and education, what has come to be called practice theory and philosophy, understood as a loose assemblage of arguments and interests centred on practice as concept and primary organising principle for the social world. Schatzki’s work is an initial reference-point, as a key figure in the contemporary ‘practice turn’ in contemporary theory. Of particular interest here is the manner in which the body is mobilised in Schatzki’s self-described ‘residually humanist’ theory of practice, bearing in mind too his views on language and representation and his own measured, somewhat ambivalent engagement with Deleuze and Guattari. This is followed by a Deleuzian account of practice and the body, taking into account the primary question, ‘What can a body do?’. A final section is addressed specifically to the Early Years classroom, reading pedagogy, and the body-work of teaching.

Practice theories study people, materials, and intersubjective patterns of actions, understanding power as contextual and embedded. This chapter situates the practice turn in the broader International Relations (IR) landscape, presents its key contributions and challenges, and suggests future research agendas. Theoretically, practice theories are interested in logics of practice and practicality. Methodologically, they champion empirical sensitivity; normatively, they center on the human experiences of performance and resistance. The chapter identifies two distinct approaches within the practice turn: “ordering” and “disordering.” Moreover, ontological and epistemological critiques of the practice turn are addressed. I argue that practice theories are perfectly situated for studying relational negotiations of positions as well as informal and formal authority. I reiterate practice theory’s commitment to exposing power within and across social orders. I call for future research to scrutinize hidden or understudied socio-political configurations, hierarchies and global experiences more effectively. I also encourage practice-oriented explorations of bodies, emotions, materials, and technologies.

Rebound Effects in Practice: An Invitation to Consider Rebound From a Practice Theory Perspective

In this concluding chapter, we ask whether International Practice Theory has so far lived up to its promises. Some of the promises are clearly on the way to being realized, others leave us with a more mixed evaluation. Indeed, the practice turn is far from being completed. Yet, what would it imply if the practice turn is completed? What will be the status of practice theory in the future? We end in speculating about this future and outline three scenarios in which International Practice Theory will either become an ever growing and thriving trading zone, a paradigm, or disappear in the annals of International Relations theory.