Warning: this post is about boring thesis stuff...
(Wow, one of the campus parrots just flew across above the building in front of my balcony.)
I've spent the past week writing the lit review for my thesis and the reasons why that's a bit worrying are the following: 1) writing lit reviews is not that hard, 2) I've had most of my lit review written for my proposal. But it just doesn't want to come together. I have 15 pages on meetings in organizations, sensemaking and sensegiving, meeting practices and the practice approach, group performance and decision making and organizational change and I've been shuffling these around, experimenting with different orders, writing different connecting and intro sentences and it just doesn't seem right. The order I have right now is something like this: I start out with discussing organizational change (because the meetings I have been studying took place and were initiated in the context of organizational change) and then I go on saying that meetings are exciting to study in the context of organizational change because they can further change or preserve the status quo. Then, I talk about what meetings are, I introduce 4 different conceptualizations of meetings and then try to come up with a synthesis under the umbrella of the interpretivist tradition. Then, I argue that the concepts of sensemaking and sensegiving can deepen our understanding of both organizational change and meeting dynamics. Then, I define what sensemaking, bracketing, framing and sensegiving are before explaining why these concepts could be useful in studying the meetings at UC. Then, I discuss the practice approach (pragmatic turn, practice turn, methodological innovations in the study of organizations, i.e. ethnography, strategy as practice - maybe I should just scrap SAP) and go on by saying that meeting practices are interesting to study because they can open a window into understanding group decision making and group performance, so it's pretty much applied research. Then, I have a mini lit review of group decision making and group performance. Then, I'm planning on writing a short part on studying meetings, sensemaking and sensegiving through language. I used to have two bits on language, one at the end of the sensemaking section and one at the end of the practice section, but I thought it would make more sense to have one. Maybe I should take it out of the lit review all together, but then again, I don't like really long methodology/methods sections and this would sure make it quite long. Oh, I miss positivistic research.
I think I'll read this again tomorrow and make some decisions.
As for the rest of today: I'll submit an application to a trainee program and then try to get in the mood for a small huisfeestje that will be thrown by one of my thesis groupees. The weather sucks again. At least she also lives on campus.