A sense of spacing : Toward a diffractive reading of organizational space

This is a sel -a chi ed e sion o an o iginal a icle. This e sion may di e om he o iginal in pagina ion and ypog aphic de ails. Au ho (s): Ti le: Yea : Ve sion: Copy igh : Righ s: Righ s u l: Please ci e he o iginal e sion: CC BY 4.0 h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/ A sense o spacing : Towa d a di ac i e eading o o ganiza ional space © 2022 he Au ho s Published e sion Kuismin, A i Kuismin, A. (2022). A sense o spacing : Towa d a di ac i e eading o o ganiza ional space. Managemen Lea ning, 53(4), 718-733. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/13505076221100923 2022 h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/13505076221100923 Managemen Lea ning 1 –16 © The Au ho (s) 2022 A icle euse guidelines: sagepub.com/jou nals-pe missions DOI: 10.1177/13505076221100923 jou nals.sagepub.com/home/mlq A sense o spacing: Towa d a di ac i e eading o o ganiza ional space A i Kuismin Uni e si y o Jy äskylä, Finland Abs ac This a icle explo es how a di ac i e me hodology can en ich esea ch on o ganiza ional space and he senses. Th ough he c ea ion o in e e ences, a di ac i e me hodology di ec s a en ion o how di e ences in sensing a e c ea ed in he ongoing p oduc ion o space and wha he e ec s o hese a e. By using examples om an e hnog aphic s udy o he Hub, a uni e si y-based en ep eneu ship space designed o in oke posi i e “buzz”, he a icle illus a es how a di ac i e me hodology allows o he explo a ion o he senso y design o space and how i go e ns he possibili ies o sensing among pa icipan s. The a icle con ibu es o o ganiza ional esea ch by demons a ing how a di ac i e me hodology can be u ilized o explo e sensing as a spa ial, uns able achie emen and by highligh ing how di e ences in he possibili ies o sensing can be an impo an analy ical s a ing poin . Keywo ds Di ac ion, en ep eneu ial hub, in a-ac ion, me hodology, senses, space In oduc ion Resea che s a e paying mo e a en ion o how space in luences o ganiza ional p ocesses, such as lea ning, con ol, and leade ship (e.g. Beyes and Hol , 2020; S ephenson e al., 2020). S udies sug- ges ha space wo ks h ough bodily senses by e oking a ec i e esponses (Michels and S eyae , 2017), eelings (Siebe e al., 2017), and unde s andings o o ganiza ional eali y (Tyle and Cohen, 2010). The wo kings o space a e shaped by a ange o s imuli such as isual (de Vaujany and Vaas , 2016), audi o y (B own e al., 2020), and ol ac o y (Riach and Wa en, 2015) cues ha a chi ec u e and (senso y) design seek o modi y o gene a e speci ic expe iences and ac ions (Dale and Bu ell, 2008; De Molli e al., 2020; Jø gensen and Hol , 2019). In examining he ela ionship be ween senses and space, ecen s udies ha e mo ed owa d ela ional and pe o ma i e on o- epis emologies (Ashc a e al., 2009; Beyes and Hol , 2020; Beyes and S eyae , 2012; Cnossen and Benche ki, 2019). These s udies ocus on he ma e ial-discu si e p oduc ion o space (Knox Co esponding au ho : A i Kuismin, Depa men o Language and Communica ion S udies, Uni e si y o Jy äskylä, PO Box 35, 40014 Jy äskylä, Finland. Email: [email p o ec ed] 1100923MLQ0010.1177/13505076221100923Managemen Lea ningKuismin esea ch-a icle2022 Special Issue: The Senses in Managemen Resea ch and Educa ion 2 Managemen Lea ning 00(0) e al., 2015; Ra ne , 2020) as an ongoing “spacing” (Beyes and S eyae , 2012). They, especially, in i e us o conside o ganiza ional space and he possibili ies o sensing as en angled and eme gen . In esponse o his in i a ion, esea che s ha e employed inno a i e me hodological app oaches, including non- ep esen a ional esea ch (Beyes and S eyae , 2012), hy hmanalysis (Nash, 2020), ideo-based me hods (Bes and Hindma sh, 2019; Mengis e al., 2018), and di e en p ac ices o walking (Beyes and S eyae , 2013; Michels e al., 2020; Nash, 2018). These app oaches highligh he ac i e in luence o schola ly ieldwo k, analysis, and w i ing echniques (Pe ani, 2019) oge he wi h “ou own a ec i e capaci ies as esea che s” (Michels and S eyae , 2017: 88) on how he ela ionship be ween senses and space becomes a ailable o unde s anding. Exis ing li e a u e, howe e , does no , adequa ely accoun o how di e ences in he possibili ies o sensing ge made in he ongoing p oduc ion o o ganiza ional space and wha he e ec s o hese di e ences a e. By such di e ences, I e e o si ua ionally speci ic cha ac e is ics o pa icula i ies (Dale and La ham, 2015) ha highligh “unac ualized” o “disabled” possibili ies o sensing. In his a icle, I espond o his lacuna by d awing on di ac i e me hodologies (Ba ad, 2007; Ha away, 1997) ha ha e gained g owing a en ion in o ganiza ional s udies (e.g. Da ies and Riach, 2018; Kee e s and T elea en, 2011; Mengis and Nicolini, 2021). The e m di ac ion comes om physics and e e s o “ he way wa es combine when hey o e lap” (Ba ad, 2007: 28) o gene a e new pa e ns. A di - ac i e me hodology can be used o build new unde s andings abou he objec o s udy by c ea - ing di e ences, o example, by eading a ious ex s h ough one ano he , and by conside ing he e ec s o hese di e ences. On his basis, I sugges ha a di ac i e me hodology can help us examine and be e unde - s and sensing as a spa ial and uns able achie emen , as i di ec s a en ion o di e ences in how he possibili ies o sensing1 ma e ialize. This means di e ences in how he bodies sensing and sensed a e cons i u ed (c. ., Manning, 2009; Th i , 2008), including he body o he esea che . Examining he e ec s o hese di e ences is impo an o u he p oblema ize he powe ul, ye unp edic able o ces ha wo k o go e n he possibili ies o sensing in o ganiza ional spaces, including spa ial design (e.g. Jø gensen and Hol , 2019; Michels and S eyae , 2017). A di ac i e app oach can u he gene a e an unde s anding o new and “s ange” (Beyes and S eyae , 2013) ways o sens- ing. To illus a e he po en ial o a di ac i e me hodology, I will sha e an example om an e hno- g aphic s udy o a uni e si y-based en ep eneu ship hub ( he Hub), whe e signi ican a en ion was placed on designing he senso y expe ience o he pa icipan s. The a icle is s uc u ed as ollows. To si ua e my di ac i e app oach in ela ion o he p e ious esea ch, I will i s p o ide a b ie o e iew o how space has been app oached as a senso y phe- nomenon in o ganiza ional s udies. I will highligh how di e en unde s andings o sense and sens- ing o space unde pin p e ious esea ch app oaches in pa icula . Agains his backg ound, I will a icula e a di ac i e app oach as an ex ension o s udies ha acknowledge sensing as a ela ional achie emen . Building on he e hnog aphic s udy o he en ep eneu ship hub, I will p o ide an empi ical illus a ion o my di ac i e app oach, discuss i in ela ion o da a collec ion and analy- sis, and p o ide a di ac i e eading o he hub as an o ganiza ional space. Finally, I will discuss he con ibu ions and encou age esea che s in e es ed in space o di ac (as opposed o e lec ). Sensing o ganiza ional space Schola s ha e adop ed a ious heo e ical and me hodological app oaches o examine how space a ec s o ganiza ional p ocesses h ough senso y expe ience. While hese app oaches o e lap sig- ni ican ly, o example, in e ms o da a collec ion me hods, hey a e g ounded in a he di e en Kuismin 3 iews o wha is sensed, and how, in o ganiza ional space. Thus, hey make isible how esea ch app oaches pe o m senses in pa icula ways. Physiological and psychological e ec s We can i s iden i y app oaches ha iew he senses as physiological and psychological e ec s. Roo ed in en i onmen al psychology and e gonomics (Da is e al., 2011; Sunds om and Sunds om, 1986), hese s udies place pa icula emphasis on how indi iduals encoun e and in e - ac wi h an o ganiza ion’s physical en i onmen , including a ious senso y s imuli, and how his a ec s hei emo ional o beha io al esponses (Da is e al., 2011). Wha b ings many o hese s udies oge he is a gene al in e es in e ealing connec ions be ween speci ic spa ial a ange- men s and speci ic employee esponses. To illus a e, he classical Haw ho ne s udies conduc ed in he 1920s ocused on he impac o physical se up on he pe o mance o employees (Roe hlisbe ge F i z and William, 1939). Mo e ecen s udies explo e he impac o excessi e noise on employees’ well-being and p o- duc i i y (Da is, 1984; Elsbach and P a , 2007) and he e ec s o ligh ing, empe a u e, o ice déco , and physical a i ac s on hei pe o mance (Da is, 1984; Elsbach and P a , 2007). Pa icula a en ion is paid o senso y s imuli in open-plan o ices (Elsbach and P a , 2007; Hedge, 1982; Oldham and B ass, 1979), o example, wi h ega d o s ess among employees (Da is e al., 2011). In hei s udy, Oldham e al. (1995) used a quasi-expe imen al esea ch design o examine he ela- ionship be ween s e eo headse use and employee wo k esponses. The s udy e eals how employ- ees wo king in he s e eo condi ion exhibi “signi ican imp o emen s in pe o mance, u no e in en ions, o ganiza ion sa is ac ion, mood s a es, and o he esponses” (p. 547). In u n, G ajewski (1993) uses he Space Syn ax model o analyze employees’ esponses o he in e io layou o he Scandina ian Ai lines Sys em’s (SAS) head o ice. O e all, hese s udies highligh space as a sen- so y- ich en i onmen ha can be modi ied o gene a e ce ain beha io s and emo ional s a es. These s udies a e, hus, unde pinned by an unde s anding o he senses as physiological and psy- chological e ec s. Me hodologically, hese s udies make use o expe imen s (Oldham e al., 1995), su eys, and in e iews (Oldham and B ass, 1979; Sunds om e al., 1982) in ways ha minimize he in luence o he esea che ’s own pa icipa ion and e ec . Resea che s, o example, employ ma e -o - ac desc ip ions o he physical en i onmen o beha io al changes hey obse e. Da is (1984) w i es ha he “[p]hysical s uc u e, physical s imuli, and symbolic a i ac s can be desc ibed wi h con- side able accu acy [and] [ ]hese aspec s o he se ing can e en be pho og aphed” (pp. 281–282). Mo e ecen s udies, howe e , emphasize ha he physiological and psychological e ec s in ol e mul iple and complex elemen s such as hea s ess and he need o p i acy ha need o be exam- ined wi h pa icula me hodological echniques (Elsbach, 2003; Elsbach and P a , 2007). Meaning-making When he senso y expe ience o space is ead h ough an in e p e a i e epis emological lens, he ocus shi s o how people cons uc and nego ia e i s social meaning. This gi es ise o an unde - s anding o he senses as meaning-making. F om his pe spec i e, esea che s ocus on he in e ac- ions, uses o language, and embodied knowing h ough which people make sense o spa ial senso y expe ience (Ma in, 2002; Ropo e al., 2015; Ropo and Höykinpu o, 2017; Taylo and Spice , 2007; Van Ma ewijk, 2011). S udies a gue, especially, ha buildings, o ices, and o he si es o o ganizing ma e ialize meaning (Yanow, 1998) and cul u al no ms ha people ead o adjus hei (gende ed) iden i y pe o mances (Hi s and Humph eys, 2020; Tyle and Cohen, 4 Managemen Lea ning 00(0) 2010). Layou s, walls, doo s, smells, and sounds, hus, ha e socially cons uc ed signi icance ha con ibu es o o ganiza ional eali y (Gaglia di, 1990; S a i, 1999; Van Ma ewijk and Yanow, 2010). While a chi ec u e and design seek o modi y and s abilize he meaning ha a space ma e- ializes, employees can challenge and esis hese e o s (Wasse man and F enkel, 2011). Space always ells “a s o y” (Yanow, 1998), and he plo o his s o y may be con es ed by employees (Panayio ou, 2015). App oaching senses as meaning-making in ol es acknowledging he expe ience o bo h esea ch pa icipan s and he esea che he sel . The gene al in e es is in how people in e p e and make sense o di e en senso y cues (Dale and Bu ell, 2008; Siebe e al., 2017; Van Ma ewijk and Yanow, 2010). Yanow (2010) sugges s ha his equi es he esea che o de elop a “spa ial sensibili y” (p. 139) o “a he meneu ic-phenomenological o ien a ion owa ds he spa ial dimen- sion o he ma e ial wo ld” (pp. 144–145). Ma in (2002), o example, uses pa icipan obse a- ion and open-ended in e iews o examine how old people’s homes we e cons uc ed h ough di e en senso y s imuli such as sigh s, smells, and sounds. A e he o iginal ieldwo k, she e u ned o he esea ch si es (16 elde ly homes) a a ious imes o imme se he sel in e e yday spa ial ac i i ies. In a simila ein, Wa en (2008) no es ha he ieldwo k in an o ice en i onmen “ elied hea ily” on he “own aes he ic ela ionship wi h he esea ch si e” (p. 569). S a i (2007), in u n, builds on ieldwo k conduc ed in a sawmill, a oo ing i m and a sec e a ial o ice o high- ligh he impo ance o sensible, embodied knowledge o spa ial wo king p ac ices. S udies ha ocus on he meaning ulness o space, and i s abili y o con ey meaning ypically use w i ing s yles ha make he esea che ’s own expe ience and oice explici (Höykinpu o and Ropo, 2014; Van Ma ewijk, 2011; Van Ma ewijk and Yanow, 2010; Wa en, 2008). This in ol es, o ins ance, using pe sonalized accoun s ha connec he esea che ’s e lec ion wi h hose o he o ganiza ional pa icipan s, such as employees, manage s, designe s, and clien s. This is close o wha Van Maanen (2011) calls con essional ales. While some schola s use mo e adi ional epo - ing s yles ha ely on he use o in e iew exce p s (e.g. Wasse man and F enkel, 2011), o he s make use o e oca i e na a i es ha highligh he eme gence o expe iences and eelings h ough senso y engagemen (Ropo and Höykinpu o, 2017; Van Ma ewijk, 2011). As hese examples highligh , he ocus on meaning-making shi s a en ion owa d subjec i e knowing o wha is sensed and how. Rela ional p ocess In addi ion o highligh ing he meaning o senso y expe ience, o ganiza ional space esea che s examine how sensing ma e ializes o becomes possible in he i s place. This app oach is unde - pinned by an unde s anding o sensing as a ela ional p ocess. In his iew, senso y expe ience is no a “p ope y” o a subjec bu eme ges as a ma e ial-discu si e p ocess in which he e ogeneous elemen s (e.g. ex s, hy hms, echnologies, discou ses, spa ial a angemen s) cons i u e he body ha senses and he bodies being sensed, including he body o he esea che (Michels e al., 2020). This shi s he analy ic a en ion away om a “senso y-inpu model” (e.g. exposing onesel o excessi e noise, in e p e ing he symbolic meaning o a designed building) owa d explo ing how he capaci y o see, smell, hea , as e, o o he wise sense eme ges and is shaped as an uns able and si ua ed achie emen (Ghe a di, 2019; Michels and S eyae , 2017; Th i , 2008). Thus, he ques- ion is how sensing ma e ializes o is allowed o ma e ialize, and wha a e he p ocesses and o ces ha go e n and shape his p ocess. App oaching sensing as a ela ional p ocess sugges s conside ing esea ch p ac ices as pe - o ma i e (Mengis e al., 2018). In his iew, we canno me ely “ ep esen ” senso y expe iences o space om a dis ance; ins ead, ou a ec i e capaci ies as esea che s, oge he wi h ou analy ic Kuismin 5 amewo ks and s yles o w i ing, pa icipa e in how sensing o ganiza ional space ma e ializes. In de eloping his line o hinking, Beyes and S eyae (2012) sugges d awing om human geog a- phy and mo ing owa d non- ep esen a ional heo izing. This means engaging wi h esea ch ha enac s “ he simul aneous and excessi e coming- oge he o mul iple ajec o ies along (and exceed- ing) he ull ange o he senses” (Beyes and S eyae , 2012: 53). In his spi i , Michels and S eyae (2017) map he planning, p epa a ion, and enac men o a music e en in Be lin. They show how his e en in e enes in he u ban a mosphe e by connec ing pe o mances o music wi h e e yday u ban li e. D awing om a de ailed analysis o ideo- eco ded ma e ials, in e iew ansc ip s, and a ious o he documen s, he au ho s p esen an accoun ha connec s empi ical ma e ials wi h hei own a ec i e esponses and eelings du ing he esea ch p ocess. In u n, Nash (2020), shows how Le eb e’s hy hmanalysis p o ides a use ul senso y me hod h ough which o engage wi h and examine he hy hmic un olding o o ganiza- ional place. Ra he han me ely obse ing o eco ding spa ial hy hms, hy hmanalysis equi es he esea che o a end o hese hy hms and o d aw upon he mul iplici y o he senses. This me hod in ol es, especially, le ing he hy hms g ab and using he body as a kind o “me onome” (Nash, 2020). O he s udies make use o di e en p ac ices o walking, such as de i e, o an unplanned jou ney (Beyes and S eyae , 2021; Michels e al., 2020), and lâne ie, o an ac o s olling (Nash, 2018). These me hods ecognize ha he sel , and he abili y o sense a e in ima ely in e connec ed wi h how space is ma e ially and discu si ely p oduced. In his line o wo k, esea che s use exp essi e, na a i e, and poe ic s yles o academic w i ing o exp ess he mul iplici y and incomple eness o space. Jakonen e al. (2017) p esen hei e hno- g aphic ma e ials in he o m o h ee na a i es, each ocusing on a pa icula cowo king space. This illus a es how a ious elemen s—“ he discou ses, p ac ices, ma e ial cul u e, and meanings o each esea ch si e” in e connec (p. 238). O he schola s de elop new e ms and linguis ic exp essions o be e acknowledge he dynamic un olding o space as a senso y phenomenon. Fo example, hey combine he no ion o spacing wi h o he p ocess-o ien ed no ions o c ea e new in eg a i e concep s such as “spacing leade ship” (Ropo and Salo aa a, 2018). Howe e , while exis ing o ganiza ional space li e a u e has inc easingly acknowledged sensing as a ela ional p ocess, i has no ye adequa ely accoun ed o how di e ences in he possibili ies o sensing ge made in he p oduc ion o space and wha he e ec s o hese di e ences a e. Ye , ocusing on his is impo an o be e unde s and hose senso y possibili ies ha ha e no ye “ac ualized” o a e being “disabled” by how space is being p oduced. Examining hese di e ences is also c ucial o p oblema izing he o ces and p ocesses ha go e n he possibili ies o sensing in con empo a y o ganiza ional spaces (De Molli e al., 2020; Jø gensen and Hol , 2019). Wi h hese aspec s in mind, I now u n o di ac i e me hodologies. A di ac i e me hodology O ganiza ional esea che s ha e inc easingly employed me hodological app oaches oo ed in ela- ional on ology and pe o ma i e epis emology. These app oaches sugges ha en i ies such as people, ex s, sensa ions, and spa ial a angemen s a e no on ologically sepa able bu mu ually cons i u ed (Coo en, 2020; Dale and La ham, 2015; Huopalainen, 2020; Iedema, 2007; Nybe g, 2009; O likowski and Sco , 2014; Ring ose and Rawlings, 2015). In doing so, hey challenge he idea o “a knowing subjec ” who ep esen s wha is known abou he phenomenon unde s udy. They, ins ead, p opose ha he esea che is always en angled wi h he objec o s udy in complex ways (Ghe a di, 2019). In aking hese me hodologies u he , esea che s ha e used di ac ion as a me hodological app oach (e.g. Kee e s and T elea en, 2011; Mengis and Nicolini, 2021; Visse 6 Managemen Lea ning 00(0) and Da ies, 2021). In his a icle, I am pa icula ly in e es ed in how a di ac i e me hodology can enhance esea ch on senses and o ganiza ional space. The no ion o di ac ion is ounded on he eminis philosophies o Ha away (2007) and Ba ad (2007). As a me hodology, i in i es us o conside knowledge as an in e e ence pa e n, no as an image o an objec o knowledge, bu as an ongoing “in a-ac ion” and mu ual cons i u ion be ween bo h he objec o knowledge and he knowing subjec . Ins ead o desc ibing di e ences, a di ac- i e me hodology in ol es being a en i e o how di e ences ge made and how hese di e ences ma e . Bo owed om physics, he e m di ac ion e e s o an in e e ence ha eme ges when wa es in, o example, he sea o e lap and gene a e new pa e ns ha de elop in many di ec ions (Ba ad, 2007). While “ e lec ion” p io i izes he p ocesses o he human mind and e e s o he mi o ing o eali y as a mo e-o -less s able phenomenon (Lenz Taguchi and Palme , 2013), di - ac ion is abou engaging in he wo ld and he di e en ial becomings o i (Ba ad, 2007). Taking a di ac i e app oach, hus, equi es acknowledging how we as esea che s, h ough ou (gende ed, acialized, and classed) bodies, ieldwo k echniques, and concep ual ools, in a-ac wi h a ious o he human and nonhuman bodies in he ongoing cons i u ion o spa ial eali y (see also Ghe a di, 2019; Mengis e al., 2018). Ins ead o ex ac ing ep esen a ions om his eali y, a di ac i e app oach sugges s ocusing on he pe o ma i e c ea ion o in e e ences as an analy i- cal s a ing poin (Ba ad, 2007). This means conside ing no only he a ious in a-ac ions ha p oduce he spa ial eali y o he consequences o hese in a-ac ions, bu also how hings and phenomena can ma e ialize di e en ly. F om a di ac i e pe spec i e, sensing ma e ializes as a si ua ed and uns able accomplishmen ou o a wide ange o possibili ies. I eme ges in he momen o encoun e be ween a ious human and nonhuman agen s, including he esea che ’s capaci ies o a ec and be a ec ed. Po en ial exp essions o sensing hen become ac ualized in hese encoun e s, o example, in he o m o an audi o y expe ience. The capaci y o sense does no , howe e , p e-exis hese encoun e s. A di ac- i e app oach, hus, ocuses less on e lec ing on speci ic senso y expe iences o how hei mean- ing is nego ia ed han on conside ing how di e ences in he possibili ies o sensing ge made and wha he e ec s o hese di e ences a e. How do hese di e ences, o example, open new ways o sensing in o ganiza ional space? To illus a e he use ulness o di ac i e me hodologies o o ganiza ional space esea ch, I will use an example om a ecen e hnog aphic s udy (2013–2017) I conduc ed in a uni e si y-based en ep eneu ship space (he ea e he Hub). I will discuss ideas and sugges ions ega ding di ac- i e ieldwo k/da a collec ion and eading/w i ing up da a. I will also p o ide a di ac i e eading o he Hub. The empi ical con ex o he Hub p o ides a pa icula ly in e es ing example o exam- ining he ela ionship be ween senses and space. The Hub is a wo king and mee ing space o ea ly- s age en ep eneu s, acul y, and s uden s in e es ed in en ep eneu ship. I is designed wi h he in en ion o c ea ing a local “ho spo ” ha sp eads posi i e en ep eneu ial “buzz,” a ac s alen , and os e s new business ini ia i es. The senso y design o he Hub in ol es no only he c i ical conside a ion o he senso y s imuli ( u nishings, ambien condi ions, equipmen , e c.) bu also he “s o y,” “b and,” and he “ eel” o he space. Fieldwo k/da a collec ion A di ac i e ieldwo k and da a collec ion in ol e c ea ing di e ences and conside ing hei e ec s. Recognizing he senso y and a ec i e capaci ies o ou bodies (Thanem and Knigh s, 2019), we can lea n o a une o and acknowledge momen s o di ac ion in which, o example, he low o space becomes al e ed o he possibili ies o sensing become somehow di e en . These momen s can include su p ising o “uncanny” encoun e s (Beyes and S eyae , 2013) ha o ce us Kuismin 7 o eel in new ways (Fo aki e al., 2017). They can also include momen s in which we as esea ch- ing agen s in luence he possibili ies o o he pa icipan s o eel (Ghe a di, 2019), o example, by exp essing hesi a ion o exci emen owa d he si ua ion we a e pa o (Ka ila e al., 2020). The key is o hink o ieldwo k and da a collec ion no as cap u ing ep esen a ions o how “ hings a e” bu as an ongoing co-c ea ion o knowledge wi hin in a-ac ions be ween mul iple human and nonhu- man bodies (Ba ad, 2007). Among o he da a collec ion p ac ices, a di ac i e app oach u ges us o e hink ou p ac ices o in e iewing. I especially sugges s ha in e iewing can be unde s ood as an in a iew (Kun z and P esnall, 2012) o as he mu ual cons i u ion o ques ions, esponses, commen s, and ma e iali ies. In addi ion o a uning o and acknowledging he momen s o di ac ion wi hin ieldwo k and da a collec ion, a di ac i e me hodology ocuses on hei e ec s. Fo example, wha does di - ac ion do wi h ega ds o a mosphe es, bounda ies, o hy hms o spacing? Wha possibili ies o sensing i p oduces o “cu s ou ”? Focusing on hese e ec s o di ac ion builds on he idea ha ou senso y expe ience always eme ges om a si ua ed ma e ial-discu si e engagemen wi h he wo ld we encoun e (Ghe a di, 2019). Thus, senses a e mo e han jus physiological ools ha cap u e p e-exis ing s imuli. They, ins ead, enable us o a ec and be a ec ed by a i- ous human and nonhuman elemen s in complex ways. This means ha he speci ic senso y pe - cep ion we expe ience and in e p e as a eeling ac ualizes only some o he wo ld’s innume able po en iali ies. Di e ences in how spacing un olds imply di e en po en iali ies o sensing. While he e is no hing new in he idea ha we as esea che s “use” ou bodies o gain sensi- ble-aes he ic knowledge (S a i, 2007; Yanow, 2010) and ha ou posi ionali y a ec s ou esea ch (Manning, 2018), a di ac i e me hodology places speci ic emphasis on how knowing is embedded in si ua ed in a-ac ions and how di e ences wi hin hese in a-ac ions can p oduce new insigh s. Fo example, Mengis e al. (2018) elabo a e on how using di e en ideo eco d- ing echniques o examine he same spa ial si ua ion allowed hem o no ice and pay a en ion o speci ic spa ial ela ionships ha hey could no o he wise see. Ra he han me ely compa ing he ou comes o di e en ypes o da a collec ion p ac ices, he au ho s concen a e on wha eme ges om hei ela ions and ensions. While some ela ional and pe o ma i e s udies on o ganiza ional space ha e al eady expe imen ed wi h simila me hodological ideas (e.g. Michels and S eyae , 2017; Nash, 2020) a di ac i e app oach ex ends hese s udies. Speci ically, i places emphasis on enac ing “ lows o di e ence” (Lenz Taguchi and Palme , 2013: 676) and conside ing he e ec s he eo . When conduc ing he ieldwo k a he Hub, I a ended se e al e en s, wo kshops, and p o- g ams ha p omo ed, among o he hings, “en ep eneu ial hinking” and “s a up cul u e” wi hin he uni e si y con ex . I, o example, a ended a p og am designed o acili a e he busi- ness de elopmen p ocesses o ea ly-s age en ep eneu ial eams wo king wi h a ange o di e - en business ideas. The p og am consis ed o a ious mee ings, co-wo king sessions, men o ing e en s, and “demo day” sales pi ch e en s. A e pa icipa ing in hese e en s, I o en imes ound mysel eeling headache and nausea, almos like a hango e . I no iced ha his sensa ion was o en connec ed, especially, o he loud (elec onic) music played a he p og am e en s wi h he in en ion o , o example, “ge ing he ene gies up” in a wo kshop o c ea ing “exci emen ” be o e he demo day sales pi ches. In he language o my di ac i e analysis, he sound wa es eme ged as impo an ma e ial agen s ha in e e ed wi h my body in ways ha some imes inc eased bu mainly dec eased my possibili ies o sense and conduc empi ical esea ch. En angled wi h his expe ience o “hango e ,” I chose o ideo eco d subsequen e en s o c e- a e a be e unde s anding o hem— he eby making a cu be ween eco dable and o he senso y expe iences. 8 Managemen Lea ning 00(0) Reading/w i ing up da a Wi h ega ds o empi ical analysis, a di ac i e me hodology shi s a en ion o how in a-ac ions be ween di e en esea ch ma e ials and he esea che gi e ise o di e ences ha ma e . This in ol es “ eading insigh s h ough one ano he in ways ha help illumina e di e ences as hey eme ge: how di e en di e ences ge made, wha ge s excluded, and how hese exclusions ma e ” (Ba ad, 2007: 30). Engaging in di e en senso y da a in a-ac i ely, hen, ypically akes place a e he ieldwo k and gene a ion o esea ch da a. Ins ead o gi ing p io i y o any speci ic ype o da a o egis e o sensa ion, a di ac i e app oach equi es placing he da a in o con e sa ion wi h each o he and conside ing he pa e ns o di ac ion ha eme ge (Lenz Taguchi and Palme , 2013). While hese da a can span o e pa icula ime- agmen s, hey a e unde s ood o ela e o each o he , no as sepa a e pa s bu o un old as elemen s en angled wi h each o he . New in e p e- a ions and pa e ns eme ge om hese encoun e s be ween di e en esea ch da a, and by consid- e ing wha each o hem includes and excludes. This in ol es, o example, looking o “c ea i e and unexpec ed p o oca ions” (Mu is and Bozalek, 2019: 873) a he han using a bina y logic o compa ing he di e en da a o each o he as sepa a e en i ies. Reading and w i ing up da a di ac i ely encou ages us o hink abou ou sel es as ac i e esea ching agen s; ac o s conduc ing he in a-ac i e eading and enac ing pa e ns o di e ence. As Ba ad (2014) ap ly no es, “[ ]he e is no ‘I’ ha exis s ou side o he di ac ion pa e n, obse - ing i , elling i s s o y” (p. 181). This builds on he cen al p emise o di ac i e me hodologies, acco ding o which he objec o knowledge and he knowing subjec always cons i u e each o he ; “wha can be li ed and sensed by esea che s, and how da a makes us as esea che s” (Ghe a di, 2019: 743). This p emise implies ha we as esea che s a e “no ully o med, p e-exis ing sub- jec s, bu as subjec s in a-ac i ely co-cons i u ed h ough he ma e ial-discu si e p ac ice ha we (...) engage in” (Ba ad, 2007: 168). The analysis o empi ical ma e ials can, he e o e, be unde - s ood as an embodied engagemen in which he esea che is a ec ed by he da a h ough senses ha egis e he lows o images, ex s, smells, sounds, as es, ouches, and eelings (Lenz Taguchi and Palme , 2013; Lenz Taguchi, 2012). The ocus is on wha da a “does” in ela ion o ou bodily capaci ies o how i in e e es wi h ou sensibili ies. Some esea che s e e o hese “doings o da a” as da a “ho spo s” ha “glow” (MacLu e, 2013 in Ring ose and Renold, 2014). A di ac i e analysis, hus, in ol es embodied engagemen wi h he esea ch da a o “a becoming-wi h he da a as esea che ” (Lenz Taguchi, 2012: 265). The ways in which we come o acknowledge, o example, he ol ac o y quali ies, soundscape, and smells, among o he aspec s o o ganiza ional space, depends no only on he speci ic esea ch da a we gene a e bu also on he di e ences ha ge made h ough ou embodied engagemen wi h his da a. This sugges ion mo es beyond e lec ing on how ou gende ed, acialized, and classed bodies shape ou esea ch owa d ocusing on how we as ma e ial bodies a e, on one hand, ans- o med in encoun e s wi h he ma e iali y o he esea ch da a and, on he o he hand, choose wha o ocus on and how o w i e up he da a. As Lenz Taguchi (2012) ci ing Deleuze no es, “[w]e mus ac i a e he sensibili y o all ou embodied acul ies” (p. 272). This means ha a di ac i e app oach is less conce ned wi h ep esen ing an empi ical eali y ha has “ aken place be o e he ac o ep esen a ion” han wi h enac ing mul iple and di e se po en ials ha eme ge om he encoun e s wi h he esea che and he esea ch da a. In his endea o , esea che s ha e engaged in e oca i e and pe o ma i e s yles o w i ing (Gilmo e e al., 2019; Huopalainen, 2020; Ka ila, 2019). Reading and w i ing up da a di ac i ely helped me and my colleagues2 o unde s and he mul- iplici y o egis e s o sensa ion h ough which he Hub ope a ed. We o ganized mee ings du ing which we ead he esea ch ma e ials o each o he , discussed eme ging insigh s, and engaged in Kuismin 15 Mengis J, Nicolini D and Go li M (2018) The Video P oduc ion o Space:How Di e en Reco ding P ac ices Ma e . O ganiza ional Resea ch Me hods 21(2): 288–315. Michels C and S eyae C (2017) By acciden and by design: Composing a ec i e a mosphe es in an u ban a in e en ion. O ganiza ion 24(1): 79–104. Michels C, Hindley C, Knowles D, e al. (2020) Lea ning a mosphe es: Re-imagining managemen educa ion h ough he dé i e. Managemen Lea ning 51(5): 559–578. Mu is K and Bozalek V (2019) Di ac ing di ac i e eadings o ex s as me hodology: Some p oposi ions. Educa ional Philosophy and Theo y 51(14): 1504–1517. Nash L (2018) Gende ed places: Place, pe o ma i i y and lâne ie in he Ci y o London. Gende , Wo k & O ganiza ion 25(6): 601–620. Nash L (2020) Pe o ming place: A hy hmanalysis o he Ci y o London. O ganiza ion S udies 41(3): 301– 321. Nybe g D (2009) Compu e s, cus ome se ice ope a i es and cybo gs: In a-ac ions in call cen es. O ganiza ion S udies 30(11): 1181–1199. Oldham GR and B ass DJ (1979) Employee eac ions o an open-plan o ice: A na u ally occu ing quasi- expe imen . Adminis a i e Science Qua e ly 28: 267–284. Oldham GR, Cummings A, Mischel LJ, e al. (1995) Lis en while you wo k? Quasi-expe imen al ela ions be ween pe sonal-s e eo headse use and employee wo k esponses. Jou nal o Applied Psychology 80(5): 547. O likowski WJ and Sco SV (2014) Wha happens when e alua ion goes online? Explo ing appa a uses o alua ion in he a el sec o . O ganiza ion Science 25(3): 868–891. Panayio ou A (2015) Spacing gende , gende ing space: A adical “s ong plo ” in ilm. Managemen Lea ning 46(4): 427–443. Pe ani FJ (2019) Con essions o an o ganiza ional space w i e . O ganiza ion 26(6): 961–971. Ra ne H (2020) Topologies o o ganiza ion: Space in con inuous de o ma ion. O ganiza ion S udies 41(11): 1513–1530. Riach K and Wa en S (2015) Smell o ganiza ion: Bodies and co po eal po osi y in o ice wo k. Human Rela ions 68(5): 789–809. Ring ose J and Rawlings V (2015) Pos human pe o ma i i y, gende and “school bullying”: Explo ing he ma e ial-discu si e in a-ac ions o ski s, hai , slu s, and poo s. Con e o: Essays on Educa ion, Philosophy and Poli ics 3(2): 1–37. Ring ose J and Renold E (2014) “F** k ape!” Explo ing a ec i e in ensi ies in a eminis esea ch assem- blage. Quali a i e Inqui y 20(6): 772–780. Roe hlisbe ge F i z J and William D (1939) Managemen and he Wo ke . Camb idge: Ha a d Uni e si y P ess. Ropo A and Höykinpu o R (2017) Na a ing o ganiza ional spaces. Jou nal o O ganiza ional Change Managemen 30(3): 357–366. Ropo A and Salo aa a P (2018) Spacing leade ship as an embodied and pe o ma i e p ocess. Leade ship 15(4): 461–479. Ropo A, Salo aa a P, Saue E, e al. (2015) Leade ship in Spaces and Places. Chel enham: Edwa d Elga Publishing. Se gi V and Hallin A (2011) Thick pe o mances, no jus hick desc ip ions: The p ocessual na u e o doing quali a i e esea ch. Quali a i e Resea ch in O ganiza ions and Managemen : An In e na ional Jou nal 6(2): 191–208. Shouse E (2005) Feeling, emo ion, a ec . M/C Jou nal. Epub ahead o p in . Decembe 2005. DOI: 10.5204/ mcj.2443. Siebe S, Wilson F and Hamil on JRA (2017) “De ils may si he e”: he ole o enchan men in ins i u ional main enance. Academy o Managemen Jou nal 60(4): 1607–1632. Skoglund A and Hol R (2021) Spa ially o ganizing u u e gende s: An a is ic in e en ion in he c ea ion o a hi - oile . Human Rela ions 74(7): 1007–1032. S ephenson KA, Kuismin A, Pu nam LL, e al. (2020) P ocess s udies o o ganiza ional space. Academy o Managemen Annals 14(2): 797–827. 16 Managemen Lea ning 00(0) S a i A (1999) O ganiza ion and Aes he ics. London: SAGE. S a i A (2007) Sensible knowledge and p ac ice-based lea ning. Managemen Lea ning 38(1): 61–77. Sunds om E and Sunds om MG (1986) Wo k Places: The Psychology o he Physical En i onmen in O ices and Fac o ies. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. Sunds om E, He be RK and B own DW (1982) P i acy and communica ion in an open-plan o ice: A case s udy. En i onmen and Beha io 14(3): 379–392. Taylo S and Spice A (2007) Time o space: A na a i e e iew o esea ch on o ganiza ional spaces. In e na ional Jou nal o Managemen Re iews 9(4): 325–346. Thanem T and Knigh s D (2019) Embodied Resea ch Me hods. London: SAGE. Th i N (2008) Non-Rep esen a ional Theo y: Space, Poli ics, A ec . Abingdon: Rou ledge. Tyle M and Cohen L (2010) Spaces ha ma e : Gende pe o ma i i y and o ganiza ional space. O ganiza ion S udies 31(2): 175–198. Van Maanen J (2011) Tales o he Field: On W i ing E hnog aphy. Chicago: Uni e si y o Chicago P ess. Van Ma ewijk A (2011) Aes he ic expe iences o designed o ganisa ional space. In e na ional Jou nal o Wo k O ganisa ion and Emo ion 4(1): 61–77. Van Ma ewijk A and Yanow D (2010) O ganiza ional Spaces: Rema e ializing he Wo kaday Wo ld. Chel enham: Edwa d Elga Publishing. Vásquez C and Coo en F (2013) Spacing p ac ices: The communica i e con igu a ion o o ganizing h ough space- imes. Communica ion Theo y 23(1): 25–47. Visse LM and Da ies OE (2021) The becoming o online heal hca e h ough en angled powe and pe o ma- i i y: A pos humanis agen ial ealis pe spec i e. O ganiza ion S udies 42(12): 1817–1837. Wa en S (2008) Empi ical challenges in o ganiza ional aes he ics esea ch: Towa ds a sensual me hodology. O ganiza ion S udies 29(4): 559–580. Wasse man V and F enkel M (2011) O ganiza ional aes he ics: Caugh be ween iden i y egula ion and cul- u e jamming. O ganiza ion Science 22(2): 503–521. Yanow D (1998) Space s o ies: S udying museum buildings as o ganiza ional spaces while e lec ing on in e p e i e me hods and hei na a ion. Jou nal o Managemen Inqui y 7(3): 215–239. Yanow D (2010) Gi ing oice o space: Academic p ac ices and he ma e ial wo ld. In: Van Ma ewijk A and Yanow D (eds) O ganiza ional Spaces. Rema e ializing he Wo kaday Wo ld. Chel enham: Edwa d Elga , pp.139–158.