PARADIGMS LOST - INCOMMENSURABILITY VS STRUCTURATIONIST INQUIRY

Although some organizational scholars invoke the alleged incommensurab ility of metatheoretical paradigms in order to legitimize a plurality of approaches to the field, others have called for cross- or multi-par adigm inquiry into organizations while yet maintaining the essential i ncommensurability of paradigms. As long as the incommensurability thes is itself is maintained, however, calls for cross- or multi-paradigm i nquiry are compromised, and legitimate goals of theoretical and metath eoretical diversity are poorly served. The problem is not with such ca lls for broader but still diverse perspectives, but with the incommens urability thesis to which they infelicitously are tied. Giddens' struc turationist metatheory provides a means to honour both calls for a bro ader, more unified perspective and demands for metatheoretical and the oretical pluralism, without resorting to the self-stultifying incommen surability thesis. A structurational analysis enables us to give up th e idea of impermeable and imperialistic paradigms, while yet maintaini ng distinctive perspectives within organizational inquiry.