Umeå University's logo

Med inspiration från boken Didaktisk dialog i högre utbildning (Levinsson et al., 2021) baseras denna antologi på texter skrivna inom ramen för kursen Didaktik för universitetslärare, given av Enheten för Universitetspedagogik och lärandestöd (UPL) under våren 2026. Under ledning av Dan Borglund och Peter Vinnervik fick kursdeltagarna i uppgift att, med utgångspunkt i sin egen undervisningspraktik, identifiera och formulera ett så kallat ”didaktiskt dilemma.” D.v.s. något de brottas med i sin roll som lärare.

This article investigates how actors in an interorganizational construction project engage in ambidextrous tensions related to digital transformation. The purpose is to understand how the overarching tension of exploration–exploitation manifests in practice and how actors navigate it. Based on a longitudinal qualitative case study with retrospective elements, six nested tensions shaped by institutional and temporal factors are identified. It shows how actors navigate these through distinct mindsets, resulting in heterogeneous practices and a fragmented digital landscape. The study concludes that digital ambidexterity is a situated practice, highlighting the importance of aligning mindsets.

Over the last decade, extensive research on digitalization in construction has focused on understanding the challenges and potentials of new digital technologies at both industry and firm levels. Less attention has been dedicated to the underlying micro-foundations required to successfully exploit existing and explore new digital technologies, so-called digital ambidexterity. More specifically, despite awareness of individual workers' pivotal role in digital transformation, the mundane actions of project practitioners and how these can enable digital ambidexterity have not yet been explored. Therefore, this article aims to increase the understanding of practitioners' role in enabling digital ambidexterity. Empirically, the study is based on 15 semi-structured interviews, complemented by 5 days of on-site observations and the collection of documents. Through an inductive analysis, the study identifies sixteen practices enacted by three informal roles that are shown to play a key role in the digitalization process. The practices are mapped and aggregated into a process model that explains how the practices are interlinked, enabling digital ambidexterity. The paper provides critical insights into the micro-level capabilities required to enable digital ambidexterity in construction firms.

The aim of this essay is to conceptualize and discuss the phenomenon of organizational deprojectification, with the aim of exploring the drivers and consequences thereof. The discussion begins with an overview of the development of the concept of projectification, providing the necessary background to examine existing research on organizational deprojectification. Employing the lens of paradox theory, the authors analyze paradoxes influencing the deprojectification process. Subsequently, the article presents a conceptual process model that encapsulates these paradoxes, accompanied by a discussion of the implications for organizations. The findings offer a deeper understanding of the challenges and opportunities associated with deprojectification and contribute to the broader discourse on projectification in contemporary environments.

With the premise that ontological assumptions about Homo academicus and Homo academicus dux (the academic leader) must include knowledge and analysis of the organisational context where they act, this chapter sets out to challenge some common (and we argue incorrect) assumptions in contemporary management literature regarding how power is distributed, the role of dependencies among units and practices, and how a sense of belonging is formed. Three (alternative) conditions are introduced—reversed hierarchy, lateral independence, and community-based belonging—upon which academic practice and leadership implications are discussed. The alternative conditions thus explain why and how Homo academicus and Homo academicus dux acts the way (s)he acts, which consequently makes out the contours of a new academic rationality.

Purpose: Based on the well-known risks associated with deviating from established routines in primary healthcare and the positive consequences of upholding them, the purpose of this study is to increase the understanding of the role of meaningfulness in the enactment of organizational routines.

Design/methodology/approach: The study is based on 24 semi-structured interviews with three different professional categories in primary healthcare in Sweden. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis on a latent level, combined with a two-factor model as sensitizing concepts.

Findings: Differences are identified between factors that reduce meaninglessness (called “sufficiency factors”) and those that enable meaningfulness (called “meaningfulness factors”). Nine sufficiency factors and six meaningfulness factors explain what makes organizational routines perceived as meaningful by the different professional groups. A two-factor matrix is developed that highlights the intricate challenges associated with routine enactment based on these factors.

Originality/value: The study is unique in that it is the first to integrate research on organizational routines and meaningfulness. However, understanding meaningful organizational routines is not only essential because it is an overlooked area in both of these two streams of research but also because of its clear, practical relevance in the primary healthcare setting.

The adoption and use of digital technologies are shaped by the understanding users develop over time. As this understanding evolves, it can diverge both within and between groups, leading to unexpected outcomes or failure. While this is well-known, processual studies of such happenings are rare — an observation this study seizes on. Building on the 'technology frame of reference' (TFR) theory, the aim is to increase the understanding of the unfoldment of group-level (in)congruence and (in)consistency in the adoption and use of new digital technology. The study involves two actor groups in the AEC industry adopting a new digital geotechnical data management system that is expected to impact work processes and practices. Based on semi-structured interviews, documents, and observations at two separate occasions, two years apart, we analyse how the differences and similarities in technology frames unfold and influence the adoption and use of the new system. It can be concluded that the operational dimension of framing is very dependent on experiences from the first period of use. In contrast, differences in strategic dimensions of framing remain between groups.

In primary healthcare, various professions and roles need to collaborate to treat the constant influx of patients. Notorious problems of stress, high workload, high staff turnover, etcetera, make this collaboration even more challenging. Well-functioning organizational routines are needed to coordinate work, ensure patient safety, and the correct and equal treatment of patients. However, if the routines are perceived as meaningless, there is a high risk that professionals will deviate from them. Therefore, it is essential that the routine is perceived as meaningful to motivate all those involved to uphold the routine. Although the subjective meaningfulness of work has been found to have beneficial performance outcomes, it has rarely been connected to organizational routines. We, therefore, explore how organizations can foster meaningfulness in routines. Based on a thematic analysis of interviews with staff at three primary care units, six sources that make routines perceived as meaningful were identified. Also, we discuss and identify two types of organizational practices that can foster meaningfulness in routines, internalization practices and collectivization practices, that are summarized as 6C’s. Our findings have significant implications for healthcare organizations and are relevant for organizations in other contexts where different professional groups collaborate.

This Special Issue marks the 30th anniversary of the influential 1995 Special Issue on Temporary Organizations in the Scandinavian Journal of Management, which redefined projects as time-bound, socially embedded organizations. That issue initiated a “soul-searching” journey, sparking a vibrant academic field. Today, the field offers nuanced insights into temporary organizing, gaining broader recognition in management and organization studies. This anniversary prompts renewed soul-searching: Do the original ideas still resonate? How should the field evolve amid contemporary challenges? What responsibilities do scholars bear? We close by reflecting on creating and nurturing the soul of an academic field, and suggest future paths for soulful and responsible scholarship in temporary organizations.