Lengersdorf, D. (2011), Arbeitsalltag ordnen – Soziale Praktiken in einer Internetagentur, Wiesbaden: Springer/VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

In her PhD-thesis at TU Dortmund, now professor Diana Lengersdorf sociologically examined everyday phenomena in work, daily life, and social order. Lengersdorf did an ethnography in an internet agency. Everyday phenomena, with practices that are taken for granted, often surprise us when we take a look. She describes how seemingly mundane aspects like work routines and informal structures change due to technological advancements, organizational changes, and evolving (gender etc.) roles.

 

Internet agencies emerged during the 1990s commercialization of the internet. These agencies initially experimented with technology, work forms, and hierarchies. Young professionals in casual attire worked flexibly and presented to corporate boards. Post-2000 economic turmoil came with stricter professional norms and formal structures but left traces of earlier cultural experimentation.

Changes in knowledge, communication, and technology-based work are visible in these agencies. The workplace had to deal with greater uncertainty and flexibility than before. Individual employees had to be creative and take responsibility while integrating new technologies. These changes influenced gender arrangements, as gender roles become more open but were still contested. The workplace reflects tensions between traditional and emerging gender roles. While soft skills often associated with women became increasingly valued, access to leadership positions remained limited. Lengersdorf’s analysis centers on how social practices adapt to and influence these transformations.

 

Social practices are routines and actions that stabilize and order daily life within organizations. Practices involve implicit, embodied knowledge that sustains continuity amidst change. Social stability in internet agencies arises from dynamic, often contradictory practices rather than fixed structures. Lengersdorf studied the interconnectedness of technology, labor, and social practices to address contemporary changes in work, technology and gender. Internet agencies are dynamic environments with complex interactions between technology, clients, and employees. The agencies are examples of the transition from traditional, stable labor practices to more flexible, decentralized, and knowledge-based work.

 

The introduction of new technologies has blurred boundaries between work and private life. This creates a need to constantly renegotiate roles, responsibilities, and work routines. Technology is of course integral to internet agencies, not only as a tool for communication and production but also as a challenge to conventional work practices. The interconnected nature of technology (computers, software) requires employees to continually adapt and collaborate. Technologies like networked computers expand the experience and action space of work, but also demand constant troubleshooting and reinterpretation of roles.

 

The influx of women into previously male-dominated fields has disrupted traditional gender roles in the workplace. While opportunities for new gender arrangements exist in internet agencies due to their less institutionalized structures, entrenched inequalities and stereotypes often persist. Gender remains a relational and fluid construct, influenced by both organizational culture and interactions with technology.

 

Internet agencies rely on continuous innovation and the integration of diverse perspectives to address evolving client needs and technological demands. How we think about work, technology, and gender has to do with dynamic and context-dependent social practices; ongoing negotiations among actors, technologies, and cultural norms. By means of ethnographic methods these complex interactions in everyday practices that sustain and transform social order can be explored.

 

Traditional sociological concepts of work were heavily influenced by industrial and organizational processes. These are inadequate to address modern complexities such as knowledge-based work, service work, and the blurring of boundaries. Contemporary approaches reconceptualize work as an integral part of everyday life that is influenced by societal and subjective conditions rather than purely production-oriented. Work has changed towards integrating subjective capacities (e.g., creativity, communication skills, empathy) into the labor process. Workers are expected to self-manage, adapt, and continuously improve their skills. This leads to a blending of professional and personal identities ("entrepreneur of the self"). This subjectivization challenges traditional boundaries between work and life, and creates a model of labor characterized by flexibility and self-exploitation.

 

Workplace studies examine how order in work is maintained through interaction, collaboration, and the integration of tools and technologies. These studies focus on how people coordinate activities, often in highly technological contexts like control rooms or law firms. Technologies play dual roles: facilitating work but also introducing disruptions that require ongoing negotiation and adaptation.

 

West and Zimmerman have shown that gender is not an inherent trait but a social accomplishment reproduced through everyday interactions (collectively, we do gender). Gender influences work through expectations, behaviors, and access to resources, which often perpetuates inequalities. Gender is continuously constructed, challenged, and negotiated, with intersections between masculinity, femininity, and broader societal norms. Technologies are embedded in social contexts and carry gendered implications, shaping and being shaped by cultural norms. Both human and non-human actors (e.g., artifacts like workplace tools) contribute to the construction and reinforcement of gender norms. But workplace studies often overlook the social dimensions of technology, including its role in gender dynamics. Modern work practices are characterized by simultaneous continuity and transformation, as old structures persist within new frameworks. Should gender be so relevant in work settings? Scholars write that variability and intersectionality are important (for an early example, see Simmel). Future analyses must explore how subjective experiences, technological integration, and gender intersect to shape labor dynamics and organizational practices.

 

Traditional sociological concepts are increasingly inadequate for analyzing contemporary transformations, see the changing meanings of gender, work, and technology. Clear distinctions dissapear, and this requires negotiation and new analytical frameworks. Theories of social practices, influenced by sociologists like Pierre Bourdieu, Michel Foucault, and Andreas Reckwitz, focus on everyday practices as the foundation of social life. Social practices are routinized, typified actions that generate meaning and sustain social order through repetition and adaptation. The central tenet is that culture and social order are actively practiced rather than passively experienced - doing culture.

New conceptual approaches are needed to address the fluidity and interconnectedness of contemporary practices, especially as traditional dichotomies (e.g., public/private, male/female) break down. Rather than focusing solely on the intentions or interpretations of individual actors, we should recognize that meaning is made within practices.

Social practices are iterative and dynamic. They involve repetition and innovation. They do not originate from a single starting point but are built upon existing cultural repertoires. Technologies, objects, and artifacts are integral to social practices. They influence and are being influenced by human interactions. The social order is contingent. Practices connect people, objects, and actions across space and time; they are interdependent.

 

Gender is done through interactions, behaviors, and cultural norms. This reflects and reinforces societal structures. Idealized representations of gender in media and cultural symbols continue to influence perceptions and expectations. Work extends beyond economic labor to include diverse social and subjective contributions. Theories of practice reveal how workplaces are sites of negotiated order; activities are synchronized across time and space. Technology a participant in social practices, influencing and being integrated into cultural and organizational routines. Social order is a fluid and ongoing process rather than a fixed structure. Practices continuously negotiate boundaries and meanings, and this impacts stability and change. Boundaries are not disappearing but multiplying. This leads to overlapping and blurred distinctions in areas like work-life balance, gender roles, and organizational structures.

 

The research explores social practices within the framework of practice theories, which emphasize the dynamic and relational nature of social interactions. It seeks to address fundamental questions about what constitutes the social and how the continuity of social forms is maintained through everyday practices. A pendulum movement between theory and empirical research is proposed, where theoretical insights inform the empirical process, and findings from the field refine theoretical concepts. The study employs ethnography as a method to uncover the "language" of everyday life and provide insights into the implicit, embodied knowledge underlying social practices. The challenge lies in shaping the research object, given the conceptual fluidity and fragmented theoretical underpinnings of practice theories. Social practices are dual in nature: they involve observable physical actions and implicit, hard-to-capture structures of meaning.

The study draws on three main traditions within practice theory: Ethnomethodology, i.e. the shared methods and tacit knowledge participants use in everyday interactions; Discourse analysis examines how discursive practices shape identity and meaning within specific contexts, influenced by Foucault’s concepts of knowledge and power. Based on Bourdieu, Habitus Theory investigates how embodied dispositions influence social differentiation and stabilize practices over time.

Ethnomethodology emphasizes situational actions but struggles to capture the transsituational and structured nature of practices. Discourse analysis highlights the role of language and representation but may overlook non-discursive practices and embodied actions. Habitus theory provides a bridge between structure and agency but risks reifying orientation patterns as pre-existing rather than emergent from practices. Ethnography is employed to study the nuanced, context-dependent unfolding of social practices, emphasizing observation and participation.

The approach aims to uncover the implicit knowledge and shared routines that constitute social practices. The researcher must engage reflexively with their own role in interpreting practices, balancing involvement with analytical distance. The study emphasizes the importance of iterative, qualitative methods to analyze the complex interplay of practices within broader social structures.

It seeks to identify "practice complexes," or interconnected clusters of practices, and their underlying logics, which extend beyond individual actions or isolated contexts.

 

Ethnography is an exploratory, flexible, and field-specific research approach. It involves participant observation, field notes, and a reflective process to understand the practices and implicit knowledge of a specific group. Methods used include unstructured observation, interviews, document analysis, and reflexive journaling. The researcher initially adopted a highly passive role, focusing on observation and documentation rather than active participation. This strategy aimed to maintain an outsider's perspective and prevent premature assumptions. Early challenges included isolation and difficulty integrating into the agency's daily interactions. The researcher then began to establish connections and participate more actively in discussions and routines, fostering trust and deeper engagement with the field. Tasks assigned remained superficial, despite the researcher's prior professional experience in the field. The Active Seeking Phase focused on targeted observations and refining interpretations based on emerging patterns and key practices identified earlier. Strategies included more structured observations, targeted questions, and closer analysis of specific activities and their contexts. Data collection included field notes, interviews, observations, email exchanges, and analysis of organizational documents. Tools such as reflective journaling and interpretive note-taking helped the researcher analyze the implicit social dynamics of the workplace. Practices were categorized into thematic “activity clusters,” such as team interactions, workflows, or ritualized behaviors (e.g., signing birthday cards).

 

Social practices were reconstructed through a multi-layered analysis to uncover their implicit logic and connections. Practices were examined for their relevance, sustainability across situations, and contribution to organizational coherence. The analysis extended beyond isolated activities to identify interconnected “practice complexes” (e.g., combining signing cards with singing and gift-giving rituals). Challenges were that (1) Navigating “going native,” or becoming too integrated into the community, required deliberate distancing techniques, such as reflective writing and periodic withdrawal from the field; (2) Ensuring participant anonymity and balancing the need for trust with ethical considerations were critical concerns throughout the study.

 

The agency, part of a larger network, had distinct roles categorized into departments like programming, creative, and consulting. Workplace culture emphasized casual interactions and creative autonomy, influenced by the broader dynamics of the internet industry. The use of interconnected computer systems and software was central to daily workflows, reflecting the agency's dependence on digital tools for project management and collaboration.

Practices such as gift-giving, card-signing, and team meetings revealed underlying norms and expectations that shaped social cohesion. These rituals created a “practical experiential space” where shared understandings of appropriateness and value were negotiated and maintained.

The study highlights how implicit social practices sustain organizational routines and relationships.

It emphasizes the importance of analyzing activities not only for their immediate purpose but also for their role in reinforcing broader organizational structures and norms.

 

Social order is continuously produced and maintained through practices that are often routinized and unexamined. The analysis is grounded in practice theory, emphasizing the interplay between unpredictability and structured practices that sustain social systems. The agency's seemingly orderly structure—defined roles, workflows, and routines—is sustained through ongoing efforts. Challenges such as disruptions in routines or unexpected project demands necessitate quick adaptation to maintain workflow. Employees adapt to the company culture through informal knowledge sharing and routinized behaviors, such as flexible work hours and implicit expectations like overtime. Such behaviors reflect a "presence culture" where extended work hours are normalized as a sign of commitment. The agency operates with distinct roles: consultants, creatives, and programmers, each with their own stereotypes and norms. These roles are maintained through practices that reinforce group identity and contrast against other groups.

Interactions with clients are characterized by a dynamic where clients are often seen as "clueless" or "irrational," reinforcing the agency’s internal cohesion and sense of expertise.

 

The agency is part of a larger network, but divisions between the local office and the parent company are maintained through cultural and operational differences. These divisions manifest in perceptions of "higher" traditional advertising forms (TV and print) versus "lower" digital projects.

Employees must constantly update their knowledge of tools and technologies relevant to their roles. Access to technology is regulated, creating a hierarchy of knowledge and expertise, particularly among programmers. This technical hierarchy defines professional competence and supports a broader structure of order within the agency.

 

Identity and belonging within the agency are constructed through daily practices and interactions. This includes defining oneself against other roles within the agency and external entities like clients. The concept of "insiders" and "outsiders" is crucial, with the client positioned as the "Other" against which the agency defines its own sense of purpose and rationality.

 

Gender is perceived and enacted through practical knowledge embedded in everyday practices. This includes visual markers like clothing, hairstyles, and behavior that clearly distinguish between "male" and "female" identities. The agency demands conformity to specific gender norms to ensure smooth interpersonal and professional interactions.

 

The assignment of tasks and roles reinforces traditional gender norms. Women are often assigned supportive roles (e.g., assistants) or expected to demonstrate traits like moderation and orderliness, while men dominate competitive or technical domains like programming. Gender-typed behaviors are also socially reinforced through self-representations and interactions, such as stories about alcohol consumption among men or demonstrations of technical prowess. Gender identity is consistently reinforced through institutional mechanisms, such as naming conventions, workplace attire, and segregated activities (e.g., roles in company events like cheerleading vs. sports).

Even non-human elements (like assignments labeled "women’s tasks") contribute to gendered divisions. Physical spaces in the agency, such as offices, are organized by roles and often by gender, limiting cross-gender interactions. Men’s offices frequently become "masculine spaces" where competition and camaraderie are emphasized. Leadership roles and privileges, such as private offices, are predominantly reserved for men, reflecting traditional power hierarchies.

 

The integration and use of technology further reinforce these gender dynamics. Technical knowledge and access are often distributed along gender lines, with men occupying domains of expertise and authority. The interaction with software and tools reveals tensions between imposed technological structures and employees' adaptations, highlighting a resistance to inflexible systems when they clash with practical needs. Collaboration in the agency relies on shared knowledge and routinized practices, often mediated by technology. However, resistance occurs when technological tools or institutional norms fail to align with practical requirements or personal values.

The organization exhibits a preference for masculine-coded norms, such as competition, technical dominance, and professional language emphasizing male forms. This reinforces a gender hierarchy that privileges masculinity while marginalizing femininity.