Catálogo de publicaciones - revistas

<jats:p> Organizations and societies have changed. Bureaucracy, as modernity’s form of organization, has transformed into a reflexive organization, coordinating the conditions of system reproduction in time–space with increased reflexivity. Simultaneously, modernity with capitalism, industrialization, and rationalization as its institutional dimensions radicalized; reflexive organizations as one of its driving forces and the reflexive organization as the new organization model. Today, reflexive organizations are the most ubiquitous and powerful agents in our societies, separating and integrating activities, practices, and occurrences in new time–space arrangements and sets of social systems together with others, fueling modernity’s dynamism and global scope and letting our societies resemble an engine without a driver, erratically running in directions we cannot foresee. To identify and understand these changes and their impact on our current world, we develop a research framework informed by Anthony Giddens’ structuration theory that upgrades social systems to the core of structuration theory and adds the reflexive mode of organization and a strategic perspective to Giddens’ theory of modernity. </jats:p>

<jats:p> Although today media and communication studies across Latin America are closely linked to critical sociology, this was not always the case. In this article, we explore how the interaction between social communication (which includes communication and media studies) and critical sociology, in the Latin American context, evolved over time. In so doing, we examine how, and in which directions, media theory has developed and how it relates profoundly with critical sociology. This piece is an attempt to summarize this process and look at current contributions that propose more inclusive and participatory media. The key argument that it took a long time for Latin America’s media studies to link itself with critical sociology but once that happened, it produced a distinctive school of thought that is counter-hegemonic and directs itself towards the contestation of power and oppression by linking itself with the popular. </jats:p>

<jats:p> In this article, we analyse the role that entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship have played in the construction and consolidation of capitalism in Poland. We question the line conventionally drawn between entrepreneurs and the working class, arguing that the vast majority of so-called entrepreneurs in Poland are disguised workers who were rejected from the labour market during the transition to capitalism or forced into self-employment as Poland’s precariat labour market crystallised. We outline a critical historical analysis of the origin of these disguised workers to provide space for a discussion of the specific ‘labour problem’ that Poland has faced during its transition to capitalism. A central argument of our study is that the top-down creation of entrepreneurship is a partial and often contradictory response to this ‘labour problem’. We then illustrate these contradictions, showing how those commonly defined as entrepreneurs have performed relatively poorly in their designated roles of creating employment and innovation, while their living standards and wellbeing have deteriorated. We historically frame how this group of disguised workers in Poland embody the tension between the normative and actual aspects of capitalist development in Poland since 1989. </jats:p>

<jats:p> This article contributes to the debate on the platformization of society by presenting a theoretical framework that describes the influence of strategic action fields (SAFs) on the emergence of platform architectures. It shifts the focus from already successful platforms to contested processes of platformization, understood as the gradual reorganization of fields around the architectures of digital platforms. To assess the influence of fields on platformization processes, the article combines the architectural view of platforms and the theory of SAFs. The resulting framework emphasizes that platform organizations may occupy powerful positions in fields, but they also depend on the contributions of users and complementors to establish these positions in the first place. Therefore, the forms and outcomes of platformization are influenced by the conditions in SAFs, particularly the stage in the field’s temporal trajectory and the field position of platform organizations. By re-examining a growing body of empirical research, the article distinguishes platformization processes in emerging, stable, and transforming fields, and presents scenarios for each case. By theorizing a wide range of platformization processes and outcomes beyond disruption, the article offers a nuanced understanding of the proliferation of digital platforms and the influence of platform organizations in contemporary societies. </jats:p>