So little time and so much to change: a structurationist case study on the limitations of rationalization.

In all the theories pertaining to organizations, the concept of time, also termed temporality, is often approached as a simple implicit framework of action. The notion of movement or change can only therefore be appreciated by its variation and rarely as an intrinsic dimension able to influence and provide greater insight into the complexities surrounding the causalities observed. Bearing this in mind, we have primed the theory of structuration which considers time, but also space, as a dimension of the structural dynamics. According to Giddens, each structure comprises a homeostatic principle which tends to maintain its living conditions for it over a given period despite the external pressures to which it can be submitted. Our interest here lies in the notion of disturbance resulting from this notion of homeostasis. What happens when a structural feature evolves? Can one see a disturbance? Can time be considered as a structural feature? In order to attempt to address these questions we will present a case study in which four operational offices of a large firm have the particularity of being faced with a spate of large scale organizational changes and a serious rise in psychosocial disorders. Without jeopardizing the possible causality link connecting both phenomena, we hypothesize that temporal dissonance could be considered as a source of explanation for this disturbance